Textures are absolutely horrendous

Post » Fri Dec 09, 2011 8:03 pm

Minecraft is sucessful, look at those graphics. When will people realise that graphics aren't the most important thing?
User avatar
Justin Bywater
 
Posts: 3264
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2007 10:44 pm

Post » Fri Dec 09, 2011 10:18 pm

Minecraft is sucessful, look at those graphics. When will people realise that graphics aren't the most important thing?


Where did anyone here say that was the case? You've made a useless post from a baseless assumption, congratulations.

I direct you to my previous post in this thread.
User avatar
Latino HeaT
 
Posts: 3402
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2007 6:21 pm

Post » Fri Dec 09, 2011 9:42 pm

The only notibly low-quality textures are the ones who, if all loaded at once, would [censored] your processors(10s of thousands of duplicates of same textures in the open world).
User avatar
Ella Loapaga
 
Posts: 3376
Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2007 2:45 pm

Post » Sat Dec 10, 2011 1:30 am


To Aramyn: Good luck tweaking the textures from the ini.


....? Where did I say you can improve the textures in the .ini?

I said you can improve LOD/shadows/draw distance, which you claim you can only see 20 meters of apparently.
User avatar
Daramis McGee
 
Posts: 3378
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2007 10:47 am

Post » Sat Dec 10, 2011 3:11 am

The only notibly low-quality textures are the ones who, if all loaded at once, would [censored] your processors(10s of thousands of duplicates of same textures in the open world).


Not everyone is gaming on a Pentium 4.

To Aramyn: 20 meters is roughly the point where visual quality begins to decay below "normal". Minor foliage starts disappearing, etc. Settings can be pushed slightly higher by editing the options file but textures will still be terrible. Which is what this thread is about.

You said Skyrim is about the big picture, the big picture is just as bad as the up close one.

Don't embarrass yourself by thinking you're the only one around here who knows how to tweak an ini lmao.
User avatar
Katie Pollard
 
Posts: 3460
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 11:23 pm

Post » Sat Dec 10, 2011 7:16 am

im on a console and i think the textures look great maybe this is because i dont spend my time looking at leaf veins and individual hairs.

User avatar
Lynette Wilson
 
Posts: 3424
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2006 4:20 pm

Post » Sat Dec 10, 2011 4:43 am

Not everyone is gaming on a Pentium 4.

p4s are becoming outdated soon enough. Sitting on a 6x3.6ghz AMD cpu right now, sadly the game only uses about 34% at all times :( Oh and on consoles the third core is used for random access memory, instead of having its seperate hardware-part, which also limits consoles alot.

But my point was that with 4000x4000 textures the game would be unplayable due to the open world concept.
User avatar
Shae Munro
 
Posts: 3443
Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2007 11:32 am

Post » Sat Dec 10, 2011 10:39 am

But my point was that with 4000x4000 textures the game would be unplayable due to the open world concept.


That's what LOD distance is for. Also keep in mind that even though the game world is open, it's still heavily instanced.
User avatar
Mari martnez Martinez
 
Posts: 3500
Joined: Sat Aug 11, 2007 9:39 am

Post » Sat Dec 10, 2011 2:18 am

Not everyone is gaming on a Pentium 4.

To Aramyn: 20 meters is roughly the point where visual quality begins to decay below "normal". Minor foliage starts disappearing, etc. Settings can be pushed slightly higher by editing the options file but textures will still be terrible. Which is what this thread is about.

You said Skyrim is about the big picture, the big picture is just as bad as the up close one.

Don't embarrass yourself by thinking you're the only one around here who knows how to tweak an ini lmao.


Wow you are hopeless. I'm going to go back to playing my heavily tweaked awesome looking game. You can go back to staring at walls from a foot away and being a baby about it.
User avatar
Niisha
 
Posts: 3393
Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2006 2:54 am

Post » Fri Dec 09, 2011 9:09 pm

I play on pc and I think its fine.
Why are you worried about it anyway, its like rage all over again.
User avatar
Suzie Dalziel
 
Posts: 3443
Joined: Thu Jun 15, 2006 8:19 pm

Post » Sat Dec 10, 2011 11:03 am

I wouldn't mind it so much if the texture quality was consistent. But you see terrible textures right next to good ones.

