I do remember a quote stating "When you look at Skyrim it makes you feel like your looking at a new console" I think thats enough to say yes, it will be beautiful.

I always thought they made it for pc first then dumbed it down for console capabilities.. not sure though.

"Dumbed it down"? That phrase is synonymous with porting to a console? :facepalm:

I'm ready for a new engine, alright, but, assuming Fallout 4 will follow Fallout 3's footsteps, does that mean we may see another Fallout game during the life cycle of this current generation of consoles, as well?

Its possible depending on how long they keep them around.

Im not sure what you mean by top line..

I can't wait to hear what this new engine can do. If it can just at the minimum improve the graphics a bit but severely cut down on the bugs and glitches then I'll be a happy camper.

I did hear though that someone said that it would be like playing on a new console.

I wonder how long they do plan to keep them around, however I think it would be more cost-efficient and time-efficient for Bethesda to be able to use a new engine in a relatively similar form for at least two games before significantly upgrading again, so I'm not sure what to think of this in relation to Fallout 4.


"Dumbed it down" isn't exactly a flattering phrase. It's actually quite condescending and it implies a removal of intellectual content for a lack of intellectual prowess.

I hope they're different

Not necessarily better but different.

I'll be happy if the graphics are anywhere close to DA:O's. If not, there are always mods, well, hopefully.

Looks wise, don't expect Skyrim to look radically different. Sure the graphics might be a bit better, however its art assets are still going to be made by the same people who did Oblivion/Fallout... so the art style will be similar, and thus Skyrim will likely look like a slightly better looking Oblivion. To expect it to be night and day compared to Oblivion is irrational.

When it comes to the engine, the biggest difference is certainly going to be the feel of the game, and how it plays (hopefully a lot smoother). Looks wise, the odds are its going to have a very familiar look to it.

I never saw anything graphically impressive in that game. Am I missing something?

Characters were well done and all maxed out (especially when modded) DA actually looks very good.

I think you got way too low expectations.
Do you even realize how much have been improved in terms of technology and its development since 2006?
Now, almost every game looks like Crysis did in 2007, which is really good. That's what my expectation is, and it's definitely a realistic one; not an irrational one.
There are tons of new games that look like Crysis in 2007 (or almost like it), and I can just keep mentioning names after names after names. The point is that, if Bethesda wants to keep up with graphics, which is an important part of a game nowadays, they will need to keep up with these expectations that other games have. With Fallout NV being critized for its bad graphics, the demand is even higher now.

"Slighly better looking" isn't enough nowadays. Slighly better looking Oblivion is basically what Fallout 3 looks like, and even that looks very outdated now.

If you can tell my why Skyrim wouldn't be able to look as good as other games do nowadays (Red Dead Redemption, Crysis, Just Cause 2, The Hunter, Mass Effect & Uncharted series, Stalker, Gears of War, Halo Reach, etc...), please do.

Uncharted 2 level graphics... :drool:

That game's running on four year old PS3s and it looks fantastic.

It would be pretty cool if TES V looekd like Uncharted 2 on the consoles versions.

We don't need the graphics engine to look godly we need it to work without getting all the bugs and glitches that Bethesda has been notorious with in the past. Would I like it to look better then say Oblivion, Fallout 3 and Fallout New Vegas sure of course but the game doesn't need to have godly graphics like Crysis. I'd rather have Bethesda work on Improving Gameplay and have less bugs and glitches then have an amazing looking graphics engine.

There's no reason why they can't do both, but as for who cares, obviously most gamers care because better graphics have been a standard of the industry for... as long as games have existed. Bethesda also cares because they've been saying the game looks almost like it's on a new console and both Morrowind and Oblivion were pretty good looking games on release. Bethesda cares and I'm sure they've been ironing out flaws and glitches, as well, because of the criticism they've received and because they're making an entirely new engine.

Bethesda tweets:

"We can now confirm that the TES V: Skyrim engine is all-new. And it looks fantastic."

"Seeing lots of speculation about #tesv game engine. It's brand new... and it's spectacular!"

"It's a new graphics/gameplay engine built internally. We'll have more details down the road."

Todd Howard:
"When it comes to the characters and the animation, I think there are other people who do it much, much better. That's something we've put a lot of time into - not just technology but people and talent, and how long we spend doing individual elements."

I understand, it's just Bethesda has been notorious with Bugs and Glitches in their past games (Gamebryo takes some of the blame but not all of it) and I'd rather they focus on that and gameplay then making graphics their number 1 priority when it shouldn't be. I also understand that I don't want the game to be completely ugly but we can't have Bethesda repeat what happened with Fallout New Vegas that is completely unacceptable the amount of bugs and glitches in that game. Even though Obsidian developed New Vegas the point can be made that it could happen again if Bethesda isn't careful. Who cares was probably not my best choice of words (I blame shoveling snow) but like I said I don't want what happened with New Vegas to ever be repeated in any future Bethesda game Fallout or Elder Scrolls. Bugs and Glitches may happen sure but I don't want them on a level that was in New Vegas.

Exactly. A great example is Red Dead Redemption. It got very good graphics (despite it being on console), not the best out there, but some of the best. RDR got great and huge gameplay, a very big and open world with lots of quests and stuff to do. It has even focused on having very good multiplayer features as well.

The reason why I mentioned this game is because it's a huge open and free game, like TES, with great gameplay and great graphics together. There's absolutely no reason why Skyrim shouldn't or wouldn't have both great graphics and gameplay.
I think people look back at Oblivion, think of how big challenge making good mods have been, and then strangely assume that it can't be done in an another or better way; a totally wrong way of looking at it.

If the graphics aren't that great, they better get their [censored] together in the writing department to compensate for it.

I think the graphics will be similar to Fallout 3, to fit the console standarts. Remember, Oblivion brought the consoles to their knees in terms of performance,so, visually it might look a bit better than Oblivion, but with a lot more content.

But do RDR also got 1000 npcs with their own scheduled ruitine, that can all be interacted with, and A.I to react on certain situations? Do RDR give the player the option to enter every house within the game and pick up or steal every damn item in the game?

That is the fundamental problem with Wikipedia being edited by users. The above portion in bold is not a quote from any Bethesda employee and is in fact liberty taken by the writer. It can neither be confirmed nor disproved as to whether or not Gambryo is history.

Just for perspective know that when Oblivion was announced it too had an all new internally developed engine. New engine doesn't necessarily mean Gamebryo is out, it could just as easily be the latest one, Gambryo Light Speed.

So Wikipedia is wrong, big surprise.

Yet Oblivion's engine was VERY poorly optimized and Todd has commented on the new graphical nature. Oblivion even looks very outdated compared to other console games, including other sandbox console games (I'm playing Just Cause 2, right now, and it's just beautiful to look at). Fallout 3 looked better and was bit more optimized, so it typically ran a little better, before the DLC, anyway, as well. I don't expect a graphical revolution, but they can do a decent bit better than Fallout 3 level graphics on current consoles.