Merging Armor Excuse Was A Load Of Crap : V - Skyrim

» Sat Dec 17, 2011 11:09 am

Don't base your historical knowledge off Hollywood movies.

They did that... it was a scare tactic to prove their fearlessness and insanity. I would certainly be perturbed if a large naked Scottish came bounding down the hill at me, club swinging. :shifty:

» Sat Dec 17, 2011 6:19 am

Console Owner:

No. I know how old my console is. I can also say that graphics have progressively improved over the years for consoles. The reason new consoles have not arrived on the market is real simple. Developers have not exceeded the capabilities of the current ones. And as someone else has mentioned, even a game developed specifically for "gaming PCs" would be designed with a mid-range performing system in mind. The idea is to reach as many consumers as possible -- not the small percentage that spend thousands on their rigs.

Another fact -- consoles are a task specific computing device and STANDARDIZED. Programming to standard hardware is better than attempting to make something work on everything.

But a mid ranges PC has at least twice the power of a console.

PCs have so much unused potential because consoles are not on par with even the low end gaming machines. The reason isnt that developers havnt exceeded the hardware of consoles, its that current consoles are still profitable. They are milking it and as a reuslt, developers are opting to develop for the consoles to make their money, making PC versions of those games suffer in potential. PC hardware has far surpassed console hardware.

» Sat Dec 17, 2011 8:46 am

Console Owner:

No. I know how old my console is. I can also say that graphics have progressively improved over the years for consoles. The reason new consoles have not arrived on the market is real simple. Developers have not exceeded the capabilities of the current ones. And as someone else has mentioned, even a game developed specifically for "gaming PCs" would be designed with a mid-range performing system in mind. The idea is to reach as many consumers as possible -- not the small percentage that spend thousands on their rigs.

Another fact -- consoles are a task specific computing device and STANDARDIZED. Programming to standard hardware is better than attempting to make something work on everything.

This console generation is reaching the end of its life span. Skyrim alone is taking up all of the GPU and CPU resources that consoles have. The Xbox360 has virtually reached its limit while the PS3 is not too far off.

As a PC user I agree that consoles are not holding back games for the most part and are giving a larger market to Developers to make and produce games, (I also think the same for mobile game platforms like iPad)

True PC games are aimed at the mid-level consumer but the mid-level consumer who spends $600-$800 on a computer can have a machine vastly more powerful than a console and new Directx platforms are not being used and applied properly because console GPU's only support Directx 9.

I think Directx 11 would be awesome in Skyrim because it allows for smoother LOD changes at a lower performance cost virtually getting rid of pop ins and getting rid of the horrible view distance.

Consoles are a great way to make gaming accessible to a larger audience but I really think it is time for consoles to have an upgrade so developers can use newer tech and rendering techniques to make even more awesome games.

» Sat Dec 17, 2011 2:36 pm

Developers have not exceeded the capabilities of the current ones.

Uh, no.

» Sat Dec 17, 2011 6:52 am

I do think consoles are holding back further technical progress, but back to my original point, they are not the cause of the regression of game design as seen in continually lessening TES quantities such as armor slots.

» Sat Dec 17, 2011 7:09 am

It's my personal belief that PC gaming is being replaced by console gaming. I also personally belief that youth of today have a different way of viewing consoles and PCs altogether. That view is really simple and reinforced by how they are growing up. PCs are for work. Consoles are for gaming. This can be seen in situations were families have both. You tell your child to work on his report and finish his or her research. They use the computer. You rent them a game at the local video store. They play that on a console.

I know about STEAM and digital delivery. But to me, that signifies companies trying to save money on bringing games to PCs.

EDIT: While I agree consoles need a hardware upgrade, it doesn't negate my belief.

» Sat Dec 17, 2011 8:56 pm

People need to stop blaming console users and start blaming the companies that are catering to them. Better yet, blame Microsoft and Sony for milking the current gen consoles instead of making the new gen already. It's not like console owners enjoy PC owners suffering due the companies greed (I do due how hilarious it is....

). People need to put platform elitism to the side and be able call themselves gamers not "360 gamers", "PS3 gamers", or "PC gamers".

» Sat Dec 17, 2011 2:24 pm

It's my personal belief that PC gaming is being replaced by console gaming. I also personally belief that youth of today have a different way of viewing consoles and PCs altogether. That view is really simple and reinforced by how they are growing up. PCs are for work. Consoles are for gaming. This can be seen in situations were families have both. You tell your child to work on his report and finish his or her research. They use the computer. You rent them a game at the local video store. They play that on a console.

I know about STEAM and digital delivery. But to me, that signifies companies trying to save money on bringing games to PCs.

PC will never be replaced by consoles. As long as people strive for more, there will always be personal computers for gaming. The only way they could be replaced is if they were merged, and people would still make their own PCs. Especially in the distant, and maybe not so distant future.

