The graphic quality in Skyrim : V - Skyrim

» Sat May 28, 2011 4:35 pm

Forgive me if i misunderstood the OP, but i get the impression your post was aimed at PC users. I find this odd because quite a lot of my mates are Console gamers and all i hear them talk about are the graphics. I find Console and PC gamers complain just as much as each other.

I am a PC user and i love to play games like Minecraft so GFX's are most certainly not something i fuss over. I still play Morrowind more than i play Oblivion these days.

The main reason i prefer PC is simply because of mods adding SO much more content to games giving them a longer lifespan. Also, i don't understand why so many people use this excuse about pc's costing so much more. I do not upgrade every two years and i am still playing top notch games. Not sure in other countries but here in the U.K PC games cost ￡10 sometimes 15 pounds cheaper than console games upon release...

I actually thought Skyrim looked fantastic from what i saw in the trailer! Really looking forward to it.

» Sat May 28, 2011 11:01 am

First off, let me apologize to any of the pc gamers I offended, it wasn't intended.

All I really meant was that it seems to ONLY be the PC gamers that are complaining about the graphics. None of the console players seem upset by them, because for US, Skyrim is one of the most graphically beautiful games we've ever seen.

Someone above suggested that since I've never seen a game that looks significantly better, that is the reason I dont' care as much. That statement alone proves my point. PC gamers are spoiled when it comes to graphics...at least that's what the above statement suggests.

Obviously not every PC gamer cares only about graphics, but graphics are definitely a bigger concern for PC gamers than they are for console gamers. The first thing someone mentions when talking about Crysis is the graphical quality. The first argument that PC gamers use when comparing a PC version of a game to a console version is graphics.

My post was simply to point out, that perhaps they should appreciate what they have. Could the graphics in Skyrim be better than what we've been shown? Probably. Do they need to be? I don't think so. If a small graphical hiccup such as low res textures takes the immersion out of the game, then perhaps you are too easily taken out of the immersion. I barely even NOTICE low res textures.

It just seems that people have literally frame-by-framed the trailer specifically LOOKING for graphical complaints.

» Sat May 28, 2011 8:50 pm

Forgive me if i misunderstood the OP, but i get the impression your post was aimed at PC users. I find this odd because quite a lot of my mates are Console gamers and all i hear them talk about are the graphics. I find Console and PC gamers complain just as much as each other.

I am a PC user and i love to play games like Minecraft so GFX's are most certainly not something i fuss over. I still play Morrowind more than i play Oblivion these days.

The main reason i prefer PC is simply because of mods adding SO much more content to games giving them a longer lifespan. Also, i don't understand why so many people use this excuse about pc's costing so much more. I do not upgrade every two years and i am still playing top notch games. Not sure in other countries but here in the U.K PC games cost ￡10 sometimes 15 pounds cheaper than console games upon release...

I actually thought Skyrim looked fantastic from what i saw in the trailer! Really looking forward to it.

Well...the post wasn't really "aimed" at PC users, though I guess it does come across that way. It's mainly aimed at the people complaining about the graphics, which, in my experience, seems to be mainly PC gamers. Your post is exactly why I get mad at MS actually though. As I stated in my OP, I dont' like to upgrade my PC every few years, so I play my games on consoles, but because of MS insistence on not allowing TRUE user-created content, I miss out on all the excellent mods. That's the REAL reason that PC versions of games like the Elder Scrolls are better than the console versions.

» Sat May 28, 2011 7:15 pm

People can say whatever they want, but the fact of the matter is graphics are one of the main factors that push the industry forward. The better the game looks, the more likely people will pick it up and take a bite. Personally, I think Skyrim in its current build looks phenomenal. It far surpasses Oblivion graphically and I would totally buy the game in its current state.

» Sat May 28, 2011 2:04 pm

People can say whatever they want, but the fact of the matter is graphics are one of the main factors that push the industry forward. The better the game looks, the more likely people will pick it up and take a bite. Personally, I think Skyrim in its current build looks phenomenal. It far surpasses Oblivion graphically and I would totally buy the game in its current state.

Not to mention I think alot of the people that complain about the graphics don't take into mind that this is the 360 version and if you compare the 360 version of Crysis and the 360 version of Skyrim, Skyrim is just as good. I'm not exaggerating, It's the truth. Go find a screen of the 360 version of Crysis or better yet go buy it and check it out, you'll see that they are equal in graphics quality.

» Sun May 29, 2011 2:12 am

Not to mention I think alot of the people that complain about the graphics don't take into mind that this is the 360 version and if you compare the 360 version of Crysis and the 360 version of Skyrim, Skyrim is just as good. I'm not exaggerating, It's the truth. Go find a screen of the 360 version of Crysis or better yet go buy it and check it out, you'll see that they are equal in graphics quality.

