So about the release date and modern API's : V - Skyrim

» Mon Nov 01, 2010 11:07 am

Games are Immersive or not. Graphics are just eye candy. I have played Text Based games that svcked me into the world, and I have played graphically rich games that did nothing for me as the game itself svcked.

Sure, graphics can have an impact, good or bad, on a game, however no crap game has ever been made better by Eye Candy (Crysis 2 anyone?). However my point stands that the graphics for this game were established long ago. I have used Hi Res texture packs on most of my games and for the most part, they just look weird to me. Some parts of the game look different than other parts. For them to put in DX11 at this point, or even DX10 (if there is anything of value to that one) would require all the graphical elements to be overhauled.

I would much rather them be fixing bugs and polishing quest lines at this point.

The 'realistic' graphical style skyrim appears to be going for would benefit greatly from the ability to actually look realistic. And, of course, tessellation doesn't make anything look better by itself and is certainly not just eye-candy, any open world game would greatly benefit. I think ignoring all graphical advancements is just as ill advised as requiring them.

Higher resolution textures aren't what I'm talking about, either, get some decent shaders on there and the low resolution vanilla textures will start looking much better, for example. If you're going to do a graphical style, do it right, or it'll just look wrong. That's why I think most modern console games look like crap, not because they don't use the latest TLA, but because they try to do the realistic art style and simply don't have the power to actually look anywhere near realistic.

» Mon Nov 01, 2010 4:59 pm

There are no absolutes. Each has its own importance. Gameplay/Graphics/Sound/Story all have their place in a well-made game.

Yes, and graphics are on the bottom.

» Mon Nov 01, 2010 1:11 pm

In addition, when they built the engine, I doubt DX11 was anywhere among their concerns considering the time...

This is probably a big part of it.

Looking back at the Steam Hardware Survey, less than a year ago (the graph goes to May 2010), only 5.6% of systems using Steam were fully DX11 (gpu + operating system).

With that small an amount of DX11 PC systems, combined with also making the game for X360 & PS3 (no DX11 there), it's no surprise that they might not put budget towards it.

» Mon Nov 01, 2010 8:03 pm

get some decent shaders on there and the low resolution vanilla textures will start looking much better, for example.

Thing is, you have not seen the PC Version of this game, no one has. The previews are all done on a 360 which does not have the graphics horsepower of even a 3 year old Gaming PC. I would not say the game looks good or needs improvement until I see it on my PC.

» Mon Nov 01, 2010 4:11 pm

Thing is, you have not seen the PC Version of this game, no one has. The previews are all done on a 360 which does not have the graphics horsepower of even a 3 year old Gaming PC. I would not say the game looks good or needs improvement until I see it on my PC.

I was talking about Oblivion, but my point remains the same. It doesn't matter if you have the largest textures in the world if your shaders are always going to be drawing them with the same lighting, bumping, so on. I certainly haven't seen Skyrim on PC, but I have no reason to believe they're going to go the extra mile and add anything other than better textures for the PC version.

» Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:56 pm

They should've just skipped Elder Scrolls V and made Elder Scrolls XI.

They should've added an 11th race.