» Sat Dec 17, 2011 9:20 am

Merging armor pieces makes it easier to draw shadows as there is less combination of pieces, meaning less effort overall. That means the shadows can be more detailed.

Its a small thing, but imo not an issue. It just reduces the number of items to equip by 1.

Reduce it by 1 here, reduce it by 1 there, etc. Daggerfall had at LEAST 12 clothing/armor slots... not counting jewelry slots. In Skyrim, we have 5.

Doing things because they are easier sounds like laziness to me.

Please explain how this is streamlining.

Streamlining is when you simplify something. It CAN be good (in the instance of Mass Effect 2). It can also be very bad.

But honestly, it's just another "I want my toy back" thread. You have enough pieces to enchant as it is. Why do you want one more? What you should be griping about is actual game issues -- backwards flying dragon (Oh yeah, we know!),

Really? I have enough pieces to enchant as it is? According to whom? Not me. You may have enough, but I don't. Yes, I want "my toy back"... even though I don't enchant anything. I want spellmaking back too, even though I don't make spells. If this were about just ONE "toy," you may have a point. It's not. It's about the NUMEROUS things that have been removed since Daggerfall... all of it needlessly. It makes for a WORSE game... PERIOD.

What about the backward flying dragons? Do you really need forward flying dragons? You do? Why? Come on, it's the same thing. You feel that dragons should behave as you want them to. I feel that I should have more armor slots and customization ability. EVERYTHING should be fixed.

merging them allowed Bethesda to create much nicer looking armor than if they were seperate. No, look isn't everything, but to sacrifice ONE enchanting slot for better looking armor across the board is more than worth it.

How in the world does merging armor slots make armor look better? They would look just the same if they were split in two. Even if merging did make it look better, why would better looking armor be worth losing yet another ability to customize my character? It doesn't. Besides, the armor appearance can be modified by the community... I fear that the merged armor slots cannot.

It still doesn't matter. It's the developers' choice to go ahead and cut the armor slots for a bit faster rendering performance. They choose the slightly better graphics over the slightly better customization. I am not and never was arguing that the current consoles were not outdated, I'm arguing that it still doesn't matter. Oblivion had more armor slots than Skyrim on the same hardware. Morrowind had even more on far weaker hardware. Daggerfall have even more on even more weaker hardware. It's not an inherent limitation of any console, it's Bethesda choice to prioritize certain graphical improvement over maintenance, at least, of the same gameplay options and as I said, and it is fact, even when jumping to new hardware (Daggerfall to Morrowind transition, Morrowind to Oblivion transition), they STILL cut the armor slots, the town sizes, the NPC amounts, etc. It's Bethesda choice to further prioritize graphics over content, not any piece of hardware's and if history repeats itself, TES VI on the next-gen consoles won't go back to a high armor slot amount.

That statistic has been declining for years across several game transitions despite hardware transitions. This is simply what Bethesda do... what much of the industry do. The solution is not to sacrifice more and more game quality to try and stem the inevitable fact that consoles, overall, as with all hardware, cannot keep up to the latest hardware in graphical rendering techniques, so just let the hardware fall behind on graphical settings a tiny bit more, don't irrevocably (fact, post-Daggerfall, Bethesda have never added more, in terms of quantity of in-game objects, buildings, NPCs, etc., to render at any given time in a successive game despite better hardware) mar game design. The consoles do not force such "compromise", the developers do. They do anything to squeeze even just a bit more out of hardware, even encroaching upon game design. They shouldn't do that and it's not the hardware's fault that developers don't see the fallacy of this.

AMEN!!!

Graphics are an essential part of the game design, dont tell it like it isnt.

Graphics are NOT an essential part of game design. Graphics are the icing on the cake. Granted, many people would prefer to eat the icing instead of the cake. That doesn't mean the cake isn't the foundation for everything. If the cake is rotten, then the icing cannot save it.

Besides, graphics have little to do with the gameplay mechanics of a game. They are separate parts of the development team. The graphic artists do not touch the gameplay code. If a game plays badly, don't play the graphic artists.

Daggerfall may have no icing at all, but I can tell you the cake itself is far superior to Skyrim's. It may be ugly and lopsided, but it holds the core concept. And for cake-lovers, that's what matters.

» Sat Dec 17, 2011 9:22 am

It's my personal belief that PC gaming is being replaced by console gaming. I also personally belief that youth of today have a different way of viewing consoles and PCs altogether. That view is really simple and reinforced by how they are growing up. PCs are for work. Consoles are for gaming. This can be seen in situations were families have both. You tell your child to work on his report and finish his or her research. They use the computer. You rent them a game at the local video store. They play that on a console.

