Outdated Graphics? : V - Skyrim

» Tue Feb 15, 2011 1:04 am

I won't lie, I do wish they took an approach similar to DICE and BF3 when it comes to graphics scaling and different systems.

But then I also guess they would have to gimp the console version too much and lose sales.

They seem to have did what is best for everyone.

Would console players actually not buy the game if the PC version looked better, even though the console version would look the same in either case? Console players would feel ripped off because the PC gamer, who payed at least twice as much for their computer, gets better graphics? May these console players burn in the planes of Oblivion forever.

[censored] ing cross-platform communism... :banghead:

» Tue Feb 15, 2011 1:48 am

The game's being released for the same consoles that Oblivion was released for. Beth has to release a game that doesn't stress the existing consoles too much. And that's that. There's only so much they can do with the graphics.

Personally, I'd rather they'd just taken the time to fix a handful of problems with Oblivion - balance the view distance and render distance so that things don't pop in, fix the skin tones, improve the weather effects and..... that's about it. Other than that, they could've just left the graphics as they were and invested all the rest of their time and budget into improving gameplay.

» Tue Feb 15, 2011 10:34 am

Maybe if the keyboard and mouse is too complex for them...

Keyboard and mouse is actually more simplified to me then a controller.

» Mon Feb 14, 2011 9:46 pm

Skyrim animation vs. Oblivion

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mKCerijbsW8

» Tue Feb 15, 2011 8:44 am

*awaits impending flame war*
And if consoles didn't exist, everyone would be on PC gaming, which is, IMO, funner.

Did you just say "funner".... really?
Anyhow, I love my gaming rig and very much enjoy playing games on PC. I also enjoy playing games on my 360. Consoles are much more affordable because they are specialized for gaming, while PC's are made to be able to do things that a console couldn't dream about doing. They are what they are, and they both have their perks and their downfalls. I hate these stupid flame wars, especially when their driven by people who use phrases like "funner."

» Mon Feb 14, 2011 9:00 pm

If they didn't waste it on consoles, controllers, and other console-related stuff, and took the time to save up, yeah, they could. :flamethrower:

Not to mention the surround sound, big screen TV, etc...

Keyboard and mouse is actually more simplified to me then a controller.

Well, I'm not quite sure how to say this but... you're wrong? There are many more keys on a keyboard, and the mouse has much more control than clumsy thumbsticks. Also, ever heard of a thing called macros ?

» Tue Feb 15, 2011 7:53 am

Skyrim animation vs. Oblivion

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mKCerijbsW8

Nice, I love how the arms kind of flow more with every step. It's hard to realize how far they've come until you see a comparison like that. :goodjob:

» Mon Feb 14, 2011 7:02 pm

A PC that can play Skyrim on medium settings these days can be made for under $600. Even so, I know not everyone has the funds for a computer, but many can afford one who would still get a console over a PC - why anyone in their right mind would do this I know not. Maybe if the keyboard and mouse is too complex for them...

I agree 100%. The importance of good sound in games is often overlooked. It really has the potential to add to the immersion. We already know the music will be amazing, but hopefully all the other sounds will be good too

i hope you get suspended again the forums where more peaceful then :facepalm: . but i digress my computer has barely 1 gig of ram and a pentium 3 processor and im sure most console players computers are roughly in the same area hence why they got consoles. if i had a choice between a top of the line pc that could run skyrim or a console believe me i would pick the pc every time. but you seem to be forgetting that consoles are for people who cannot afford great computers. so think twice before posting such inflammatory remarks and there wont be any arguments okay

» Tue Feb 15, 2011 3:47 am

Would console players actually not buy the game if the PC version looked better, even though the console version would look the same in either case? Console players would feel ripped off because the PC gamer, who payed at least twice as much for their computer, gets better graphics? May these console players burn in the planes of Oblivion forever.

[censored] ing cross-platform communism... :banghead:

I guess on the bright-side of all this communism, it'll probably be running 60+ frames(max settings) on even relatively cheap rigs.

» Tue Feb 15, 2011 4:25 am

i hope you get suspended again the forums where more peaceful then :facepalm: . but i digress my computer has barely 1 gig of ram and a pentium 3 processor and im sure most console players computers are roughly in the same area hence why they got consoles. if i had a choice between a top of the line pc that could run skyrim or a console believe me i would pick the pc every time. but you seem to be forgetting that consoles are for people who cannot afford great computers. so think twice before posting such inflammatory remarks and there wont be any arguments okay

I saw no inflammatory remarks in his post, but I see lots in yours. :glare:

» Tue Feb 15, 2011 8:55 am

i hope you get suspended again the forums where more peaceful then :facepalm: . but i digress my computer has barely 1 gig of ram and a pentium 3 processor and im sure most console players computers are roughly in the same area hence why they got consoles. if i had a choice between a top of the line pc that could run skyrim or a console believe me i would pick the pc every time. but you seem to be forgetting that consoles are for people who cannot afford great computers. so think twice before posting such inflammatory remarks and there wont be any arguments okay

I think you somehow misinterpreted what I said. In fact when you say "if i had a choice between a top of the line pc that could run skyrim or a console believe me i would pick the pc every time", you're agreeing exactly with what I said. I said no inflammatory remark in that post.