I agree,but not only are the graphics impressive for consoles,it's the fact that they have done that and way more too.
More and better animations,better AI,lots of crafting,snow dusting,wind effecting water/dust,perks,duel wielding,more magic effects,shadows,flowing water ( different types too ).the game tracking what you've done and how you play etc.....and many,many other things. To think what they have added overall to this game so far,i'm amazed how this game looks on the consoles with only 512mb of memory....it's outstanding really.
There is also lots of things we haven't seen yet,but with what we have seen and what they have done graphically is a great achievement.
To me bethesda has set the standard again,if this game does not win any kind of award.....i'll be shocked!

» Sat May 28, 2011 5:42 pm

PC gamers generally pay more for their rigs than console gamers pay for their consoles, so it's natural for them to want games to take advantage of it. Take a look at Battlefield 3, there's going to be console and PC versions, but the PC version isn't being held back at all (64 players, DX11, better destruction etc). Nobody is complaining because console users are getting the best out of their platform and PC users are getting the best out of theirs. I hope Bethesda takes a similar route. Though it's also important to know that the want for visual fidelity goes hand in hand with the want for optimisation.

An exaggerated comparison would be PS3/360 games being created with Wii level visuals because developers want all three version to be the same (or are too slack to make the changes). I'm sure PS3/360 gamers would hate that, PC gamers do as well.

» Sun May 29, 2011 1:26 am

Generalising doesn't always work,but i just wanted to point some things out.
I understand that you like oranges. :thumbsup:
There is arguments for both sides,i understand ,that if you have great PC you want it to be used as it should,i have no problem with that at all.
I know where you are coming from. But skyrim looks good enough overall.
PC user's shouldn't worry too much,we know it's going to look fantastic on PC. I don't think bethesda are going to forget that.
They usually don't do that stuff till later on.
I just want all of us to enjoy the game regardless of what we play it on....it's why we are here.
Suppose i've got a little defensive about the game,because i'm delighted with what i've seen.
I don't wish to offend anyone,but i feel some things needed to be said.
Lets all enjoy skyrim for what it is,and is going to be.....a great game in the series

Even though i play on xbox,i do enjoy looking at the mods people have created on PC. I think some people have great creative minds.
I will no doubt look at more in the future on youtube when skyrim s released.

Just remember pc gamers spend an assload of money on there rigs; many of them build them from the ground up, and all we want is some games to justify the amount spent.

bf3 (dx10/11 only), crysis 2 (dx9/10/11) metro 2033 (dx 9/10/11), rage & brink (opengl 4.1 i think) ect and so on (theres a lot more) but the only RPG thats going to push graphics if Skyrim doesn't is the witcher 2 everything else is an FPS OR shogun 2.

» Sat May 28, 2011 3:09 pm

Not to mention I think alot of the people that complain about the graphics don't take into mind that this is the 360 version and if you compare the 360 version of Crysis and the 360 version of Skyrim, Skyrim is just as good. I'm not exaggerating, It's the truth. Go find a screen of the 360 version of Crysis or better yet go buy it and check it out, you'll see that they are equal in graphics quality.

i hope you mean crysis 2; also did you see the ground texture's and general texture work on skyrim and compare that to crysis 2....yeah. BUT THE FACT REMAINS THAT bethesda has stated all the versions will look similar so I'm extremely doubtful of dx11 support.

Most likely it will be this
HDR
AA
higher resolution texture's (resolution)
better shadow's.
draw distances.
They've stated they are comfy (lazy) and like Dx9....

so that means this games "visaul" longevity is going to be short without the ability for modders to add in DX11 effects.

» Sat May 28, 2011 12:04 pm

I also have never played Morrowind OR Oblivion for PC, and have never really been a PC gamer anyway. I've never been comfortable having to upgrade my PC every two years to keep with the times so to speak.

actually the consules are behind the times. not sure about sony but microsoft stated that if the economy would have been better they would have had their next gen system out in 2010 but cunstruction and research was pushed back to 2012.

and if you build your pc good enough the first time and leave room to upgrade it can last you about 5+ years and still get decent settings on games.

» Sat May 28, 2011 10:37 pm

i hope you mean crysis 2; also did you see the ground texture's and general texture work on skyrim and compare that to crysis 2....yeah. BUT THE FACT REMAINS THAT bethesda has stated all the versions will look similar so I'm extremely doubtful of dx11 support.

