I'm not trying to start a flame war or anything but I do have some concerns. So Oblivion came out in 2006 and at the time, no doubt about it, the game looked fantastic on the 360. But here we are 5 years later and we now have Skyrim coming out on the same system. So the question is, how much of an improvement can Skyrim really be over Oblivion? I've seen the screen caps in GI but I can't help but wonder if they are truly representative of what we'll see in the final product on the consoles (maybe even PCs). Can the consoles really crank out that much of an improvement in graphics?

One of the reasons for my concern is I don't know if I can afford to buy a new comp this year (my current rig is a duo core 2.33 ghz w/ 3 gigs of RAM and an 8600 GT vid card and I'm not sure if it will even run Skyrim) and so I'm thinking of getting a 360 instead. However, will Skyrim be a poor experience on the 360 with dumbed down graphics and will that make it a waste of money overall or can the 360 still pull of some amazing stuff even after all of these years?

Someone please comfort my poor troubled mind!

I'd say (assume) significant if the new engine is as good as I hope.

That's all we can do though, is assume (guess) until some game footage is released.

P.S.

http://www.gamesas.com/index.php?/topic/1159991-how-better-can-it-really-look/page__st__40

well considering the Xbox was only out for 4-5 month before OB game out and the PS3 launched 8 months after with the ps3 oblivion coming out 4-5 months after that... i think the graphics can def get much better... look at the difference between oblivion and Fallout 3 there is a good size graphic dif and there was even a small graphic dif between fallout 3 and New Vages, throw in the fact that its on a new engine that can handle alot more i expect a good size dif in the graphics from OB on consoles and Skyrim on counsels... and i dont want to sound like a PS3 fan boy but i also think that the PS3 is just a better piece of hardware than the 360 and for my opinion i think the best looking games graphically have been ps3 exclusive games... now that wont factor into this because its a waste of time customizing the game for both consoles and PC's and we know from OB that Beth decided not to make a PC version and a dif consoles version.

Well, the screenshots look promising, but I want to see some actual gameplay.

A lot better. Considering even with oblivion's old tech, a few mods and it looks like one of the most impressive games visually to date.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zPJnF-V0-AI&hd=1


Skyrim will add full dynamic lighting, a MUCH better animation system, better LOD, Larger Draw Distance, Improved Particle effects, Greatly improved weather system, Character/facial model fidelity has seen a huge jump, physics of objects and vegetation as well as rag doll. And this is just the stuff we know from the reveal, who is to say what other graphical goodies await us.

Oblivion came out at the birth of the new consoles. Now developers have had 5 years to know how to get the most out of the hardware. It's more reasurring in my opinion.

Long story short, look at CoD 2, then look at Black Ops.

Skyrim will look better than Oblivion did on the consoles for sure. It will be optimized better, the details will be sharper, and there will be significant improvements. What you need to consider though is the screen shots GI took were from the Xbox 360. Will the game definitely look better on PC? Of course, especially if the game is DX11 compatible. Console technology is lagging behind the PC world, but it will still be a quality experience on consoles.

@ KTGrim86 - Keep in mind the OP wants to know about consoles, not PC. It will definitely look better than Fallout: New Vegas, but I wouldn't expect it too look much better than the 360 screen shots in the GI.

Indeed, look at Uncharted 1-Uncharted 3.

Resistance 1-3

Halo 3 to Halo Reach

Perfect Dark to Rage

Battlefield 2 to Battlefield BC 2

etc etc.

Devs now have a handle on the hardware, and games can look orders of magnitude better, even on old systems.


All that said, I am still praying for some nice jumps in fidelity for PC users. Like Mirrors Edge, GTAIV, Two Worlds II, Crysis II, Rage, BFBCII, AvP, Left4Dead 2, Bioshock and ect have easily done.

On way or another, spend 300$ (?) on a Xbox360, or $1000+ on a PC that's going to have an 'ok' framerate ... even I, anti-Xbox that I am, will *consider* getting the 360. At some point in your life you put more thought in your priorities, and generally a gaming PC is not an intelligent purchase because it loses value faster than the worst car.

'course, if you dont have a laptop to your name (that's me!), you can use that argument to get one and while you're at it, get one that can game. Even more pricy that a desktop gaming rig, but I like to use a computer anywhere in the house.

I'm just happy we get to see actual mountains. Thats a first for the series.

You can buy a PC for $400, maybe even less, that will play ANY 360 game at higher frame rates and better graphics that 360. What you say was true at launch, almost 6 years ago... that is a lifetime for PC hardware.

Before I go any further, I really respect PC gamers BUT they do have a tendency of downgrading consoles due to their technicalities. I'm a PC gamer myself, and I know how it feels to sometimes wonder "why consoles?". The problem with this notion is that many of us grew into gaming through consoles...I myself came in through the Playstation, which I thought was all the rage at the time. So, at least for me, it's hard to understand why consoles are so ridiculed because I grew up with them. I'll tell you right now: Don't worry about it, I'm a 360 gamer and I'm sure the game will look beautiful on the system.

That said, I've played both 360 and PS3 games, and they can be just as jaw dropping as PC games. Technicalities aside, games are pretty, games are memorable, by their aesthetic value and this doesn't mean draw distance and shadows. They do help, but what really makes a game unique and enjoyable is the detail, the artwork, and the dedication put into it. The Assassin's Creed series, for example, is a testament to the effort of a few developers trying to bring enjoyment to a gamer's couch while still adding a beautiful world, story, and soundtrack. On the flip side, the Uncharted series on the PS3 has also brought its share of attention with equally gorgeous games like Uncharted. These are games that use what they have and produce something unparalleled in the industry. Some PC games (which I won't specifically mention), for example, will only be remembered by their technical excellence...and not their unoriginal story, uninspired characters, and a setting that could be placed into countless other FPS's without any touch-up. Take away that one piece of quality from these games and you have something that can't even stand on it's own two feet. So my point is this: technical superiority doesn't produce a better experience. It may produce a more believable experience, but this can only be accomplished by more important factors that transcend the entertainment industry (story, characters, etc).

