Yeah, you're absolutely not the fool here... I won't repeat everything I said but that's just wrong. I will complain if the game looks like the video and with good reasons I already explained.

Yeah.. I think many people here have faulty assumptions about "good graphics". When they hear "better graphics than in Skyrim" they think about about games like Crysis which they don't like = "BETTER GRAPHICS SUXX!"

Skrim has these graphics already but they just need to turn the resolution up (pc users). and I will know that mods will totally own this video.

Needs moar contrast.

I've been reading this forum for some time, and I am thoroughly convinced by now that most people on here are just blind followers of Bethesda and worship whatever Bethesda does.

There are two main moments that proved this to me beyond reasonable doubt.

1.) When the first gameplay demo came out, one of the biggest complaints everyone had was the "One Handed Increased to 21!" right in the middle of the screen during combat.

Then a recent poll on here asked what people thought about it, and the majority of people seemed to be in favor of it.

Just give people on here a little bit of time, and they would worship Skyrim even if it was a 2D shooter with 12 hours of gameplay.


2.) The fact that people are saying they DON'T want the graphics in Skyrim to look more realistic than they do.

The fact that people saying this is just absolutely laughable. And an absolute confirmation that people are blinded by their love for Bethesda.

You DON'T want better graphics for Skyrim? You are straight up lying. I can't believe how blinded you all are by your obsession over TES.

If another game came out that had twice the land size of Skyrim but was every bit as detailed, you would say, "No, that's too big. There's too much content there to explore. I'm not impressed. I wish it would be more like Skyrim."

If another game came out that looked amazing on even low-end PCs from 10 years ago, you would say, "I don't like this game. It looks too good. I want something that is more limited by my system, like Skyrim! All hail Skyrim!"

I just have to keep telling myself not to let it bother me, how people act around here. But I can't help it! It's like an army of minions that won't snap out of their trance!

Probably not...
Maybe it's just me, but from what I've seen from the gameplay demos, Skyrim actuually looks a lot better. Not in terms of graphics ofcourse, but in the design and all the detail and effort bgs has put into creating the world.

Man I wish Skyrim could look like that on xbox.

I'm not saying it should have motion blur, motion control etc like in the video, I personally don't like it. But in a Skyrim environment at that level of detail, it would have the community praising it.

Also, I agree, I am not the fool here. :thumbsup:

Maby one day... i hope

PREPARED TO GET LOCKED MUTHAFUCA

As far as photo-realism goes, I'm in the middle. Some games, mostly RPGs I prefer to have more artistic graphics. I want to be able to escape this world and be someone else for a bit. But for a shooter, photo-realism would be amazing.

I seriously doubt non of the "graphics are not important" crowd would complain if they had the opportunity to step into a holodeck.

You know what, even the LOTR movies aren't photorealistic. There's so much in terms of post processing in that movie that you won't believe your eyes if you watch the original footage. It's just a matter of style. In my opinion a photorealistic look doesn't fit well in a fantasy RPG.

I think the issue with most people is that they think good graphics = photorealism.

Also i agree with you.

Ok, people here are talking about diferent things. Graphics, animations and design are totally diferent.

I love amazing graphics, I study graphic design and I love them. But still, gameplay comes first. I played crysis 1 with low settings (my pc couldn't handle it) and still I really enjoyed the game. It was (still is) different from most FPS. I was annoyed with oblivion and even fallout 3 for not having shadows, at least some simple shadowing, but the games are so awesome that I didn't mind about that. Still, graphics can give you amazing inmersion and moments, for example, seen a sunset, a torch projecting shadows all around in a dark cave, the lighting from the fire thrown by a dragon. It's natural to see and feel those things because, those things are real, aren't they?

Design is another thing. It's how things look, what things are, and why they are like that. It depends on the setting of the game. You can't comprare god of war with crysis.. crysis is set in 'real life' so they used many real things, stuff you see every day, like trees, beaches, weapons, etc.. god of war? hehe nothing there exists in real life, that gives you a lot of workspace to design. It's different in everything. They did an impresive job. You can't comprae counter strike and morrowind xP

And 'animation' is something way totally different. It's how things move, interact, and all that stuff. It doesn't have to do anything with the 'grapchis engine'

Crytek created an engine, and then put a game into it. Not the other way. They are still kings in video games engines. They even created their own phisycs, animation and AI engine into it. IT'S A 2007 GAME!

I think skyrim will look impressive in PC, (without the limitations of the consoles) still, I don't think beth will get to a crysis level of detail for many reasons, but mainly, becaouse they don't need to.

IMO, I still want videogames to develop the 'physics engines' that means more interaction and funny stuff

Realism vs Artistry is a http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma.

Just look at anything involving GRRM's Game of Thrones.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i3bPjEbenew

Come on, can you guys seriously say that if there was a way to make Skyrim's environments look like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sbKbPuKp5Ts&feature=related

That you wouldn't do it? Assuming your PC could run it of course.

:brokencomputer:

Nope. I love the look of the game as is.

Im talking about modded Crysis here, so yes, Crysis' textures are much better. Models are also better. If you deny this then someone indeed does have a fan fever for battlefield, and fyi, its not me.

The bolded part, you make no friggin sense, so what, high res nice looking textures has nothing to do with the graphics? Its just the skill of the artists I guess.. Foolish kid is foolish.. :facepalm: ATTENTION TO DETAIL HAS AS MUCH TO DO WITH GRAPHICS AS ANYTHING

The reason why Skyrim (or Oblivion) doesn't look as realistic as shown in Crisis video is not because of 'artistry'. It's because the engine isn't capable of producing photo realistic effects.

Did any of you ever look at the textures in Oblivion? Many of them are photographies of real things. There is no special 'art direction' involved like in some other games. If we were talking about games like Borderlands or Rage, which indeed have a certain unrealistic (cartoon like) art style then I could accept what people post here. But in Oblivion or Skyrim there is none of this. If you'd put the meshes and textures into a better engine (like the Crisis engine) it would look photo realistic. If they could, they would make it look like that. And I bet the next ES game (after Skyrim) will look much more photo realistic if it is developed for next gen consoles.

But I guess many people here need to persuade themselves that every single part of Skyrim is better than in any other game. And of course when the next ES game is announced they will all cheer 'wow, look at the almost photo realistic graphics, I always wanted that!'.

I have a feeling if Todd Howard took a dump in the middle of your living room floor, you would think it was the greatest thing ever.

Yes. This kind of graphics would fit very well in a TES game, and even though they're running on the same graphic engine they're *very* different from the ones in that other video because of the different lighting and colorization.

You may be the most succesful one...