... you better give that post a reread

» Tue Feb 15, 2011 4:17 am

Well, I'm not quite sure how to say this but... you're wrong? There are many more keys on a keyboard, and the mouse has much more control than clumsy thumbsticks. Also, ever heard of a thing called macros ?

It's an opinion. I myself cannot play an FPS on a console because there is nothing simple to me about moving two thumbsticks.

» Tue Feb 15, 2011 2:27 am

"Exactly what are you using right now viewing these forums?? $200 (price of average console + a few games) will make a PC better rig with better components then a console.."

a profoundly outdated computer. you?

» Tue Feb 15, 2011 7:07 am

Looks great for a console, when they release PC gameplay it will look even better

» Mon Feb 14, 2011 8:55 pm

Graphics don't matter at all to me. In fact, i think some games only were really great because they were pixels.
Graphics don't really matter when the game has an amazing story and fun gameplay.

» Tue Feb 15, 2011 8:49 am

and I almost forgot, I dont think Bethesda have even close to the funding that DICE are getting for BF3. EA are spending over 100million on marketing alone, trying to beat out CoD (according to EA head)

that also might explain how they were able to get away with the whole Frostbite 2.0 looking amazing for high end pc's, while still being able to run on consoles.

» Tue Feb 15, 2011 4:48 am

Looks great for a console, when they release PC gameplay it will look even better

I really hope you are right, but we've heard Todd say multiple times that they "want Skyrim to look the same across all platforms".
That's a bit unnerving for me

» Tue Feb 15, 2011 5:09 am

I think you somehow misinterpreted what I said. In fact when you say "if i had a choice between a top of the line pc that could run skyrim or a console believe me i would pick the pc every time", you're agreeing exactly with what I said. I said no inflammatory remark in that post.

... you better give that post a reread

i was referring to the section in your first post where you said console players are neutering gaming for the sake of saving a couple hundred bucks

» Tue Feb 15, 2011 5:14 am

Oh those wacky consoles ruining all those games. Of course it's always the consoles what else...

But I have to question to all those who wanted to see "more": What did you expected?

» Tue Feb 15, 2011 8:40 am

i hope you get suspended again the forums where more peaceful then :facepalm: . but i digress my computer has barely 1 gig of ram and a pentium 3 processor and im sure most console players computers are roughly in the same area hence why they got consoles. if i had a choice between a top of the line pc that could run skyrim or a console believe me i would pick the pc every time. but you seem to be forgetting that consoles are for people who cannot afford great computers. so think twice before posting such inflammatory remarks and there wont be any arguments okay

consoles are for people who are clueless about PC and exactly how much they can save by choosing them.. If you get a 360 and XBL sub thats for people who prefer COD (rip off galore)

Like said previously you do not need a "top of the line" PC to run games perfectly... you can have a 4-5 year old PC and pay about $200 on a new GPU on the 5th year and still have a better rig then any console has...

» Tue Feb 15, 2011 10:46 am

Well, I'm not quite sure how to say this but... you're wrong? There are many more keys on a keyboard, and the mouse has much more control than clumsy thumbsticks. Also, ever heard of a thing called macros ?

Well, i'm not quite sure how to say this...but you're wrong? I find the keyboard/mouse input easier then a controller. Sorry.

» Mon Feb 14, 2011 10:30 pm

Oh those wacky consoles ruining all those games. Of course it's always the consoles what else...

graphics limitations actually are directly due to consoles, most devs even state this. its not exactly a conspiracy.

but you can't blame them, its too costly to make engines/assets that both really push the newest cards yet run good on xbox360/ps3.

» Tue Feb 15, 2011 12:32 am

consoles are for people who are clueless about PC and exactly how much they can save by choosing them.. If you get a 360 and XBL sub thats for people who prefer COD (rip off galore)

Like said previously you do not need a "top of the line" PC to run games perfectly... you can have a 4-5 year old PC and pay about $200 on a new GPU on the 5th year and still have a better rig then any console has...

Exactly.

» Tue Feb 15, 2011 3:51 am

i was referring to the section in your first post where you said console players are neutering gaming for the sake of saving a couple hundred bucks

Oh, that. Well, they are. Not on purpose of course, but they are nonetheless. Sorry if I offended you. If money really is the issue forcing somebody to get a console, then they have my deepest sympathies and I mean no disrespect to them.

» Tue Feb 15, 2011 3:44 am

If they didn't waste it on consoles, controllers, and other console-related stuff, and took the time to save up, yeah, they could. :flamethrower:

so you think everyone has 1000 dollars lying around to blow on some computer? thats better spent keeping your lights on... much more pracital to spend about 200 instead. but if you come from the upper middle class bye all means go ahead you got the money to spare.