I posted these in a thread some guy posted about Skyrim pushing the boundaries for graphics.

http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/192/2011112100001.jpg/
http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/543/2011112100002.jpg/

This is PC ultra quality by the way.



Gods! The second image... I can't even wear gloves of any sort as a mage. I'm hoping the mod tools offer an easy way to equip multiple rings to make up for the lack of gloves.
User avatar
Loane
 
Posts: 3411
Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2007 6:35 am

Post » Sat Dec 10, 2011 9:26 am

To be honest I don't see why so many people hate the UI. Even if it was designed for consoles, its very easy to use and works fine for me.


SERIOUSLY. I don't understand the whining. It's not the best but it's really not even as close to as bad as people make it out to be. Not being able to hotkey for dual wielding is the only thing i think they failed on in the UI but that doesn't make it the worst.
User avatar
Eliza Potter
 
Posts: 3481
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 3:20 am

Post » Sat Dec 10, 2011 1:36 am

SERIOUSLY. I don't understand the whining. It's not the best but it's really not even as close to as bad as people make it out to be. Not being able to hotkey for dual wielding is the only thing i think they failed on in the UI but that doesn't make it the worst.


You mean "you don't comprehend another persons opinion because it's contrary to yours". It is not whining. (Well, there are whining people, (To complain or protest in a childish fashion.) but this apparently applies to everyone with a differing opinion. Not just the "childish" ones.)

Any time people disagree, one becomes a whiner.........yeah, ok.

Just so you know, I don't hate the UI, but it could be better.....am I a whiner now to?

<_<
User avatar
Penny Flame
 
Posts: 3336
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 1:53 am

Post » Fri Dec 09, 2011 10:40 pm

i think its only a bug deal because of the size and scale of this game, it was one of the huge releases this year, and we all know bethesda could make an amazing game, i love this game, but there are alot of problems with it, the way i see it is its like the game is so bad ass..we dont need no stinking graphics, and i guess thats fine if the company is ok with settling. Most companies dont strive for perfection like they used to, and bethesda is no exception, they could have made the game look better and they did not.. period
User avatar
Roddy
 
Posts: 3564
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2007 11:50 pm

Post » Sat Dec 10, 2011 4:21 am

Dang folks keep I some what civil. Some of u guys are acting like a bunch of second graders.......


Hmmmm actually that's an insult to my daughters entire second grade class.
User avatar
Breautiful
 
Posts: 3539
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2007 6:51 am

Post » Sat Dec 10, 2011 6:21 am

This is comedy gold. Bethesda created a massive, beautiful gameworld. But because the edge of a table is a bit blurry, that makes the game worse :rofl:


I merely pointed out that the texture quality was inconsistent. But, sure, put words into my mouth if you want.
User avatar
Kill Bill
 
Posts: 3355
Joined: Wed Aug 30, 2006 2:22 am

Post » Fri Dec 09, 2011 10:13 pm

I'm playing on the 360 and (after uninstalling from the hard drive) my textures look fantastic. They're clearly several orders of magnitude beyond PS2 textures, such as was proposed in the topic post.



I haven't seen anything in the game that's N64-quality, and I'm a N64 owner (still have two of them).


I completely disagree. I have PC and 360 and the 360 looks horrible amongst many other things.
User avatar
Killer McCracken
 
Posts: 3456
Joined: Wed Feb 14, 2007 9:57 pm

Post » Fri Dec 09, 2011 9:39 pm

This is comedy gold. Bethesda created a massive, beautiful gameworld. But because the edge of a table is a bit blurry, that makes the game worse :rofl:

Get off his back.
He only pointed out a lower quality texture and that suddenly means he thrashes the entire game and prefers graphics?

You Bethesda Defense Forces people never cease to amaze me. :shrug:
If it wasn't for the community feedback(or whining according to you), Bethesda would never improve. At all.
User avatar
Lew.p
 
Posts: 3430
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2007 5:31 pm

Post » Sat Dec 10, 2011 1:48 am

Okay I have been on the bad textures bandwagon since release....anyone following the forums would have probably seem my post (and former signature about textures) about textures. I let it rest to try to enjoy the game but I Just got to Windhelm and am completely dumbfounded. This is the worst looking area of this game by far.

