5 seconds of Skyrim footage - leaked Demo

Post » Wed Mar 30, 2011 6:33 am

My biggest thing is the snow falling through the ceiling, is that enough to assume that dungeons are not separate cells from the outside terrain?


Either that or the cells include a portion of the outside before they transition into another cell.
User avatar
Ludivine Poussineau
 
Posts: 3353
Joined: Fri Mar 30, 2007 2:49 pm

Post » Wed Mar 30, 2011 6:24 am

My biggest thing is the snow falling through the ceiling, is that enough to assume that dungeons are not separate cells from the outside terrain?


It could be similar to Oblivion when Rocks fell in the dungeons.
User avatar
Laura Samson
 
Posts: 3337
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2007 6:36 pm

Post » Wed Mar 30, 2011 10:30 am

Either that or the cells include a portion of the outside before they transition into another cell.


Likely, i still hope they arent cells though. I mean, im no game expert, but wouldnt it be impossible to have that many caves and them not be cells? and wouldnt that say that buildings dont have to be either (and i think its confirmed they are)
User avatar
Breautiful
 
Posts: 3539
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2007 6:51 am

Post » Wed Mar 30, 2011 12:06 pm

The only interesting thing of this video is one of the guy's hair.

Really, it doesn't show anything new.
User avatar
Marquis deVille
 
Posts: 3409
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2007 8:24 am

Post » Wed Mar 30, 2011 12:46 pm

Likely, i still hope they arent cells though. I mean, im no game expert, but wouldnt it be impossible to have that many caves and them not be cells? and wouldnt that say that buildings dont have to be either (and i think its confirmed they are)


The caves and buildings in TES have to be individual cells really because of our beloved clutter items that make the world so much more real. The amount of clutter items in a single town in Oblivion is several thousands and trying to render them all at once would be an issue. Individual cells is basically a must to make it easier on all computers. But on most computers it's a very fast load going into a cell. Frankly I don't even notice the load times and just think of myself just walking in the door because it's instantaneous on my computer but that's me, some peoples computers may take several seconds (older computers, average computers today should do it pretty quickly.)
User avatar
I’m my own
 
Posts: 3344
Joined: Tue Oct 10, 2006 2:55 am

Post » Wed Mar 30, 2011 5:42 am

Did we SERIOUSLY talk about 5 seconds of video for 10+ pages?

I think we need to get some help, gentlemen.

five seconds = 100+ screenshots...
User avatar
Austin Suggs
 
Posts: 3358
Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2007 5:35 pm

Post » Wed Mar 30, 2011 9:10 am

five seconds = 100+ screenshots...

200 actually..

Assuming that the games averaging at least 40fps :P
User avatar
Jay Baby
 
Posts: 3369
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 12:43 pm

Post » Tue Mar 29, 2011 11:42 pm

200 actually..

Assuming that the games averaging at least 40fps :P

Doesn't matter what the game is putting out, video capture is rarely greater than 30fps.
User avatar
Jessie Butterfield
 
Posts: 3453
Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 5:59 pm

Post » Wed Mar 30, 2011 12:12 pm

200 actually..

Assuming that the games averaging at least 40fps :P


Oh that was much higher than 40 fps, looked like their projector ran at 120Hz, so that's about 600 frames. That's just a guess, otherwise it's probably locked at 60Hz.
User avatar
Vincent Joe
 
Posts: 3370
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2007 1:13 pm

Post » Wed Mar 30, 2011 6:34 am

I hope that was a vampire breaking out of that coffin :tes:
User avatar
Your Mum
 
Posts: 3434
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 6:23 pm

Post » Wed Mar 30, 2011 1:03 am

I just want the next book to be leaked or just released would be good.
User avatar
Pumpkin
 
Posts: 3440
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 10:23 am

Post » Wed Mar 30, 2011 5:31 am

Doesn't matter what the game is putting out, video capture is rarely greater than 30fps.

We have a winner! :thumbsup:

Oh that was much higher than 40 fps, looked like their projector ran at 120Hz, so that's about 600 frames. That's just a guess, otherwise it's probably locked at 60Hz.

