Music and voice files are the largest files, so if they don't pose a problem, everything else will neither. I don't even get how they were limited by voice acting in Oblivion, Oblivion is only 4.6gb large. For comparison, red dead redemption is 6.7gb large on a single disc.

@ RPhx Leonine, that is your opinion. But I felt Oblivion was a really let down from Morrowind.

Yes, I know. I said that, because you seemed to state yours as fact.

I said serval times "in my opinion", "how I feel" all over the thread, and I did say to the post you are refering to in the end "Sorry. My opinion".
I didn't know this was a court? Do I have to say "in my opinion" all the time... (that isn't a question by the way)

Anyway, if we look at the poll now, we see 19 people didn't feel Oblivion was a fully fleshed PC game, I think that says alot.

Doesn't matter because something like 2% (probably less but I have no idea about the actual number) of players actually visit the forums. And even less will vote on this. ;D

It's even less. I haven't seen a poll with over 400 votes on these boards, 400 people are less than 1% of the player base.

EDIT: sorry you kind of pointed that out with forum base not being voting base

It's true that consoles can change how a game is designed, but that doesn't necessarily make the design change inferior. There is absolutely no way to know that unless you actually participated in the process.

I would however like to hear an example of how Oblivion could have been better if it was not limited by the console, and what proof do you have?

cut out city of sutch(someone else will have to source that but ive seen it posted so many time and i havent seen anyone deny it) to fit on the 360 disk, loss of shadows cause consoles couldnt handle them. and of course oblivions legendarily crappy UI.

things like quest arrows and instant map cheat travel can also be attributed to "consolitis"

You edited that last bit in. Originally, it just said "Sorry". What's the -truth part mean? That's new, as well.

It doesn't matter the amount of how many, it's not a war. We are not gathering followers.
This poll just show that some do actually feel that way and who are you to say they are wrong.

We are here, we discuss and share our opinions. That's it. What more do you want.



Well edit is a good way to go insted of making multiple posts. You should try that insted of making this a personal conversation between you and me with nothing interesting for the rest to read.
What you posted here mostly about is what I did say or didn't say, enough - this isn't about me. That's my final cent on that.

Well you were the one that said, "Anyway, if we look at the poll now, we see 19 people didn't feel Oblivion was a fully fleshed PC game, I think that says alot."

I was just pointing out that even if it had 1,000 votes, it wouldn't matter unless the vast majority of players came and voted.

Red dead redemption have fine shadows, Oblivion is 4.6GB on a single disc, while Red dead redemption is 6.7GB on a single disc, why would they cut because of limitations, when they haven't even filled up the disc?



Daggefall also had instant map travel. And let's not forget that Oblivion fast travel isn't instant. Unless of course you also think that silt striders were instant cheat travel.

It would still not say anything if 1,000,000,000 voted.
I should not said "I think that says alot.", see that now.

But yes, 19 (now 21) people didn't feel Oblivion was fully fleshed PC game. Why do you think they felt that way? - Because it should be a fully fleshed PC game even tho it's on Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3.

I have heard about cutting a city out, but as someone pointed out earlier they didn't use all of the disc space available. I would argue that Bethesda bit off more than they could chew when they made Oblivion and couldn't do everything they wanted to. With Skyrim they obviously have a bigger budget and a lot of experience working with consoles.

I'm not actually saying that the console doesn't limit graphical decisions, but a more complex AI doesn't seem like something that can be attributed to the same limitations.

I think they felt that way because of being over-hyped previous to the games release. I myself fall into that category. I couldn't fully enjoy Oblivion until the past year or so, and even then it's heavily modded, and I know it's because I expected Oblivion to be the second coming of Christ.

Do you think when they set a release date so early it's because they have to do so?
When I look at interviews it doesn't seem to me the game is done 100%.

They often say, we will see how it turns out, if that stays or get cut out.

The only thing that stops Skyrim reaching its full potential is what developers do with the engine!

Well this can be fun because this is the first time in history they didn't make an entire new engine. So this isn't a evolution like before.
And as he said it himself, because they didn't wanted to wait for the next console.

Meaning, they can't make a new engine for Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 because the limitations.

So it's clear to me if they would really make the game for the game sake, it would be a new engine on PC.

Blu-Ray and cell processor



That is all.

I think that they set the release date at the best possible time of year to get the sales they want. When they make that decision, the development team is either nearly finished or they are not getting support to add more content to the game. I can certainly say that if the dev team had time and resources to add something into the game within the limit of the time and money they have, to their satisfaction, they would add it. It is totally possible the developers thought they made the best game they could that didn't live up to your expectations.

You edited it in to make me appear as though I can't read properly.

i just remember seeing lots of posts about sutch being cut. and the shadows were definitely because of the consoles. daggerfall had to use that system out of necessity cause the game world was ginormous. ive seen peolpe post that it woudl take real days or weeks to cross the gameworld in real time. goddam i cant wait for daggerXL so i can finally play that game. but it sill cost you money and you could be ambushed if you took a riskier route. morrowinds system you had to actually go to a silt strider or a boart or use a scroll or mark/recall etc and all of those were in game travel options that made sense and had their downsides, mainly cost and actually suriving the trip to get there or using up a scroll in the case of amsilevi sp? intervention. mark recall was the closest to oblivions system but you had limited numbers of locations you could mark 8 i think so you still had to use the other services on occasion.

oblivions system had no downsides or cost. all it did was add an extra couple of hours to your day......whoopedy doo. it didnt cost you any money, you could use it anywhere to get out of danger as long as you were outside and you never had to worry about being ambushed en route. if you were in a tough fight and you had badly damaged armor and your weapons were destroyed and you had used all of your potions, normally you would think that the trip home would be frought with danger and anxiety.......not the case with oblivions system. BAM your instantly back to any city or town of your choice all safe and sound and snug as a bug. crappy game design. its an ever present "get out of jail free" card.

I happen to like it.



Go play Arena. This fast-travel "debate" has no relevance to consoles whatsoever.

How will the 'fast travel' system work in Skyrim? Same as Oblivion?

did arena cost money and have the risk of ambush like daggerfall? if so then its not like oblivions system at all.

if they port arena to daggerXL i plan on playing all the games with the exception of redguard which apparently svcked.

@ Jacob.........they have both cheat map travel and carriages so everyone is happy.