Shaders and textures are top notch.

For 2005, yes.

Haven't played Crysis on absolute max I take it?

Or Metro 2033 on absolute max?

Point is, what Uncharted is doing on the PS3 was already done like a year or two before it's release on the PC. And since then, the PC has gotten even better. The absolute best graphics on consoles these days are nothing compared to the absolute best on the PC, and they never will be until the next generation starts. And even then, it'll only be a matter of a year or so before the consoles become dated again.



As for the matter at hand, I doubt Skyrim will have any form of AO at all. Bethesda isn't really the type of developer to add in any graphical extras on their games for the PC versions. Maybe some slightly better textures here and there, but nothing like AO, Dynamic Depth of Field, Global Illumination, SSS, etc. And they're definitely not the type to add in functionality for other API's like DX10 or DX11, so that means no proper soft shadows, no tesselation, etc.

Besides, Todd already confirmed that the only extras the PC version will be getting is higher resolution textures, adjustable AA, and the ability to play at higher resolutions.

Untrue affirmation the AO Ether there is eithere there isn'tn there isn't a ahlf things with and half without , so this statement is based on know knowing what is SSAO ...

What?

the way you guys tak about consoles i hope the game will be better than anything consoles can give

Oh well. guess you won't be getting this game because of some lighting effects. AO or not. It's still gonna be game of the year.

Edit: The only reason PC games are better graphically is because when a game comes out on console it will work for the console no matter what. And with consoles I can play 10 games without having to install or remove them unlike a PC (Unless you spent a whole bunch of moola on a kickass PC) Consoles are built to last gamers a couple years without having to replace them but when a PC game with superior graphics comes out it either fails because people need to buy the hardware which costs a significant amount of money or their PC can't play it because of a lack of hardware or such.

Haha. Not having to uninstall games comes down to hard drive space, and despite what MS might have you believe, hard drives are incredibly cheap. PC games look better because it's been 6 years since the consoles came out, and as Moore's law states (Or rather, the practical applications of) chips will get roughly twice as powerful every 2 years at the same price point. So a mid end graphics card, for less than $100, is about 8 times stronger than the consoles. This isn't because we can spend more money on it, (I'm a PC gamer because I *don't* want to be gouged for money, thank you very much) it's because technology has evolved significantly. I paid about ￡330 for my PC, and it'll last for years - and it vastly outperforms either console. Why, right now I have Dead Space 2 tabbed out in the background, but within the minute I could be playing any other game I own, without even having to get up. The great difficulty of installing is simply a case of pressing these buttons in order: Next, I agree, Next, Finish. That's it. Done. Nothing else to worry about. No worrying about scratched disks, no worrying about whether it's overheating (Because if it does, not only will it tell me, it'll shut down before any damage could occur - the overheating issues of both consoles show they could learn a lot from this approach). And do I have to spend significant amounts of money? No, I don't have to spend a penny on it. Games are cheaper (Sometimes significantly), there are more games, and perhaps most importantly of all, the extra power I got from building a gaming PC makes everything else on my PC go faster too, whether it's an IDE or a web browser.

this has turned into some kind of hated debate, please just post your opinion about if you would like ambien occlusion or not

You can still play everything on good settings (as in it should look better than on an Xbox 360) using something like an 8800 GT. The card came out in 2007, about 3.5 years ago to be precise.

I think you're overestimating just how much it costs to get hold of a Pc that's better than a 360... You could probably do so, monitor included for the price of a 360 and good sized HD ready TV. Hard drive space is very cheap, many laptops come with like 500 GB which should be enough to easily install far more than 10 games. If you spent ￡1000 on a computer now it'll last you several years and keeping it up to date is a matter of upgrade costs. If you buy intelligently a pc isn't that expensive, if you didn't do the research to establish what you should be buying then you will struggle but nobody ever said that pc gaming was less effort, you spend more time to get better performance, a system with a wider functionality and a better selection of games.

edit to stay on topic: I think it's likely that ambiant occlusion will be included and

@ promethius

The algorithm is implemented as a pixel shader, anolyzing the scene depth buffer which is stored in a texture. For every pixel on the screen, the pixel shader samples the depth values around the current pixel and tries to compute the amount of occlusion from each of the sampled points. In its simplest implementation, the occlusion factor depends only on the depth difference between sampled point and current point.

Without additional smart solutions, such a brute force method would require about 200 texture reads per pixel for good visual quality. This is not acceptable for real-time rendering on modern graphics hardware. In order to get high quality results with far fewer reads, sampling is performed using a randomly-rotated kernel. The kernel orientation is repeated every N screen pixels in order to have only high-frequency noise in the final picture.