Most likely it will be this
HDR
AA
higher resolution texture's (resolution)
better shadow's.
draw distances.
They've stated they are comfy (lazy) and like Dx9....

so that means this games "visaul" longevity is going to be short without the ability for modders to add in DX11 effects.

I've never really looked at Crysis 2 yet. Besides, I won't being buying Crysis 2 for the 360 this time around, I'm just going to be running it at full detail on my comp. As for bethesda stating "All the versions will look similar" I've said before that it was probably just a gaff or misinterpretation or something seeing as only one magazine said that and Todd also claimed that there will be differences between PC and the console and there have been tweets that stated there will be PC unique features. It was one line that may or may not be accurate against multiple statements. Besides, the PC version will always look inherently better than the console versions due to the fact the graphics card will force certain graphics properties on a game such as anisotropic filtering, AA and AAA. I wouldn't count out DX11 yet.

» Sat May 28, 2011 8:16 pm

I've never been comfortable having to upgrade my PC every two years to keep with the times so to speak.

I prefer PC because I'm tired of the PS vs Xbox vs Nintendo crap.

Back when I actually did buy these gaming systems I'd be like "Oh fantastic, this looks like a good game I can't ....well shoot it's only for Playstation!"

I got rather tired of that.

PC is the most universal gaming system- when ever a game comes out there is ALWAYS a PC version. I like that.

Plus... it's hardly all that different from having to buy a new gaming machine (i.e. from Sega Genesis, to Sega Saturn, to Sega Dreamcast....).

» Sat May 28, 2011 9:57 am

Just remember pc gamers spend an assload of money on there rigs; many of them build them from the ground up, and all we want is some games to justify the amount spent.

bf3 (dx10/11 only), crysis 2 (dx9/10/11) metro 2033 (dx 9/10/11), rage & brink (opengl 4.1 i think) ect and so on (theres a lot more) but the only RPG thats going to push graphics if Skyrim doesn't is the witcher 2 everything else is an FPS OR shogun 2.

I see your point,i don't dispute that at all.

It's just the general attitude of a select few towards consoles users that i don't like....there is no need for it at all.
All we do is buy the games,bethesda decided to add the consoles in the mix.
But....shouldn't everyone get to enjoy such a free roaming epic series of games?
I think so.

I have nothing against PC user's at all,and i can understand where some of you are coming from.
Consoles aren't really holding PC back,it's down to what the developers do really.
If they wanted to add all the extra things for PC they could. But remember....not all PC rigs are the same,and thay have to take that into account.
They know the limit of xbox and PS3,but when it comes to people having different rigs,cards,chips etc,thats a different matter.
I just want everyone to enjoy what bethesda as worked hard to do for us.

I try to be fair where possible.
Hell....i prefer xbox over PS3,but i think it still svcks that xbox gets DLC first. We should all get it at the same time,as we all contribute to bethesda

» Sat May 28, 2011 10:47 am

I don't understand how people can say that the graphics of Skyrim are somehow poor. The very first picture from the game that I saw was of the Dwemer ruins in what looked like a very well-made canyon or cliff. No other RPG comes close to approximating the landscapes that I've seen in the pictures and trailers in Skyrim, and I believe that a good RPG requires some sense of landscape for immersion. Bioware tends to do an excellent job with ambience, but for me the amazing thing about Skyrim is that the beautiful landscape is part of the game world. One of the most radical changes between the Morrowind/Oblivion generation of Elderscrolls games and Skyrim is the change in landscape design: mountains are now bona fide mountains complete with more eccentric geographic features.

In my opinion the pure graphics of a game do very little to change the lasting appeal. People still play minesweeper and 'abstract games' because they involve some level of skill (even though minesweeper is incredibly simple). However, graphics do give artists the freedom to do some pretty amazing stuff; Morrowind (or even World of Warcraft) is a good example of how graphics that are modest relative to modern standards can be paired with excellent art direction to produce an incredibly powerful atmosphere. From what I can tell, it looks like the world Skyrim has a lot of artistic inspiration.
My one qualm with past elderscrolls games is how characteristics of NPC's do not tend to extend to their graphical counterparts. The dialogue in Morrowind was strong and gave the npc's a lot of character, but there wasn't much of a connection between the personalities of npc's and the art of the game world (contrast enemies and NPC's in Morrowind and Oblivion with the stylized boss fights and purely graphically portrayed characters from "Twilight Princess").

» Sat May 28, 2011 9:30 pm

Somebody should lock this topic.
Or at least move it into the
"duh, me can is maeking mah Crysis 2 grafics maxxxxxed!!!!11" discussion.

