Oh... we definitely notice.

Sony is practically having a financial meltdown with PSN and their MMO/facebook games being taken down because of unsecured servers.

To be fair though, most gamers (in particular westerners who are the main focus) have the Xbox 360 and not the PS3.

No i plan on overclocking my cpu to scale my 580 gtx's gpu scaling.

Also im liquid cooling both GPU's my CPU and my south/north bridge's.

Its simple... todd is sayiong it wasnt worth waiting 4 more years to bring skyrim on the new consoles when what they can do right now is so good. dx11 and the new consoles can wait for elder scrolls 6.

And no they wouodnt put a ton of dx11 stuff into the game for pc because they want to keep the game down to one dvd.

All of which are completely unnecessary in order to get good performance. Even going SLI is nothing but a waste of money and good for only bragging rights. Just one of those 580 is good enough for any game that's going to be out in the near future, and by the time you'll need something more, there will be a new video card that's more powerful than those two 580's combined. If you've got more money than you know what to do with then by all means go with a setup like that, but it's completely unnecessary. Software development has been light years behind the technology simply due to the fact that most people just don't have high end rigs to use it on, and it's not economically feasible to cater only to the technological elite. If a game company doesn't aim for the average in household tech, they're not going to be in business very long.

If they can fit it onto one DVD for the 360, they can certainly fit plenty more onto the DVD for the PC release - there's no time limit for decompression when you're installing, like there is when you're streaming something.

/Signed. I don't see why Bethesda can't develop for PC with proper DX11 and then cut it down for consoles. See: Battlefield 3.

I agree with the OP. Gamers are generally lazy and cheap nowadays, and I hate that a true PC genre like the RPG is held back by the casual attitude that is found among many console gamers.
Sorry if this sounds offensive - I respect a guy which ever platform he uses - but it's frustrating to me as a PC enthusiast. I want games to move forward, but in some ways PC gaming is really held back by the current generation of consoles.

Better graphics = better immersion = truth at the end of the day.

It costs more money, requires more time, and creates and obvious inferior product that would enrage many. The last thing BGS wants to do is piss off their console fan base, who makes up about 90% of their total fan base.

Who cares? That's what they get for choosing to play the game on hardware that was merely average 5 years ago. Awful platforms like that don't deserve an equal product. Nobody's raging about Battlefield 3, I seriously doubt people would be mad if Beth went that route with Skyrim. Also, Bethesda has basically unlimited development money. See: ZeniMax. Their major game budget is on-par with EA's for 1-2 games.

If you want to pull the "Who cares" card... I'm sure ZeniMax cares 90% of their sales going down the drain doesn't sound to good from a business stand point.
Battlefield 3 is a FPS,Skyrim is a open-world RPG.

90% is an incorrect figure, but even if it weren't, why would making a better PC version stop console sales?

I can see it fueling PC sales, but stopping console sales? Is anybody really that petty?

If 90% of their sales is on consoles they should definitely be looking to add more DX11 goodies and PC features. Their PC sales must be horrendous compared to the rest of the industry in the genre. This would be a pretty easy way to get some significant increases in sales. Doesn't take a sales and marketing expert to figure that one out.

what do you expect, thats all you hear on the forums today, PC users are elitist, consoles are 90% of bethesda's funding etc etc do you really think its even worthwhile trying to converse with such thoughts? the guy gave LINKS AND INFORMATION contrary to todds statements and STILL people are like :bonk: its cripplinig the level of.....obtuse that exists here, defaces the whole point of a forum when people are all to ready to regergitate PR talk, not read the post fully and then comment in the thread with statements like "i didn't read the post and I don't care" nothing more to waxing their post counts.

There's no such thing as unlimited development money. And comparing them to EA is pointless since EA was actually showing a $1 billion loss not too long ago. The only reason why Zenimax has a healthy bankroll to work with is because they've been focusing on all platforms, not just a small elite of high-end gamers.