And how exactly can you tell this? Magic? The framerate of the video is 29.969811, so 30FPS according to VLC. Even if the projector is 120/240/480Hz the game is at most 60FPS, possibly capped at 30FPS. That's all the data there could possibly be.
User avatar
Paul Rice
 
Posts: 3430
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2007 11:51 am

Post » Wed Mar 30, 2011 4:52 am

:D this is pretty awesome. I was off for a day and I come back to see some leaked footage, awesome :D
User avatar
emma sweeney
 
Posts: 3396
Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2006 7:02 pm

Post » Wed Mar 30, 2011 9:00 am

Sweet.
User avatar
neil slattery
 
Posts: 3358
Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 4:57 am

Post » Wed Mar 30, 2011 2:50 am

And how exactly can you tell this? Magic? The framerate of the video is 29.969811, so 30FPS according to VLC. Even if the projector is 120/240/480Hz the game is at most 60FPS, possibly capped at 30FPS. That's all the data there could possibly be.


Can you ever go into a thread without starting a conflict? I can tell by eye that the game was running on more than 40FPS because I constantly run at over 200 FPS on all games no matter what their graphics settings and I frequently flip between 120Hz monitor and 60Hz monitor, so you start to get an eye for framerate after awhile. Like I said, it's fluidity suggested either 60Hz or 120Hz. The framerate cap is normally that for the 360 but the framerate cap can be removed to fit more with your monitor as I've seen people do before and I'm sure BGS would have no issue with doing...
User avatar
jadie kell
 
Posts: 3497
Joined: Sat Jul 29, 2006 3:54 pm

Post » Wed Mar 30, 2011 12:54 pm

Wow, you all really liked those 5 seconds, lol.
User avatar
Adam Porter
 
Posts: 3532
Joined: Sat Jun 02, 2007 10:47 am

Post » Wed Mar 30, 2011 7:26 am

Can you ever go into a thread without starting a conflict?

If by conflict you mean I do my best to repair the damage caused by people who continually make things up, then I guess not. You continually and baselessly make up information in order to "confirm" things, or correct other people (like your "No this is about 600 frames"). "About 600 frames" of information is not possible since the video is at 30FPS. I'm sorry you see this as me "starting a conflict". I'm just trying to keep other people from latching onto incorrect information, as a service to the community.

I can tell by eye that the game was running on more than 40FPS because I constantly run at over 200 FPS on all games no matter what their graphics settings and I frequently flip between 120Hz monitor and 60Hz monitor, so you start to get an eye for framerate after awhile. Like I said, it's fluidity suggested either 60Hz or 120Hz. The framerate cap is normally that for the 360 but the framerate cap can be removed to fit more with your monitor as I've seen people do before and I'm sure BGS would have no issue with doing...

You couldn't possibly tell from a 30FPS video at what FPS another video inside the video is at. You are only receiving 30FPS of information. You could only say whether or not the video is above or below 30FPS, and it's definitely not below 30FPS, that much is true. "Getting an eye" for framerate only matters if you were there in person viewing the projector. I assume you were not. Our eyes don't have a framerate, and this is the reason we can "get an eye" for whether something is 30, 60, or 120 FPS.. but it has to be in person. The only case in which this is not true is if the video you're watching is the same FPS as your monitor. Most monitors are 60Hz. If you're watching a 30FPS video of a game on a projector on a 60Hz monitor the game is essentially... 30FPS! Only if the video were 60FPS would you be able to make out this "fluidity" of which you speak. I'm sorry you don't understand this. But think about it.... If I took the leaked footage and showed it to you at 15FPS, the game would look choppy no? How do you tell it's 30 or 60FPS then?
User avatar
CArla HOlbert
 
Posts: 3342
Joined: Wed Feb 21, 2007 11:35 pm

Post » Wed Mar 30, 2011 1:00 pm

If by conflict you mean I do my best to repair the damage caused by people who continually make things up, then I guess not. You continually and baselessly make up information in order to "confirm" things, or correct other people (like your "No this is about 600 frames"). "About 600 frames" of information is not possible since the video is at 30FPS. I'm sorry you see this as me "starting a conflict". I'm just trying to keep other people from latching onto incorrect information, as a service to the community.


You couldn't possibly tell from a 30FPS video at what FPS another video inside the video is at. You are only receiving 30FPS of information. You could only say whether or not the video is above or below 30FPS, and it's definitely not below 30FPS, that much is true. "Getting an eye" for framerate only matters if you were there in person viewing the projector. I assume you were not. Our eyes don't have a framerate, and this is the reason we can "get an eye" for whether something is 30, 60, or 120 FPS.. but it has to be in person. The only case in which this is not true is if the video you're watching is the same FPS as your monitor. Most monitors are 60Hz. If you're watching a 30FPS video of a game on a projector on a 60Hz monitor the game is essentially... 30FPS! Only if the video were 60FPS would you be able to make out this "fluidity" of which you speak. I'm sorry you don't understand this. But think about it.... If I took the leaked footage and showed it to you at 15FPS, the game would look choppy no? How do you tell it's 30 or 60FPS then?