» Sun May 29, 2011 1:05 am

I've never really looked at Crysis 2 yet. Besides, I won't being buying Crysis 2 for the 360 this time around, I'm just going to be running it at full detail on my comp. As for bethesda stating "All the versions will look similar" I've said before that it was probably just a gaff or misinterpretation or something seeing as only one magazine said that and Todd also claimed that there will be differences between PC and the console and there have been tweets that stated there will be PC unique features. It was one line that may or may not be accurate against multiple statements. Besides, the PC version will always look inherently better than the console versions due to the fact the graphics card will force certain graphics properties on a game such as anisotropic filtering, AA and AAA. I wouldn't count out DX11 yet.

Indeed. We also have to consider as 2011 continues to progress, more and more games will offer DX11 (Battlefield 3 being the big one going all out). I would find it hard to believe that BGS wouldn't at least offer some sort of DX11 compatibility as that is the way the industry is definitely going to turn in 2012.

» Sat May 28, 2011 1:34 pm

One thing people need to realize is that every TES game (except Arena and Battlespire, even though they had great graphics for their time) were at the cutting edge of graphics at the time they came out. What makes you think Skyrim will not be? We already know it's at the cutting edge of graphics for a 360 game, I mean really, look at it. What makes you think it won't be the same for the PC?

Indeed. We also have to consider as 2011 continues to progress, more and more games will offer DX11 (Battlefield 3 being the big one going all out). I would find it hard to believe that BGS wouldn't at least offer some sort of DX11 compatibility as that is the way the industry is definitely going to turn in 2012.

This. Every juggernaut game that has come out recently have all been DX11 capable. I wouldn't see how Skyrim wouldn't take advantage of this, especially since Bethesda, as mentioned above, are incredibly talented at making epic stories and gameplay along with epic graphics that are the best of their time and that is with like 30 people. Now they have over a 100. Why wouldn't they been top of the top? I'll stay in the camp of Skyrim being a god of graphics and gameplay because that is a trend in the TES series.

» Sat May 28, 2011 10:52 pm

One thing people need to realize is that every TES game (except Arena and Battlespire, even though they had great graphics for their time) were at the cutting edge of graphics at the time they came out. What makes you think Skyrim will not be? We already know it's at the cutting edge of graphics for a 360 game, I mean really, look at it. What makes you think it won't be the same for the PC?

Very true statement. BGS strives to excel in a wide variety of areas, including graphics. Oblivion was by far the best looking next gen game at the time when it came out. I couldn't see BGS not striving to make their game as great as possible in every way possible.

» Sun May 29, 2011 1:18 am

Honestly for me, if Skyrim had the exact same graphics level of Oblivion I would be happy. We all know they are going to be a lot better, so I am happy with the graphics as they have shown. And I am a PC player.

» Sat May 28, 2011 7:35 pm

First of all let me say I am a gamer of the ZX era. I grew up with what now seem like piss poor graphics. I find the generation of today somewhat ungrateful of all the hardwork and effort put in by games designers. People have become greedy in a sense and just want more and more. Nothing is ever good enough. The fact is it's easy to stand there and criticise when your not the one actually doing the work.

Gameplay is more important to me than anything. I'd rather play a game with ok graphics but excellent gameplay than the other way around. I'm not saying graphics dont have a place but they shouldn't be the sole focus of the game, thats like judging a car on how shiny it is not how good the engine is. People said they wanted a new engine, they got one and it still isnt good enough. It's a shame that gaming has gone in this direction and people cant just enjoy a game for the sake of enjoying it, it's more of a job than a hobby.

As I've said before I don't care how good the graphics look, if I'm not enjoying the game what's the point?

» Sat May 28, 2011 4:07 pm

i'm both a PC and console old gamer - and to be honest i dont get a lot of these'' tesselation,ssao,dx11'' discussion's.
If i wanted i could buy a brand new top line PC, a week before Skyrim ship's , i would'nt care if it use's DX9

Because i just wanna play the game for what it is , and i certainly wont be looking with a magnifying glass or typing /draw_fps 1 or w/e uploading to utube to show off what my beast machine is capable of.

Also- i find it amazing what they can wring out of a cheap 5/6yr's old machine's , and they can still stand up well and hold there own against the best PC's. :goodjob:

» Sat May 28, 2011 11:52 pm

Hey guys, first post, but please...hear me out.

I need to start by saying that I never even knew what ES was until Morrowind for the original Xbox. Since it's release, I have gone back and played Arena and Daggerfall, and I've put countless hours into Oblivion, and the many expansions of both M and O.