The difference is DICE has always supported their PC origins more. They have never compromised because of technology, and always strive to make the best military shooter out there. Until Battlefield: Bad Company 2, DICE has never been that successful on console, as CoD reins supreme. BGS has a different mentality, and while their origins started on PC as well, they have to consider their majority of gamers. BGS has been successful in large part because of the console base. Morrowind was a huge hit on the original Xbox. Oblivion was an even bigger hit on the Xbox 360, and then later the PS3. Graphics have also never been the sole priority of BGS games. There are a lot more elements that need to be considered and implemented properly. A game can look beautiful, but few will remember it if there is nothing interesting about the game.

Todd Howard said "90% of their audience is consoles" (see: http://www.next-gen.biz/news/skyrim-mods-could-reach-consoles)
Making a clear inferior version of the game would probably affect the sales seeing as how they would favor one platform more than the other.
Just curious how would you feel if Bethesda removed the ability to use the construction kit (Creation Kit) and you wouldn't be able to mod the game anymore.

[censored] I'd give up DX11 (and even DX10) if I could just have open cities in the vanilla game.

But we probably won't be getting any of them. Todd should wear some makeup, so at least he looks pretty while he [censored]s the PC users.

90% as a figure doesn't add up, and is far too round - he means majority, not exact figures.

And in what way are the two comparable? That's directly affecting the version of the game I want to buy, wheras giving the PC version decent graphics makes absolutely no difference to a console user. Not buying the game because of something that doesn't affect you at all is stupid.

That doesn't even make sense. :blink:

How is making the PC version better taking anything away from the console version? The console version is already as good as it can be. Making the PC version a true "PC version" and not just a "console version run on the PC" would just entice more PC users to buy the game. Are you saying more sales is bad?

Alright. Here's something that needs to be cleared up. 90% is not true. I'm a business minor. If a company like ZeniMax had only 10% of their sales to one market (PC), they would be svcking toes and other svckable appendages to try and get that number up. We'd be hearing constantly about how amazing the PC version was, and how it had full DX11 support and real-time shadows everywhere. Anyway, open world vs FPS doesn't really matter. BF3 is going to have some very amazing technologies driving it that will be completely absent in Skyrim. Also, you might have forgotten this but Bethesda's PC games are going to be miles ahead no matter what they do. See: tesnexus.com. If things work the way you say they do, why aren't console gamers already fuming that we're getting a modding kit for Skyrim? Could it be that they don't?

considering less then 1% of the "audience" come on forums and 95% of the audience wouldn't even know that one platform had more/less features then the other one how would that "hurt" sales?

What I'm trying to say is...
I highly doubt adding DX11 is going to rocket PC sales and I generally doubt adding DX11 to PC would knock down console sales. I'm trying to say why would Bethesda bother catering to one platform? As far as I know they have never done it and probably never will.

So making the PC version take advantage of the PC hardware and peripherals is "catering" now? I guess you could say they are already "catering" the 360 platform since all the other platforms are going to look the same instead of good as they could on their own platform.

Why anyone would argue that they shouldn't take advantage of the other platforms features is beyond me. That's just, well, beyond selfish.

Developers today are tired of the limitations of current gen consoles, including Bethesda when they said "we are very comfy with current gens console" that translates too "we have done everything possible on current gen console....."

I believe game developers do their job for more then just a buck I believe they do their job to make THE best game ever.. being held back by 2005 hardware is upsetting tons of developers already and speaking out against it. To make the best game ever they need to advance in technology which is what the PC offers

Not if it was a DX11 only game, most people don't have the capability yet. I'm not sure what the market breakdown is but many people are still using DX9 cards and others are using DX10 units. To cater strictly to people who have DX11 capability would mean less sales, not more, since those people are still in the minority. It's sounds like the approach they are taking makes sense, design with DX9 in mind but add some DX11 features where they can. That will allow them to appeal to the widest number of people possible.