I know about STEAM and digital delivery. But to me, that signifies companies trying to save money on bringing games to PCs.

I think STEAM and digital delivery is actually how publishers want the future to be for both PC's and consoles not just because it's cheaper but also because it eliminates used game sales which all publishers seem to loathe.

» Sat Dec 17, 2011 7:22 am

@Mercedonis
Yes, I was referring to the area in general. But thank you for clarifying. I am still fairly certain about entire clans painting themselves blue and charging backed towards the legions. It might have been Brittinia I was thinking of.

But the point is the same, cold climate and nacked guys ran around at one point in time.

» Sat Dec 17, 2011 6:59 pm

Those were called woadwarriors i believe

» Sat Dec 17, 2011 1:51 pm

I think STEAM and digital delivery is actually how publishers want the future to be for both PC's and consoles not just because it's cheaper but also because it eliminates used game sales which all publishers seem to loathe.

I believe it, although I do not like it (mostly because I'll miss my PlayStation functioning as an optical drive and player for the latest disc-based media format and because I'm a game collector). The PS3 already has a lot of promoted digital services available and promoted on it (video store, Netflix streaming, Hulu streaming, music store, and even getting games on the PSN store, but still not nearly as expansive as Steam).

» Sat Dec 17, 2011 4:05 pm

being a console guy i have to think the stream lining was more about not breaking the game than anything. It's true that shadows are unimportant especially since they don't help with stealth to my knowledge.

I killed alduin in less than a minute with 4 perks a racial ability and lightning storm all because they altered the magic system so much that i can spam kamehameha waves and if that doesn't work send in a army of exploding attack wolves.

» Sat Dec 17, 2011 4:51 pm

I think STEAM and digital delivery is actually how publishers want the future to be for both PC's and consoles not just because it's cheaper but also because it eliminates used game sales which all publishers seem to loathe.

this. anyone who hasnt notice a huge push for downloading content on the xbox live is either not playing it or just blind. game starts up........"insert crappy DLC" is now availabe for purchase on live. the part about game resales is very true and in fact STEAM is turning huge profits right now far more than anythign you will see on consoles. online sales are now over half of PC game sales and if you dont think that microsoft and sony arent drooling at the prospect of having unresellable games (is that a word?) and also not having to pay for DVDs and boxes and shipping etc. digital distribution is going to be the main sales method of the future for ALL platforms. i bet in 5 years many AAA games wont even be sold in hardcopy format anymore. kinda sad. :sadvaultboy:

@ Seti.......i thought i read somewhere that STEAM was being put on PS3.......not sure how that works since most of the games wont even play on a console. lots of PC RTS games and indie games unless they are only going to have PS3 titles i suppose.

» Sat Dec 17, 2011 8:28 am

I only read the first page so this may have been mentioned but...dragons attacking towns add a lot of stress to the cell with guards rushing in to attack.

I feel like for every thing we 'lost' from a previous TES game, we gained something else. I'm happy with how the game turned out. If you're not, I don't know what to tell you.

» Sat Dec 17, 2011 6:56 am

Also after reading the rest of this discussion i can only say thank god that there are still pc only games like the total war series.. 20k npcs on screen no problem

» Sat Dec 17, 2011 12:06 pm

Also after reading the rest of this discussion i can only say thank god that there are still pc only games like the total war series.. 20k npcs on screen no problem

Oh god how I love the total war series :yes:

» Sat Dec 17, 2011 6:05 pm

Also after reading the rest of this discussion i can only say thank god that there are still pc only games like the total war series.. 20k npcs on screen no problem

But, how detailed are those NPCs? I'm sorry. Sprites don't work for me anymore.

» Sat Dec 17, 2011 1:16 pm

Oh god how I love the total war series :yes:

Same only reason why I tolerate my PC or laptop for gaming.

» Sat Dec 17, 2011 11:49 am

I understand what Bethesda was saying with the armor merging and how it would "allow more npc's on screen" and "make shadows easier to draw because of less combinations" and " most of the curiass's already cover the knee so greaves aren't needed" BUT I still don't agree with it. I see it as less ways to customize my character, I wouldn't have such an issue with it if all armors had greaves combined with the curiass but some armors such as Savior's Hide don't even have greaves with it and it ends up looking ugly and all I can think is "if only I had a pair of pants or greaves to put on with this." I don't see it as they did it for technical reasons, I see it as they cut corners in order to save time. If they took extra time they could have added multiple armor slots but because of how much they had to do within their timeframe they had to cut corners to get things done. It's the same reason faction quests are so short and marrige is so laughable. And why spellmaking isn't in, and a dozen other features. It's not really all that big of a deal since it really only effects cosmetics and customibility of my character, as well as enchanting of course. So weather Bethesda is telling the truth when it comes to armor slots or not in the grand scheme of things it's a minor concern, Skyrim is a great game even with it's flaws. And all we can hope for is that Bethesda learns from the flaws of Skyrim and gives us a game that is truely great once the next gen consoles come out. :tes:

