PC gamers, do feel this way? : V - Skyrim

» Thu Dec 30, 2010 7:27 am

They are needed, in some cases... or I 'd rather just prefer it, in some cases. BioShock merely allowed me to check an "unlock framerate" option that increased the framerate at the cost of some graphical detail. They don't need to allow a wide variety of options for me to be happy, but simply allowing me to do anything to get a higher framerate would make me happy. Why is it so difficult to do such a thing?

For the reasons I stated above.

I think BioShock is the exception, then, and be fortunate about it. It's almost scary to imagine console players having to worry about framerates.... :lol:

» Thu Dec 30, 2010 11:20 am

The thing is, Skyrim will ship with the settings "turned down" so that it can run smoothly on consoles, with no way to turn the detail up on a high-end PC.

except through ini tweaks - like, you know, most other games.

Textures are low resolution even though even mid-range cards come with 1GB of RAM these days. Qarls textures for Oblivion look more detailed.

Qarl's textures don't have to worry about the lowest common denominator of PC hardware because Qarl isn't selling his textures. Bethesda is. making sure the game runs well on the widest variety of systems is more important than making a couple angry neckbeards happy.

also you don't know what Skyrim's textures will look like so this argument is invalid right now. all of Bethesda's games have had higher-res textures on PC than on consoles.

Still no shadows for objects from what I can tell. A feature that has been standard in PC games for a couple of years now.

there are shadows all over the place what are you even talking about? have you seen any screenshots at all? like http://cms.elderscrolls.com/sites/default/files/tes/screenshots/Riverwood.jpg? or http://cms.elderscrolls.com/sites/default/files/tes/screenshots/Tavern01_wLegal.jpg?

Of course, there will be mods for the PC, but there are some things (like hardware tesselation and shadows) that you can't just mod into the game since it sits so deep at the core of the rendering engine

except shadows are already in the game and you can mod the hell out of the lighting in most other moddable games so why would Skyrim be any different?

» Thu Dec 30, 2010 1:31 am

Yes, 512MB memory

Aren't the 512MB shared between both the CPU and the GPU? How does that work? Does it work on both at the same time? Or does it split it in half?

» Thu Dec 30, 2010 12:23 am

For the reasons I stated above.

I think BioShock is the exception, then, and be fortunate about it. It's almost scary to imagine console players having to worry about framerates.... :lol:

I don't like the average framerate of 20-25 some games seem to give me (rough estimate). Even at 30, with all the PC players telling me a game's even better at framerates higher than 30, I want to get a higher framerate. I would sacrifice certian graphical effects for a higher framerate, and I do already with PC games.

» Thu Dec 30, 2010 5:21 am

Aren't the 512MB shared between both the CPU and the GPU? How does that work? Does it work on both at the same time? Or does it split it in half?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xbox_360_hardware#Memory_and_system_bandwidth

The only advantage it has is that it's very fast. But sadly that means nothing when you aim to high resolutions, tons of detail and AA.

» Thu Dec 30, 2010 5:27 am

I want to get a higher framerate. I would sacrifice certian graphical effects for a higher framerate, and I do already with PC games.

then play more games on PC. leave the PS3 for console exclusives.

» Thu Dec 30, 2010 2:46 pm

oh, you pc players and your graphics. you get mods so s.t.f.u.

» Thu Dec 30, 2010 5:42 am

I think it's silly they don't just do like dragon age, and develop separately for each platform, I don't understand their reasoning with making them look similar, why? when you have the tools to enhance based on platform. But really, it's a bit maybe blurry to consider the PC a single platform, because what is really meant is High End PC, which will always be limited because there will always be more people having lower hardware PCs. Even if there was no consoles, there's would still be more low end PCs, and therefore a broader audience, and more money.

» Thu Dec 30, 2010 8:57 am

You could do that, but it didn't look very good.

The thing is, Skyrim will ship with the settings "turned down" so that it can run smoothly on consoles, with no way to turn the detail up on a high-end PC. The mountains and rocks won't use hardware tesselation because the XBox doesn't do that. You can see it in some of the screenshots. Rocks are pointy and poorly detailed, like a PC game from 2005. Textures are low resolution even though even mid-range cards come with 1GB of RAM these days. Qarls textures for Oblivion look more detailed. Still no shadows for objects from what I can tell. A feature that has been standard in PC games for a couple of years now.

Of course, there will be mods for the PC, but there are some things (like hardware tesselation and shadows) that you can't just mod into the game since it sits so deep at the core of the rendering engine.

I for 1 Dont see it ! dude dont buy the game, you depress me with your negativity, and your lack of faith in bethesda, who every1 else in the gaming world call the leaders in the gaming industry yr after yr, we havent seen this game yet except for a quick view made almost a yr in advance from release, and it looked great, one gaming mag after another has stated "blown away by the graphics !" Yes every1 can agree that on a high end pc this game (if built for it) would be much superior, unfortunately most people do not have high end gaming rig pc's, even many who jump on here to gripe about it not being built for the pc exclusively, and even were that the case Beth would loose money, because like it or not most gamers ARE console users (todd himself stated its like 70 %) so why in the world would they cater to the smallest of their fan base, rather then the largest, which is like it or not 360 owners ?

» Thu Dec 30, 2010 1:37 pm

I don't like the average framerate of 20-25 some games seem to give me (rough estimate). Even at 30, with all the PC players telling me a game's even better at framerates higher than 30, I want to get a higher framerate. I would sacrifice certian graphical effects for a higher framerate, and I do already with PC games.

Well, console hardware can't be upgraded, and game devs have already decided what is best for you with that 30 fps' limit. And you can do little to nothing about it. That's freedom of choice for you

(btw, it seems you're exagerating....20 fps is choppy, and 25 is little better, and all console games I've seen seems to go at 40+ at the very least).

» Thu Dec 30, 2010 12:25 am

oh, you pc players and your graphics. you get mods so s.t.f.u.

With this last round of rude flaming I am closing this topic. It is close enough to post limit and the topic has require a lot of moderator attention.