This quote suggests that ambiant occulsion is not a binary affair and can implemented to different levels, thus making it entirely possible for the console games to have been running a 'lite' version.

Errr....



'Kay.

You keep referring to the 360 so I assume the same does not apply for the ps3?

It applies to consoles in general. However we should get back on topic. Bottom line: The PC is most of the time more powerful in the long run. That is a fair and true statement. Now lets move on to Ambient Occlusion.

The guy I was replying to was talking about a 360 and I'm not so sure about how good a ps3 is points still stand though in relation to consoles in general

The Xbox 360 CAN support ambient occlusion, as has been done with several (maybe many) games already, for instance: Halo Reach, Batman: Arkham Asylum...

Actually, probably most modern games use it.






The 360/PS3 consoles are extremely powerful, enough to match all but the best gaming computers--because that's what theyre built for. It all comes down to how the information is stored and read from the disk. Skyrim definately COULD push the graphics much further than what we've seen, BUT let's consider that it is an open world game with large draw-distance support, lots of animations, ai's,etc...--there is always a sacrafice when this happens in open world games, doesnt matter if its pc or console.

I expect that we will get a very good experience with nice graphics regardless of whether it is "cutting edge" or not. Besides the framerate, Oblivion was a beautiful game, and with the changes we've seen so far I would be very happy with Skyrim graphics-wise, as long as the gameplay is good.

No, they're enough to match all but the low... oh no, a budget card will play games significantly higher than "30fps at 720p". Indeed, I'd be surprised if you could buy a non-office class card that couldn't do a low framerate at a low resolution on low settings. That's not a slight against the consoles, it's that technology has moved so very far since their release that even very cheap technology outperforms them. Indeed, when most PC gamers refer to a "budget rig", they're already talking about something that plays games faster, larger, and harder than either console.

@phyoshi remember you have to include a blu ray drive as well when building a pc rig to compare it to a ps3 at least.

As mentioned earlier, uncharted 2 has AO and uncharted 3 will be doing some amazing things under the hood just like uncharted 2.

You know.
Blu Ray is not important for pc graphic

I agree with you, but thats the state of gaming. The fact is game developers get more money from ignorant consumers. Just look at EA Sports and what they are doing with their NFL license. Just look at the CoD franchise; now turned into a yearly event. Just look at the Wii sales. The fact of the matter is Microsoft will continue to be able to sell their peripherals for obscene prices as long as consumers continue not to care. Of course this inevitable, so all we can do is hope that the next generation of console hardware is far ahead of what we see today. The console industry is a necessary hindrance to be truthful. Th hardware may hold things up, but the revenue enables developers like BGS to truly create amazing worlds.

As for the AO, Id like to see it in some degree on the 360 seeing as I cant afford a high-end computer at the moment, but if it's not included then so be it. But it should be on the PC. It's really not fair to place limiting factors on systems that dont have them

Alright, add ￡40. But you don't need to add one, blu-ray has hardly taken off outside of the PS3 market where it's the only option, so it would go completely unused. If you need to shove large amounts of data around, the internet is a much more cost effective option. Indeed, I'd go as far as to say that a modern PC doesn't need a /DVD/ drive, never mind a blu-ray drive. However, optical drives are super cheap so you may as well get one, even though I've used mine, oh, 4 or 5 times in the past 3 years. 3 times to burn linux install DVDs and 2 times to reformat.

As a matter of fact, naughty dog was able to run AO for uncharted 2 solely on the spu's. They didn't even need to use the ppe for it. That should tell you right there that the consoles, well the ps3 at least, is more than capable.

Ok, then how about this? I have a blu ray BURNER in my current rig.

http://www.gamereactor.eu/media/59/elderscrolls5_235970b.jpg

I think this screenshot clearly demonstrates AO, so I would expect it to at least be present indoors. It's quite difficult to tell if there is any AO or not in the OP picture - I think that other outdoor screenshots suggest that the AO is enabled.

http://www.gamereactor.eu/media/59/elderscrolls5_235967b.jpg

For example, the trees in this photo.

Huh?
That's dynamic shadows and HDR I believe.
If there were SSAO, it would be shown at the bottom-middle (near the stone floor) of this picture: http://www.gamereactor.eu/media/59/elderscrolls5_235970b.jpg
There's no SSAO there between the wooden floor and the stone floor.

It's a shame there is no AO, the lack of it makes the lighting look really flat and objects appear to be floating in the games like Oblivion, fallout 3, new vegas...