» Sat Dec 17, 2011 7:08 am

this. anyone who hasnt notice a huge push for downloading content on the xbox live is either not playing it or just blind. game starts up........"insert crappy DLC" is now availabe for purchase on live. the part about game resales is very true and in fact STEAM is turning huge profits right now far more than anythign you will see on consoles. online sales are now over half of PC game sales and if you dont think that microsoft and sony arent drooling at the prospect of having unresellable games (is that a word?) and also not having to pay for DVDs and boxes and shipping etc. digital distribution is going to be the main sales method of the future for ALL platforms. i bet in 5 years many AAA games wont even be sold in hardcopy format anymore. kinda sad. :sadvaultboy:

@ Seti.......i thought i read somewhere that STEAM was being put on PS3.......not sure how that works since most of the games wont even play on a console. lots of PC RTS games and indie games unless they are only going to have PS3 titles i suppose.

It is being put on the PS3 in the sense that, unlike Microsoft, Sony has allowed some cooperation between Steam and their platform/PSN, but it won't actually be Steam and its entire library available on the PS3, it's just to allow cross-platform playing with certain games. Portal 2, for example, allowed connection of a Steam account to a PS3 so PC players and PS3 players can play multiplayer together, but I don't know how much else they've actually done with it, if anything at all. Essentially, I just know Sony were a bit accepting of Steam involvement on the PS3, but not a full-blown Steam service (in the same boat as you, there... have no clue how that could even be feasible), just some connectivity between the two.

» Sat Dec 17, 2011 11:46 am

eh............they've pretty much hit a wall. personally i think that red dead was the best looking console game and that game came out over a year ago. my 4 year old computer which would be considered mid-range today ran crysis just fine on the highest settings except for DX10 stuff since i didnt have a DX10 card. they had to severely nerf the crysis engine to get it to run on consoles. the reason they arent making new consoles is because they are trying to push these as long as they can for maximum profits. they lose money for the first couple years on console sales so they can sell them for cheaper than a similar PC but at some point it actually turns upside down and you end up paying far more for consoles when you consider the technology they are using than an equivalent PC. they just have you cornered into a cage. the only thing i could do with my xbox was add a better HDD i cant change the CPU or the graphics chip and it svcks balls.

as for how they develop it there are developers like DICE, Reality Pump, THQ and ProjektCD that developed around the PC and then scaled back for the consoles and they are still turning huge profits. its purely a design decision and as i mentioned i think bethesda took a calculated risk and figured there were more potential console gamers that would complain vs PC players that complain. if i was in there shoes and my job was to make a game but more importantly to make money for my company i might have made the same decision myself. i love my xbox for forza and my friends PS3 for dark souls but im fully aware that they are really holding back gaming now. especially considerign developers have even said so.

as for easier to program for a standardize platform clearly that doesnt make any difference cause all the platforms are getting bugs irregardless and some of them unique to a particular system like PS3s large save file issue.

@scrimmage. i believe that console gamers and PC gamers are pretty much joined at the hip. console gamers bring in the extra money that developers need to make games which are getting increasingly expensive to make, at least for AAA titles. meanwhile every console that comes out is built by PC parts manufacturers and the technology is based on technological advances made in the years in between consoles. whether one side likes it or not they are both essential to each other.

as for number of PC gamers its generally figured from what ive read that xbox and PC are pretty close to even (people forget that STEAM doesnt report its numbers and over half of game sales are digital now) and PS3 is in third place. last article i saw didnt even mention wii so they must have fallen off the map which is funny cause they still have the most console units sold world wide.......i guess that no ones playing them anymore. i havent used mine since a couple of years ago and that was for new years.

Thank you jimmy fallon tech guy. I dont think pc and console gamers are joined at the hip. More like joined by a leash. I dont generally see ads for pc games (cept WOW) or walk into a store and see a prolific display of PC games. If ur looking for PC Its more like like going behind the curtain at the low rent video store. or you buy it online. same diff. all Im saying is that most people want a much more simple gaming exp. without consoles PC'rs become a niche at best.

» Sat Dec 17, 2011 8:59 am

But, how detailed are those NPCs? I'm sorry. Sprites don't work for me anymore.

Pretty damned detailed. LOL at sprites in TW, especially contemporary TW games.

» Sat Dec 17, 2011 8:20 pm

Also after reading the rest of this discussion i can only say thank god that there are still pc only games like the total war series.. 20k npcs on screen no problem

Meh, I'm a Civilization guy... just nothing after III. II and III were great, IV just lost something, to me, and I don't even want to bother with V, so I just stick to II and III... lost my copy of II, though.