Just found a quote off a site about the first review thats came in about Skyrim. It scored a 95% and heres one of the quotes that confuse me '' Atomic call the AI moment “mood breaking” and that Bethesda have created a “beautiful sprawling world” that is jaw-dropping. ''
Mood breaking? if that is a bad thing then it seems odd to throw in a good point in the same kind of sentence?
According to that spec thread, I'll be able to run on medium — medium-low.
Also, for comparison (regarding my argument that beatemups always looks good):
SOCOM III (released 2005 for PS2)
Soul Calibur III(same year for PS2)
Images aren't the best, but the differences are clear. With smaller spaces and less stuff to concentrate on, Project soul could easily make high-quality (for the time) models for their game, since only two would be on screen at one time.
SOCOM on the other hand had bigger areas, more stuff and more everything. It would kill the PS2 if it had the same graphics.
If the majority are more than happy with what we're being given, then they're obviously doing it right, fuck. Part of what makes the elder scrolls unique is that it ISN'T completely RPG, even morrowind was an action-rpg to an extent, sure it had more rpg elements than oblivion, but the combat was essentially the same kinda deal, I don't get what the fuck your problem is
edit: I take that back actually, The skills didn't feel meaningless to me at all in oblivion, they actually still managed to have a life/death determination in a lot of cases for me. I couldn't finish the game until I rolled a character that suited my play style, I don't see how that ISN'T rpg skills governing the gameplay
Listen, and listen. If you think the game is crap, then here's a revolutionary idea...
Don't play it.
It's not that difficult. Heck, it's probably easier than arguing about it.
After all these argument and ranting, I guarantee that all you people here are still going to buy the game.
Alright, stop. If you think TES games after Morrowind are mediocre, great, good for you, but everyone doesn't. I think Oblivion is bloody fucking awesome, probably my favourite game ever. And your reaction to this? "Ahaha that guy must have a shitty taste".
And now you've gotten to the heart of the problem: taste. I think the combat looks great. I think the graphics look good enough. I think the aesthetics and the atmosphere are more than good. You disagree? No can do. But stop trying to prove our opinions wrong like you'd be always right.
edit: good example is the older gta games, shit animations, models, textures etc (they looked good at the time, yes, but even those weren't the best graphics of their time), shitty controls to an extent. But fuck me are they fun to play to this day, watching someone else play it always looks boring and not so good, the fun comes when you pick up the controller, or place your hands on your mouse and keyboard, and actually start exploring the world and playing the fuck out of it yourself
GTA IV was fucking BORING to watch someone else play, especially when they drive around, but it felt so much better actually playing it yourself. I mean seriously, how can you judge how fun something will be without even playing it yourself? streams are not indicative of fun factor man, and that's what it'll be about, not graphics, not animations, but the amount of fun you actually have with it yourself
What's wrong with the UI? I think it looks brilliant.
TES rpg's aren't like other RPG's.
In the manual to Daggerfall, where most other games have an introduction, Todd had written "When players ask what the story to Daggerfall is, I imagine Macbeth asking what the story to Macbeth is before the play begins".
Yeah sure, all TES games has a main quest, and obvious boundaries, but it's still VERY different from games such as NWN, Diablo and Witcher.
TES has almost always been more of an action game than those more "traditional" RPG's. The only game to really feature true dice-rolling was Morrowind, with it's combat (and no-one liked that, did they?)
ITT: Game sucks, I can tell by the graphics.
On Release: OH GOD IT'S AMAZING
Graphics =/= Aesthetic. A game can look good and be immersive if the aesthetic is defined. Graphics just improve the technical capabilities of a game. If you were asking me, I would say that games like Psychonauts, Borderlands, Ratchet and Clank, TF2 or even Minecraft are more visually pleasing than, say, Crysis, because they have a definitive style that serves a purpose other than to look real. I mean yeah, Crysis looks impressive but that doesn't really do anything for the game's immersion or style. Skyrim, from what I've seen, has that purposeful aesthetic. Personally I don't think that there is anything besides aesthetic that makes a game look inherently good. Skyrim mightn't be the most technically impressive game, but it doesn't need to be, its style is very much set in stone.
That's just me, though. It's why I'm totally fine with playing games with outdated tech so long as they look good beyond that.
Hey, new graph.
This thread makes me want to strangle a baby seal sometimes...
If you don't want to play it, then don't. Simple as that. Now take a Midol and go post in the thread for whatever game it is that gives you a raging erection.
Actually thinking about it now, but I think we keep worrying about graphics because that's the biggest thing that everybody has seen no matter what by now.
Doesn't matter if you watched gameplay videos or not, you've seen the graphics.
That and we just want to play it.
I hope they have different inventory navigation on PC