Cerb
Elite Member
- Aug 26, 2000
- 17,484
- 33
- 86
Morrowind has more depth, and the UI is on the awkward side (it was pretty much ground-breaking for its day, which means nobody els ehad done it well by that time, either). If you liked the general gameplay of Oblivion, but disliked how it all seemed so generic after you got a few levels in, you'll probably like Morrowind.Hope this question isn't too much of a thread derailment. If I didn't care too much for Oblivion (the exploration/graphics kept it interesting for a bit, but I gradually got bored of it), is it likely that I'll feel the same way about Morrowind? From what I've read, it seems that if the games had identical graphics, that Morrowind, as a game, is generally considered better?
As already stated, it is still old, though. If an old game's graphics bother you, like NPCs walking like puppets, and copious amounts of textures in place of geometry, you won't be impressed. It makes a 10-year-old game not feel quite so dated, but it doesn't make it work like a 3-5 year old game. Also, Morrowind+expansions will be, at most, $20.
Mine: E6750@3.28MHz, 8GB RAM, GTX 460@840MHzWin7 64-bit, 1680x1050.
8x AA, 4x AF (I find older games start looking weird w/ high MSAA and AF)
0 mipmap bias
2048 world textures, 1024 normals (max VRAM use has been over 700, so I don't want to push it)
100 grass density
9 cell draw depth
Normal shadows
Most everything else at recommended or default, IIRC
Shaders; HDR, ambient occlusion, and water bobble (I hate DoF with a passion )
Minimum FPS reported has been 28, so far.
Also, iMaxActiveDist set to 336 (default 192), making NPCs/enemies show up at longer distances.
There's some setting somewhere--maybe it was shadows--that, combined with occlusion, causes occlusion to make the game unplayable.
Last edited: