Am I the only one that wasn't impressed by the video in the OP? Sure everything looked smooth and had nicer shadows but I don't think it looks better than the orignal as far as beauty goes...

Going by the released screenshot yes I will agree with your argument. That wasn't the best screenshot they could have released. The in-town picture of the player, a guard(?) a dog and the lady on the porch shows a much better lighting system. You can see cast shadows and it looks quite good. But one screen won't tell you the full story wait for gameplay footage or at least more than ONE high res screenshot -_-

We simply do not have enough evidence to support it one way or another. Although looking at the other screenshots in the GI mag your argument that "Skyrim's lighting looks the same as OB/FO3" isn't looking too good

I know I know, but I was hoping for a bigger improvement. We don't know for sure yet, how the graphics will look in the final version. The screenshot just made me worry a bit.

i care more for epic gameplay than epic graphics

Lighting is a bit wonky IMO but I'll reserve final judgement after I see a gameplay video. The official screenshot of the city does put me off a bit because the buildings are lowpoly (again) and based on the scale all the stonework looks soft without harsher shadows. It was not the best screen to showcase the environment assets.

Have you ever considered that people who like good graphics do NOT base a game only on that merit? Why can we not want good graphics AND good gameplay? If you already have the gameplay down, why not do some work on graphics?

Just as music is important to movies, graphics are important to games. Not because it makes or breaks games, but it helps with immersion and setting the feel of the game. For some, like myself, visual input is very strong and does wonders for immersion. I can not get immersed in a text based game, though that does not mean I don't like them, but I do not play them to escape reality for a few hours.

Some people don't need good graphics to get immersed in games. That is fine and fantastic, I respect that, but please don't dike it down for those that do enjoy them. The hardware is there, and they have people dedicated to the graphics aspect of the game, so why not use it?

Graphics don't matter that much.

worry? about the fact that the first glimpses of a giant mostly fully streaming open world game. doesnt quite look as good as crysis which is a pc exlusive? are you kidding me?
will you not play it if its not the best looking game of all time?
i sure will. im also pretty sure the final product will look better than what we've seen so far, even on the 360. im also pretty sure it will be the best looking rpg. best looking open world. and possible best looking first person game on consoles to date.

i think the screens in the GI mag look awsome. and im excited.

btw imo that video doesnt look any better than OB on my 360. it looks different. but not any better....then again maybe i dont care too much about shadows?

And for those more than happy to keep repeating that graphics don't matter and refuse the fact consoles are holding back graphics development in games for years now:

Planet Elder Scrolls: What do you think was the greatest new development(s) of The Elder Scrolls games over the years? (3D environments, lip-syncing audio dialog, physics, etc.) --> also: non-appearance related developments. Actual gameplay changes, or developments in Bethesda’s approach to the series?

Todd Howard: Technically, it’s fully realized 3D environments. I think the main character and story in our games is the world around you. What the flowers look like, the chairs, the castles, you name it. Exploring that world is the key driving force, and as 3D graphics have gotten better, so have the games. People usually scoff the importance of graphics, but I feel it’s probably the number one thing in a game like this. It immediately puts you in another world, it suspends your disbelief and makes it feel new, or amazing, whatever you want to call it. We obsess over the world detail, and the art and technology to make that happen. Number two, I’d put the Radiant AI in Oblivion. It’s a really amazing system, and we only scratch the surface of it. What we could do with NPCs made the world come alive finally. Prior to that it was just ‘people as menus.’ They stand in place and you go up and click them. They felt totally dead. As far as gameplay, it’s old now, but the switch from an XP system to a skill reward system in Daggerfall really sets the series apart. The whole idea of getting better at actions as you do them becomes the ultimate gameplay carrot. I think if you put those things together, vibrant world to explore and improvement through action, you get the heart of the series. It just has a certain flow about playing it I love.

So there, they matter.

With that said, it's too early to tell how the game actually looks on the PC.

I don't expect it to look like crysis. I used that video to show how a different lighting system can make oblivion's assets(models/textures) look better. That screenshot does make me worry that the game will look like it's still using GameBryo; that's why I'm a bit disappointed. Gamebyro was buggy and looked like crap. When I heard they had made a new engine, the creation engine, I thought it would render differently and be more stable. It looks like they haven't upgraded the lighting much so it seems Beth is sticking to what they had and what they had was a buggy mess of an engine in Oblivion.