I also have never played Morrowind OR Oblivion for PC, and have never really been a PC gamer anyway. I've never been comfortable having to upgrade my PC every two years to keep with the times so to speak.

That being said, the graphics for Oblivion on the 360 were, at the time, some of the best console graphics EVER. Obviously now, they are a little dated in some areas, though in my opinion, they are still completely top notch. There are definitely aspects that look better in other titles, but the environments look phenomenal for a console title.

I've noticed, since the trailer for Skyrim, that there seems to be an awful lot of complaints regarding the graphical quality of Skyrim. Some deal with the water specifically, some are just general complaints. I'm not sure I understand this. I get that the PC gamers all are used to top quality graphics in general, but even if the graphics AREN'T top quality in Skyrim, they will clearly be better than Oblivion, and even Oblivion on the 360 looked "good enough". I for one, find the trailer to be absolutely beautiful. It's clearly leagues ahead of what Oblivion offered (when not using the graphics mods all of you PC guys use).

Furthermore, Morrowind looked like ass to me on the original Xbox. I put 300+ hours into that game. It had nothing to do with the graphics...it was the stellar open-world gameplay...the fact that I felt like I was in that world, affecting it with my actions, and facing the consequences of those actions.

I sometimes wonder if the old "gameplay trumps graphics" argument is lost on PC gamers, as it seems that the first thing they talk about is graphics...EVERY time.

I guess what I'm getting at, is that we need to stop complaining about the graphics in Skyrim. So long as it doesn't take a step BACKWARDS, the graphics are going to be fine.

Also: We probably shouldn't be complaining about spears either...seriously...I want them, you want them...is it going to hurt the game to not have them?

I'll tell you what.
When I first saw the screenshots at Gameinformer I thought that graphics wheren't that good.
But after watching the latest trailer and seeing the graphics in full motion I changed my mind.
I liked the way the game represents different times of the day and weathers,and I think that the shaders are awesome.
Nights seemed more like nights,noons where more like noons,and the skies where awesome.
The way the sky looks,the way weahter looks,and the way objects change colours based on the time of day is very good.
But what surprized me was the fact that while the game's graphics look realistic in full motion,if you pause the video at some places,the still image looks like it's a canvas painting of some famous painter.
That's amazing,truly.
Most of the textures look decent,and I only spotted 1 or 2 that I think should be more detailed.
But Todd Howard already said that the game in PC will have better detailed textures,and there are also 9 months yet for the game to come out,and I'm sure they can make some textures to look a little better also for consoles in that time.

The only bad thing now is that we will have to wait 9 months!

» Sat May 28, 2011 7:57 pm

Also- i find it amazing what they can wring out of a cheap 5/6yr's old machine's , and they can still stand up well and hold there own against the best PC's. :goodjob:

I was with you until this statement. Those old machines don't get anywhere near my computer with 24gb ram, 3-way SLI 580 gtx and a 3.3 ghz hexacore processor. They also don't get close to my 4 year old computer either. However, it is amazing what they can wring out of them though for their terrible hardware, I mean look at the trailer for Skyrim. Seriously, how the hell did they pull that out of 512 mb of memory?

» Sun May 29, 2011 1:07 am

I was with you until this statement. Those old machines don't get anywhere near my computer with 24gb ram, 3-way SLI 580 gtx and a 3.3 ghz hexacore processor. They also don't get close to my 4 year old computer either. However, it is amazing what they can wring out of them though for their terrible hardware, I mean look at the trailer for Skyrim. Seriously, how the hell did they pull that out of 512 mb of memory?

I did'nt say they were on par with PC's, sorry if i gave you that impression. what i was meaning was - i see graphic's like Uncharted 2 , RDR , GoW 2, and i think in context - they measure up to PC game's quite well...#

Also, as you know , dev's will never get the full power out of a pc , since it's always on the move.

Edit- ye what Beth have done with Skyrim on the 360 i think ...is nothing short of astounding.

» Sat May 28, 2011 4:02 pm

I did'nt say they were on par with PC's, sorry if i gave you that impression. what i was meaning was - i see graphic's like Uncharted 2 , RDR , GoW 2, and i think in context - they measure up to PC game's quite well...#

Also, as you know , dev's will never get the full power out of a pc , since it's always on the move.

Edit- ye what Beth have done with Skyrim on the 360 i think ...is nothing short of astounding.

No, the thing is, while at first glace, looking at a low resolution image at a low framerate from several feet away may look pretty, the reason few PC games look better is because very few people make games that really push a PC. It's not that they're getting so much out of consoles they can look sort of like PCs, it's that they're getting so little out of PCs they can sort of look like consoles, albeit with a decent resolution and framerate.