Maybe it's just me. Maybe I somehow can't tell any major differences between PC and console gaming. However, I know that when I do play Skyrim on my Xbox 360, the beauty will still be there along with the detail. I won't be able to see a few more trees and a shadow here and there?

Frankly, my dear....I don't give a damn. ^_^

In the case of ES5, $400 is likely the price of the videocard alone [that it will take to get an excellent framerate] ! The 360 will play it just fine, I'm sure, but a $400 computer will make anyone cry at the poor performance. I figure $400 can buy you a decent CPU, mainboard and maybe enough RAM, but you still need a mid-high end videocard if you're hoping to play ES5 at a decent resolution. At least that was the case with ES3 and ES4.

This is incorrect. Unless for some reason the PC version is lazily coded.....


A PC that is many times more powerful than an Xbox 360 will run the game with terrible frame-rates and look worse than the 360 version? That makes no sense.


And no, you can get video cards for literally sub $50.00 that are more powerful than the Xbox 360 GPU.

Especially by the time Skyrim releases, hardware will have dropped to even lower prices, and even better performance. A $400.00 PC will run Skyrim with better graphics than the 360 and with a better frame-rate. Guaranteed.

Just to give everyone who thinks the Xbox 360 and the PS3 are going to create a ceiling for the graphics, Far Cry 2 is for the PC and the PS3 and the Xbox 360. I think we'll be OK. Granted, Far Cry 2 is a few years old, but it really is still close to the top.

Pf, a midrange graphics card will likely max skyrim out at decent resolutions, a high end graphics card certainly will, and if you spend $400 on a graphics card you're pretty much at the top end of the bleeding edge - running skyrim at 2650x1600 in 3D and still maintaining 60fps. Components these days are more than powerful enough to handle modern games without even trying.

A $400 PC in total will most certainly play skyrim decently well, though. I suggest you take a look at http://media.photobucket.com/image/recent/The_FalconO6/CurrentLogicalPCBuyingGuide/Guide.png
It shows that while PCs can go exceptionally expensive, even the cheapest few tiers (Well, not the very cheapest, it doesn't even have a GPU) will play any modern game fine.

@capitalsown; that's the point many people are trying to make. FC2 is several years old, and still close to the top. Doesn't that seem wrong to you?

Although I'm a bit of a PC taliban, I have to agree that consoles certainly do a good job forcing the developers to optimize their graphics engines (and their games in general) in order to use up even the last bit of resources that consoles can offer. That leads to highly optimized engines like the Crysis' one, or the Creation Engine (I'm sure it's optimized as hell, too).

I could not care a-less-a about the graphics. I mean for god sake I'm playing diablo 2 right now and for the record it's not famous for it's graphics.

I agree. I'm playing dragon age right now and those graphics are even good for me. I break out the ps2, n64, super nintendo and still enjoy those systems.

@ op I wouldn't worry at all. In fact I would be encouraged. The best looking games generally come towards the end of a consoles life cycle. Look at god of war 2 and snale eater and even okami on ps2. Very good looking games. Final fantasy xii as well looks great. Skyrim is going to look and feel amazing.

Have you seen the trailer or videos of crysis 2 to the xbox 360 (witch is amazing as hell)? FarCry 2, Sniper etc all have amazing graphics as far as landskape, trees etc goes. However they are not as big as Skyrim(speaking of cells). So my advice to you is:

Wait for a trailer

Yes those are some good examples. Have you seen uncharted 2 and 3 on ps3?

Well guys, I will be delighted to be proven wrong. No matter how good a PC I built in the past, it was never enough to run my favorite games at max settings. At least, anti-alisaing has always come at a massive FPS cost. It that aint a problem anymore, then hell yeah

'specially since I'd like to get myself a laptop now, and gaming laptops are not exactly great as far as cost/performance goes.

Thanks for the responses everyone. I'm getting more and more convinced that I'll be buying a 360 this year for Skyrim and other games that my comp can't handle (i.e. Black Ops). I've been doing tons of research into buying a new comp and doing price comparisons everywhere. From what I've seen, it will cost at least $1000 for a rig w/ small monitor and buying Windows 7 (unless you build it yourself...which I'm not about to do) to play newer games at max settings and even at that price, you're still giving up quite a few bells and whistles (i.e. the difference between a 450 and a 460). So yeah, I'm getting convinced that I'd rather spend $300 for a 256gig Xbox that comes with built in wifi and two games included from Best Buy. I got kids to feed!

What are you talking about?! With 1000 bucks you can make a gaming PC that can play any game Maxed Out with good framerates, in most cases with +60 frames except games like Crysis 2 and Metro 2033...

Todd mentioned in one of the vids that he does not believe that there is any need at this present time for a new hardware cycle. That tells me that they know how to push the limits of the 360 still, and with developing more and more new systems and engines it will get better still for a year or two i recon.

Skyrim will be great on the 360, the cheapest way to be playing the game. It will be the same as the PS3 version, and will be the same as most PC's, unless you get some beef into it. But is it worth the ￡1000 rig for that little bit extra?

My advice, go PC if you want the mods, but if you got no beef in your rig and dont care for mods, Skyrim is yours on 360 for ￡150 and that includes the console!