And for those more than happy to keep repeating that graphics don't matter and refuse the fact consoles are holding back graphics development in games for years now:

Planet Elder Scrolls: What do you think was the greatest new development(s) of The Elder Scrolls games over the years? (3D environments, lip-syncing audio dialog, physics, etc.) --> also: non-appearance related developments. Actual gameplay changes, or developments in Bethesda’s approach to the series?

Todd Howard: Technically, it’s fully realized 3D environments. I think the main character and story in our games is the world around you. What the flowers look like, the chairs, the castles, you name it. Exploring that world is the key driving force, and as 3D graphics have gotten better, so have the games. People usually scoff the importance of graphics, but I feel it’s probably the number one thing in a game like this. It immediately puts you in another world, it suspends your disbelief and makes it feel new, or amazing, whatever you want to call it. We obsess over the world detail, and the art and technology to make that happen. Number two, I’d put the Radiant AI in Oblivion. It’s a really amazing system, and we only scratch the surface of it. What we could do with NPCs made the world come alive finally. Prior to that it was just ‘people as menus.’ They stand in place and you go up and click them. They felt totally dead. As far as gameplay, it’s old now, but the switch from an XP system to a skill reward system in Daggerfall really sets the series apart. The whole idea of getting better at actions as you do them becomes the ultimate gameplay carrot. I think if you put those things together, vibrant world to explore and improvement through action, you get the heart of the series. It just has a certain flow about playing it I love.

So there, they matter.


With that said, it's too early to tell how the game actually looks on the PC.

i agree that gambyro was pretty bad. but, with gambryo, 2 of the most amazing games were made. buggy or not. now we know for sure, that gambryo is no longer being used. so because you dont see the shadows represented how you would imagine them, in 1 screen in a mag. your worried that they're still using gambryo? i think your over reacting.

question. do the screens youve seen look better than OB, FO3, FONV? they do to me. im gonna bet that once a video is shown. youll be worried no more.

For me, model detail is easily overlooked with good texture quality. But to a point.

i agree that gambyro was pretty bad. but, with gambryo, 2 of the most amazing games were made. buggy or not. now we know for sure, that gambryo is no longer being used. so because you dont see the shadows represented how you would imagine them, in 1 screen in a mag. your worried that they're still using gambryo? i think your over reacting.

question. do the screens youve seen look better than OB, FO3, FONV? they do to me. im gonna bet that once a video is shown. youll be worried no more.

That aside, the shadows should be much harder.

After watching > http://www.neoseeker.com/news/7891-elder-scrolls-oblivion-running-in-cryengine2/ < of a mod for crysis, which places assets from Oblivion into crysis, I realized how bad oblivion's lighting really was, and how important lighting is to how a game looks. Now watch the video for yourself, then look at this > http://static.zenimax.com/bethblog/upload/2011/01/Markarth021.jpg <. That is the only official high-res image of Skyrim we have at the moment. Look at these random images of Oblivion > http://images.wikia.com/oblivion/images/c/c6/AnvilFightersGuild.jpg < > http://www.drinksalot.btinternet.co.uk/oblivion/ScreenShot11.jpg < and these images of Fallout 3 > http://www.ngohq.com/attachments/screenshots/1420d1227439590-fallout-3-screenshots-fo3027.jpg < > http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_0zxxVnlL4fo/TF0bpeOx1jI/AAAAAAAAAIA/MSU-YNWOAOE/s1600/fallout_3.jpg < The lighting of Skyrim looks very similar to Oblivion's/F3's. Bethesda put in all the effort to make a new engine and overlooked the lighting. Yes, they added more advanced shadows, but it doesn't look like they improved much beyond that. When I watched that video I realized that lighting is the one of the most important aspects of the look of a game. Simply placing oblivion's meshes in Crysis improved how they looked dramatically. Do you think that Skyrim's lighting looks like Oblivion's/F3's? I know it's too late in Skyrim's development to change something as significant as the lighting, which is really disappointing. At the moment it looks like Skyrim is running on a slightly modified version of F3's heavily modified version of Gamebyro. Hopefully, the screenshot of Skyrim is from the 360 version or the PC version set to on low graphics.

Edit: Someone mentioned console bashing. I implied that 360 graphics where crap compared to PC. That's a true statement(depending on your rig) for the most part. I am not bashing consoles. I play games primarily on the 360 and I can admit that the graphics it can produce are terri-bad compared to a high-end PC.

I also dont know why devs show off the lowest common denominator, why not just show off PC full spec screenshots and not mention on what system they were taken on