Seeing all of the blood on the sword makes me so happy. :biggrin:

How about exposed ceilings?
http://i.imgur.com/bk3JV.jpg

The Draugr standing behind the one on the right does appear to have a spear-like weapon in its right hand.

Don't know why, I capped them full screen from there. Maybe the full screen button makes them look lighter?

Edit: No, they look exactly the same to me.

Exposed ceilings are fine but like the torches mounted on walls, I don't want to see them in every dungeon just as an excuse for good lighting. I want some places to be pitch black until I light a torch myself, and even then it should still be very dark.

After playing the witcher 2 a game with a very small budget i'm sort of disappoint in ES5. Mainly being there budget is so freaking huge how is it the graphics aren't up to scale with 2011 and look like a slightly improved oblivion. While the witcher 2's budget was quite small but the game itself is great and the graphics are gorgeous.

Also what's with all the Bloom and brown???

EDIT: after looking at magazine shots, video's ect i loaded up oblivion (modded) and modded oblivion looks better; i dont get why bethesda can't push the graphical department when they easily have the money to do so without impacting any other department.

in that autumn pic, i'm not sure if i am seeing it right, but is that a nirn root? if you look at the tree trunk on the bottom left... the one with the yellow fern next to it.... well if you move your eyes right and follow the straight line the raised embankment creates... there looks to be visible the very top of the nirn root's 3 leaves sticking up.... i may just be seeing things but thats what it looks like to me...

The Witcher 2 is completely great. But it's not a open-world game and, therefore, it can have much better graphics. Skyrim is going to be big, very big. If it had The Witcher's graphics, your computer would explode.

Keep in mind though that Skyrim got cell seperation, while Witcher 2 doesn't, and the areas that are open in Witcher 2 are huge themselves, before they are seperated into another chapter.

The reason Witcher 2 can do this is because it uses a single thread to stream background resources. Skyrim could do exactly the same.
I think Just Cause 2 also did this to make the world seamless.

In Skyrim's case, I think it has more to do with how eager Bethesda actually are to spend more money on tuning graphics. How many programmers they hire, etc. That's my personal guess.

It's fortunate that I've seen the trailer, because if I would go by the pictures, it feels like Oblivion all over again. (Not the graphic quality. The artwork.)

I love Oblivion, but the mood of the game, I'm getting really tired of.

A few days ago, a dev explained how it was different in a TES. I haven't played Just Cause, but I know its giant and it has nice graphics, but I don't know if it can be compared to Skyrim, in this aspect.

I explain, it's not just a question of cells, but in Skyrim you can go practically whenever you want: to that mountain you see miles away from you (that in The Witcher would be just scenary, not part of the gameworld), or to the roof of that house. The single fact that you can jump and acces to all sort of places makes it different. More or less, this was what the dev (vsions, I think) said.

Well in the July 2011 Issue 47 of Playstation: The Official Magazine there is a 10 page spread on Skyrim and screenshots - game looks amazing and I can't wait.. Horses, Factions, Fast Travel and Guards are also in the game.

No it wouldn't i can load maps on crysis sandbox that are x20 larger than any cell in oblivion/fallout/nv and my computer runs just fine with such extreme graphical detail.

Hell look at oblivion with full graphical overhaul mods installed, looks better in some aspects than skyrim, and thats on an old game with an older version of the engine.

Why are we still stuck in 2006 graphics when it's 2011?


Before gameplay>graphics that line in invalid due to bethesda epic funds for development; also there's a reason graphical overhaul mods are so popular.

Could it be crossplatform develepment and they do not want the PC version to look that much better than the console version.

Also can anyone explain the Bloom?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/57/Crysis_lighting.jpg

Why hello there.

Old screenshots?

I just noticed there is something wrong with the feet of the lower skeleton in the background http://img585.imageshack.us/img585/6730/skyrim03.jpg.

Actually, we are "stuck" in... more or less 2007 graphics, respecting technology, with some updates through the game creation process.

Oblivion with mods can look great, but at the moment, not at all as Skyrim, and a game is much more than graphics: the weather, the AI...

Anyway, yes, there is a reason why graphical overhauls are so popular: because these games are played for years and years, and people get better PCs, and because there are people that have very pro PCs, as you, I suppose. Personally, I think that my PC won't be able to run Skyrim. Oh, and though good graphics are nice, for me, Gameplay is always more important than graphics. After all, I'm playing a game.

CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING: The time between morrowind and oblivion was 4 years, the budget for development was smaller yet graphical improvements were major. The time between oblivion and skyrim is 5 years the budget is quite massive yet graphical improvements have been quite small even though graphical rendering technology has improved at a faster rate from oblivion->skyrim than it has from morrowind->oblivion.

Yes but an RPG exploration game like ES games are having extremely pretty graphics would be nice all the way through the game. And there is really NO excuse being that it's 2011 and they have a budget of epic proportions.

And

if the Gameplay is only important and graphics dont matter that much then every game would be made in ASCII graphics.

As for graphical improvements and tech improvments everythings been 2006 (crysis 1 was released 2007 and barely anything has surpassed it) theres some exceptions like Witcher 2, and metro2033 but the industry as a whole is stuck in 2006.

Remember that the game is still very early on, and the pictures are taking on Xbox 360. They "confirmed" it will look better on a PC.

HAIL THE PC USERS, UNITE.

I think the difference would be PC vs. XBOX. I don't want to talk about it until we see PC screens.

BTW,
http://brutalgamer.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/CompositeMountain.jpg#

I never seen better real time graphics in my life.


http://members.iinet.com.au/~amills/mmm11.jpg
http://images.wikia.com/oblivion/images/6/6a/Olfand.jpg

Legen...
http://videogametalk.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Skyrim-WolvesHealMace.jpg
http://www.gamer.ru/system/attached_images/images/000/321/363/original/4.jpg

wait for it
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-jCsuz8hIZaw/Taw8_KgG_uI/AAAAAAAAATQ/h2157kOMiMY/s1600/es-1.jpg

(And one more time.)
http://brutalgamer.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/CompositeMountain.jpg#

...dary.

The change is actually quite dizzying.

Nice find!

Yes, art direction in Skyrim is exemplar and sort of makes up for a few graphical limitations.
One can but wonder what that very same art direction would produce with, say, Witcher 2's technology powering it.

Hey Luke Homonimous!
Nice!

Hey, everytime I read one of those graphics-don't-matter kind of remarks i feel the urge to come up with a snorty condensed rebutal. But I have failed miserably so far.
And then you come along and give us this, brilliant, in a nutshell.

Can i borrow from you, pweeease?

Remember that these are all Xbox 360 shots. They will look better on PC.