Skyrim E3 demo & interview.

[zerocool84]

Sometimes, yes. What's your point?

Oh, you're a "hardcore PC gamer" so I suppose you want a real combat sim. Trudging through swamps where you have to push different keys to move each limb separately. Minigames to wring out your socks. Looking for the enemy for several days in real time, and then getting a bullet through your head before you fire a shot. That'd be a real man's game. You're not a console kiddie are you?

No, I just prefer some changes over time of sequels of games and not the exact experience.

 

[Zenoth]

The matter of fact is, waiting for mods to be released for a game in order to make it visually soothing on the eyes is sinister in the first place. The minute I purchase a game and play through it, it should essentially look appealing especially if they boast about graphics before the game even releases. The notion that I have to play through the game, and wait for a modder to come out with graphical enhancements in hopes that I will replay the game again with the new mod is just weird. I just don't like when developers boast and brag about the graphics and how its something special and when time comes for us to play it, the truth reveals its self.

I agree with you to some extent, but you should keep in mind that what makes gaming on the PC superior to playing on Consoles is exactly because editing tools (official ones or not) are being created, or can be created to "improve", to "modify" games. We PC gamers can (sometimes) temper with a game's files/code/textures/sounds etc, we can tweak various assets of it to shape it just a bit more to our liking. I myself created very humble modifications for Morrowind (just two), Oblivion (five, one of which I uploaded for the public and found its way in Oscuro's Oblivion Overhaul during its early days of existence, amongst a gang of other mods that ended up shaping OOO as we know it today) and Fallout 3 (three, two of which are available on the Nexus). I literally spent more time modifying those games than actually playing them, especially when it comes to Oblivion.

In the case of Oblivion however it was a Console port, yes... BUT... it WAS one of if not (arguably so, I guess) THE best looking game on the PC when it came out and it took a lot of time before something along the lines of Qarl's Textures Pack came out to make it look "better" than it was by default. The point is that without mods already Oblivion's graphics for the PC version (being a Console port, to repeat myself) kicked the arse out of pretty much everything else out there, it was certainly on the top five best looking games at that time and even the following years (in that case with mods), but I admit, back then even the current generation of Consoles were also new, so of course the graphics were good.

In Skyrim's case, yes, I agree, it's a different story. We're not in 2006 anymore but the Console(s) for which it was developed have the exact same hardware now that they had five years ago, obviously. Every ported games this year and since the past three years or so do have that "dated" look to them simply because the years passed and the PC hardware have long since improved, heck it was already "better" in terms of horsepower even BEFORE the PlayStation 3 was released (thanks to the release of a new video card at that time that pretty much K.O'd both the 360 and the PS3 in terms of visual capabilities and features). But with that said, the reason why I said that I was agreeing with you to some extent is this, it's about Skyrim specifically. Since Skyrim was primarily (if not only) developed using the 360/PS3 development kits then obviously the need for modifications to make things look better might well be felt on release day... BUT... we still don't know just how the PC version - specifically - is looking on maximum settings, Bethesda simply haven't shown a SINGLE picture of the PC version running on maximum settings as far as I know (if on the contrary PC version pictures or even videos do exist please let me know).

The PC version could have higher resolution textures from the start, just by selecting higher graphics settings for all we know, Bethesda might well have taken the time to create such textures specifically for the PC version. Not to mention that perhaps DX10/10.1/11 could be there (I certainly hope that it goes at least beyond DX9-only but I won't hold my breath about that one, still, I have some hope). If on the contrary the PC version of Skyrim barely has any video options to temper with to make it look "better" from the start and without the need of textures/models modifications then I for one will be disappointed just like you. In the end however what "makes" the Elder Scrolls games interesting (at least starting with Morrowind in my case since I never played the previous ones) is the lore and the atmosphere. Now of course having good graphics to improve the immersion is always a good thing, I'm not one of those PC gamers claiming that graphics aren't important, they are... BUT, they MUST "work" with the "rest", JUST having good graphics won't do anything else other than generating more heat out of your hardware.