But honestly... who gives a sh*t
User avatar
Emmie Cate
 
Posts: 3372
Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2007 12:01 am

Post » Wed Mar 30, 2011 2:30 pm

Wow, you all really liked those 5 seconds, lol.

Of coarse we did. It's EVERYONE'S first 5 seconds of Skyrim gameplay that hasn't been tweaked (like the trailer). Yes, the trailer was "gameplay" but it was done cinematically to make it look cool. So this is the first real gameplay.
Pretty exciting stuff.
User avatar
Your Mum
 
Posts: 3434
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 6:23 pm

Post » Wed Mar 30, 2011 5:10 am

But honestly... who gives a sh*t

We have a winner! :thumbsup:
User avatar
CRuzIta LUVz grlz
 
Posts: 3388
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2007 11:44 am

Post » Wed Mar 30, 2011 3:13 am

But honestly... who gives a sh*t

Well, it matters when console players read his comments and expect a fluid 60FPS, and end up disappointed when they find the game usually runs at 30FPS. I'm pretty certain Oblivion was targeted to 30FPS on consoles... and it still had its dips into the teens.

I don't know why anyone would expect both a massive visual upgrade and a doubling of the FPS, either. It's more likely they kept the same FPS target, and worked on fitting more polygons onto the screen.
User avatar
CHARLODDE
 
Posts: 3408
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2007 5:33 pm

Post » Wed Mar 30, 2011 1:54 am

Well, it matters when console players read his comments and expect a fluid 60FPS, and end up disappointed when they find the game usually runs at 30FPS. I'm pretty certain Oblivion was targeted to 30FPS on consoles... and it still had its dips into the teens.

I don't know why anyone would expect both a massive visual upgrade and a doubling of the FPS, either. It's more likely they kept the same FPS target, and worked on fitting more polygons onto the screen.

Well, it IS possible that Skyrim could have better FPS than Oblivion. It's all about prioritization regarding the engine. A badly prioritized engine = low FPS. A perfectly prioritized engine = great FPS.
How they use their new engine will denote the FPS of Skyrim, plain and simple. It can be either good, bad, or somewhere in between depending.
User avatar
Andy durkan
 
Posts: 3459
Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2007 3:05 pm

Post » Wed Mar 30, 2011 2:45 am

Well, it matters when console players read his comments and expect a fluid 60FPS, and end up disappointed when they find the game usually runs at 30FPS. I'm pretty certain Oblivion was targeted to 30FPS on consoles... and it still had its dips into the teens.

I don't know why anyone would expect both a massive visual upgrade and a doubling of the FPS, either. It's more likely they kept the same FPS target, and worked on fitting more polygons onto the screen.

The variations in FPS relative to your enjoyment while playing the game is minimal. They aren't going to release a game that runs <20 FPS standard... so it doesn't matter.
User avatar
Javaun Thompson
 
Posts: 3397
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 10:28 am

Post » Tue Mar 29, 2011 11:01 pm

Well, it IS possible that Skyrim could have better FPS than Oblivion. It's all about prioritization regarding the engine. A badly prioritized engine = low FPS. A perfectly prioritized engine = great FPS.
How they use their new engine will denote the FPS of Skyrim, plain and simple. It can be either good, bad, or somewhere in between depending.

Yes, if the visual quality of Skyrim were kept the same as its predecessor. This obviously isn't the case, so it seems to me they've taken every bit of optimization and used it to fit more detail into the same target FPS as Oblivion. Doing both that AND doubling the FPS would take considerable effort. 60FPS gives you 16.6ms to do everything. This is generally unattainable for most graphically intensive games (or CPU intensive for that matter). Almost all of the console games I've studied target around 30ms frame times, which equates to 30FPS. Even faster-paced games like FPSes often target 30ms frame times. Crysis 2 is one of them.
User avatar
A Boy called Marilyn
 
Posts: 3391
Joined: Sat May 26, 2007 7:17 am

Post » Wed Mar 30, 2011 8:55 am

Wow, it's 5 pages again? I don't think there's anything new I could see in those vids.
User avatar
Nany Smith
 
Posts: 3419
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2007 5:36 pm

PreviousNext

Return to V - Skyrim