What in the heck happened with this city? The textures look even lower-res than the other garbage in the game..and the entire city looks like complete crap out of 1985. What the heck?
User avatar
Elizabeth Falvey
 
Posts: 3347
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 1:37 am

Post » Sat Dec 10, 2011 2:08 am

Kidding, right? I'm on 360, 55" LCD, HDMI, and I am more than satisfied.

I've had the texture glitch strike once, lasted 5 seconds and corrected itself... Other than that, purely sublime.



Same here! I'm playing on an Xbox 360 set at 1080p output to a Samsung full HD TV set at Game mode 1080p and the graphics including the textures are sublime and the best I've seen in such a huge world such as Skyrim. Detail is everywhere, leaves, tree trunks, wood, the diffrerent surfaces on the ground, leaves, plants etc and the stone work, all absolutely gorgeous and illustrating just what the Xbox 360 is still capable of.
User avatar
BRIANNA
 
Posts: 3438
Joined: Thu Jan 11, 2007 7:51 pm

Post » Fri Dec 09, 2011 7:03 pm

probably not...it's the PC people who are graphics snobs. console players don't use the word textures.

I found this amusing because when the Xbox 360 launched console gamers were joyous and throwing around terms like "high definition" and "anti-aliasing", now they call PC gamers "graphics wh0res" and "snobs" because most console games are rendered in sub-720p and only since FXAA have any games had a reasonable anti-aliasing solution (which looks crap in the sub-HD resolutions in which the games are actually displayed on large screens).

When you have the capability you call it having standards, or "next-gen".
When you don't have the capability you go in to denial and call it "snobbery".

Same here! I'm playing on an Xbox 360 set at 1080p output to a Samsung full HD TV set at Game mode 1080p and the graphics including the textures are sublime and the best I've seen in such a huge world such as Skyrim. Detail is everywhere, leaves, tree trunks, wood, the diffrerent surfaces on the ground, leaves, plants etc and the stone work, all absolutely gorgeous and illustrating just what the Xbox 360 is still capable of.

If you saw what 2048 textures looked like you would change your mind, either that or you'd go in to denial because consoles don't have the memory.

All I can say is "thank the gods for the modding community", they remember that your average gaming PC has much more than 512MB of memory to utilise.
User avatar
Petr Jordy Zugar
 
Posts: 3497
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2007 10:10 pm

Post » Sat Dec 10, 2011 3:46 am

Haha..

There you go Bethesda.. most playing your game are very happy with the graphics no need to do ANYTHING to them.

But really would have been nice if they went that extra mile for PC. So yeah they did a great job on porting the game to PC. If consoles is what brings in the money then this is what we will see.
User avatar
Cash n Class
 
Posts: 3430
Joined: Wed Jun 28, 2006 10:01 am

Post » Sat Dec 10, 2011 6:49 am

Kidding, right? I'm on 360, 55" LCD, HDMI, and I am more than satisfied.

I've had the texture glitch strike once, lasted 5 seconds and corrected itself... Other than that, purely sublime.

And you and the OP haven't even listed your GPU...


<--- Nvidia 560 ti and the game kills Oblivion for me in graphics and I play both in max settings. Give me a break. Troll Skyrim harder.
User avatar
Brian LeHury
 
Posts: 3416
Joined: Tue May 22, 2007 6:54 am

Post » Sat Dec 10, 2011 1:38 am

And you and the OP haven't even listed your GPU...

You quoted the part where he said Xbox 360, so a cut down X1800.

<--- Nvidia 560 ti and the game kills Oblivion for me in graphics and I play both in max settings. Give me a break. Troll Skyrim harder.

I can see how someone would say that if they never played with Qarl's Texture Pack.

<-- Core i5 2500k, GTX 580, game textures are nothing special. Overall design and environment is a different story.
User avatar
Sophie Payne
 
Posts: 3377
Joined: Thu Dec 07, 2006 6:49 am

Post » Sat Dec 10, 2011 9:03 am

Bah.
User avatar
rebecca moody
 
Posts: 3430
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 3:01 pm

PreviousNext

Return to V - Skyrim