Gameplay + Story > Graphics, imho. :shrug: I'm blown away by what I've seen in the trailer, and am not disappointed in the slightest about the visuals.

RAGE does, it's open world but probably not to the scale of Skyrim and it NPC characters and enemies have very impressive AI. Though it's another game published under Bethesda Softworks and the key thing to keep in mind here is id Tech 5 is a different engine then what Skyrim is made from. It may have the capability to produce better textures and particles, lighting and what not that all goes into good graphics. I'm excited for Skyrim the most but RAGE looks very impressive in it's own right.

Vegetation usually doesn't create THAT HUGE of an impact on the game's possible graphics. And while Skyrim's models look good, I'll have to disagree with you there.

Technically, that's not Crysis though. That's some demo levels of Crysis remade in Cryengine 3 and then compared to the same shots at different qualities in Cryengine 2. So technically, it's Crysis 2. Or even more technical, it's not Crysis at all.



Also, everyone else please look at my previous post. I edited something into it that might clarify some things on this "Open World = Not as impressive graphics" thing.


The Witcher 2 isn't even out yet, and the devs plan on releasing it on consoles at some point.

RAGE and Crysis both do. Crysis actually has some pretty advanced AI in engine, and while both kind of take the "checkpoint" approach to open worlds, they're still pretty open. And, if you think about it, with every building in Skyrim having a separate cell instead of them all being rendered in world like in RAGE or Crysis, you could almost say Skyrim is less open world than those two.

You can spend more time on ground textures and textures of metal and cliff walls when you don't have to model trees and make grass textures and apply shadow effects to them and the trees and so on. Not to mention will will make the area look different in a certain light.

It's still Crysis, limited by the graphics of the console and Skyrim looks just as good.

Personally I think these types of games don't need good graphics. I'd much rather there be an amazing story an a ton of content. Besides this game looks amazing, Beth is awesome for being able to do what they've done in such a big game. Plus there's seven months for them to optimize the graphics.

I'm going to agree to disagree here. No matter what we say to each other, we aren't going to change each others opinion. Plus I'm tired and I don't want to debate with people right now. Rahu, as long as you can appreciate the rest of the game for what it is(which I can assume you can, your a pretty intelligent guy), your thoughts on the graphics are your own and I'll stop debating them with you.

I'm ending this because I don't like being on bad terms with the people on these forums. Its all opinion, I have mine, you have yours and we aren't going to change each others.

I don't think that Skyrim has to be the most graphically impressive game of 2011 because "SUPER AWESOME OPOSSUM GRAFIX" has never been anything that Bethesda has really strived for (I mean along the lines of games like Crysis). They obviously want their games to look good, and most of the time they look fantastic for the time period they're released; but I wouldn't say it's one of their major priorities, or that it should be.

I think it looks better, but the pc version of Crysis though looks much better(than its console counterpart) while Bethesda, based on past games will not use the pc to it full potential for SR.

The problem from my perspective is that if vanilla Skyrim does not include high res textures that work for 1080p, then I will need to install texture and/or graphics mods which will make it less likely I can get decent framerates on my laptop.

high res textures/DX11/etc in vanilla Skyrim = can probably get excellent frame rates on mid-range desktop video cards /high end laptop cards at 1920x1080

so-so textures/graphics in vanilla Skyrim = have to install demanding mods, maybe only runs great at 1920x1080 with high end desktop video cards

Well there isn't really much of a trend to go on. Morrowind was originally for the PC and was ported to the console. Oblivion was a huge jump from the console version to the PC version and Fallout wasn't much of a change at all. I don't think we can really know what it will be this time around, it's all scattershot. I'm putting my faith in BGS that they will finish the game and have plenty of time left to bring the PC version to it's full potential. This is reinforced by the fact that BGS was confident enough to announce the release date a year early, which means they were confident enough to know they would be done long before that date.

Night all, I'm tired and I'm going to sleep :snoring:

It's perfect as is. To me, Bethesda's The Elder Scrolls series has been far ahead of other RPGs of it's time.

Many people, not all, but most people don't seem understand the word "appreciation" on this forum. :shakehead:

Do you honestly believe that they wouldn't have tried certain methods and techniques to make this game as good looking as possible? You cant even compare COD with Skyrim unless you want a load screen every 2 minutes.

I'm sure the team are working on making this game as good as the 360 will allow, and you will more than likely be able to boost your PC versions no problem. I for one certainly dont want a gorgeous looking game thats broken because of jumping animations and glitches.

Gosh! When the trailer was out, the forums flooded with threads about how impressive and awesome the game looks. Now, I see more and more threads like this where people say that after all the game isn't perfect, there's a lot of space for improvement (while not offering any viable solution). Damn guys, you never be satisfied. :sadvaultboy:

OB did not have proper dev time for 360, FO3 did. That was there last game, the pc market for Beth games from MW to OB to FO has gotten smaller and smaller % wise, making the effort to improved the pc version less and less a worthwhile investment in time and resouces, which we saw with FO3. We might not even crack %20 for Skyrim saleswise. And how many of those %20 of pc user even have a DX11 card? Not even half most likely. I think you are too optimistic, and will be disappointed. Keep expectations realistic.

The game looks fantastic as it stands, I will consider these the graphics as they are and will be.

Exactly.

There is nothing unrealistic about my expectations, they are all within the realm of realism. Asking for full particle effect rivers or the ability to pick out individual grains of sand on a rock would be unrealistic, expecting dx11 isn't that far fetched seeing as how every big game in the last couple of years has had dx11 support.

Now I'm really off to bed :snoring:

I hope your right and now I am off to bed.

Crysis 2 is going to hold that title.

lol!



Except that Crysis also offers great gameplay, relative openworldness and freedom (for a shooter), and quite a nice story (I expected worse, and the part that is pretty epic). A game can have it all, you know, and Crysis offer a nice balance.

I'm not saying Skyrim won't have that balance, but I don't like that Crysis is only mentioned for it's graphics. Sure, it's the most outstanding feature of the game, but it gives the impression that all the rest of it is crap. Which is not.

The reason the graphics are so [censored] in the trailer is because it's recorded uses Xbox360 footage/settings. It will look ridiculously better on a PC, just like Oblivion did.

As for the poll, graphics aren't everything. Gameplay is a lot more important than how a game looks. Take Minecraft, or Age of Empires 2 for instance. Exceptional games, but they're nowhere near graphically amazing.

No matter how high res you make it, get close enough and all textures look bad.

Nuff' Said.

YOU could almost say that. I on the other hand, will not.

Making it as graphical as possible would mean most people can't play it. I don't support that kind of design.

Couldn't agree more. I liked what I saw in the video, and I am very enthusiastic about the art direction in Skyrim. The only thing that could spoil it would be not having high res textures for the PC, which is a feature they already said would be available.

Wait... The dungeons in OBLIVION didnt look the same? You gotta slow down on that skooma, mate.