Screenshot request - Med / High / Ultra : V - Skyrim

» Sat Dec 10, 2011 10:48 am

I thought xbox was low settings?

There has always been suspicion Pete Hines was full of BS on that statement. He said PC cannot go any lower than XBOX, so everyone assumed that meant XBOX = PC Low settings. Personally I think low looks worse than the xbox demos, but just slightly. xbox to me looks like med.

» Sat Dec 10, 2011 1:21 pm

Did you label High and Ultra correctly? High has much sharper textures than Ultra

I can see Ultra has more of a "Blur" effect so that's probably why.

» Sat Dec 10, 2011 4:01 pm

Judging from these shots I would say 360 looks somewhere around medium or even high, which I guess is not that surprising, but I call complete BS on "Ultra will melt your face off", it's only slightly better than high.

Even so, the overall feel of the art direction is incredible, can't wait to hop in!

Pete confirmed even the lowest setting on PC is better than Xbox. http://twitter.com/#!/DCDeacon/status/124153952416698368

» Sat Dec 10, 2011 2:50 pm

Since you are currently playing, would you say the system requirements are accurate? Looking at your comparison shots, the difference in quality makes me think the official requirements are a complete load of crap.

So youre saying that the req are higher than advertised or lower?

» Sat Dec 10, 2011 4:11 pm

Did you label High and Ultra correctly? High has much sharper textures than Ultra

The water looks ways better in Ultra than High though so I think he labeled them correctly.

» Sat Dec 10, 2011 1:59 pm

So youre saying that the req are higher than advertised or lower?

The recommended seems a bit overkill for the quality of those shots.

» Sat Dec 10, 2011 7:12 pm

The recommended seems a bit overkill for the quality of those shots.

Sweet

» Sat Dec 10, 2011 9:46 pm

Ultra's texture quality is the same as High, but there is a Depth of Field effect that blurs them somewhat.

» Sat Dec 10, 2011 9:40 pm

So, do these people have terrible brightness/contrast settings or is the game actually that bright and washed out. I think it looks ok other than that ... going to have to turn down the gamma in the game tho maybe. (edit maybe it's too much bloom)

That's one reason why I hate bloom.

» Sat Dec 10, 2011 11:38 pm

"Melt your face off" was obviously pure marketing hype, and I don't think anybody should be surprised by that, since Todd had said it essentially looks the same on all platforms, and because experience says that games don't look drastically different on PC and console unless they're designed for PC and then stuff is removed for consoles (and even then "drastically" is a bold term to use)... and we knew that Skyrim is a console game being ported to PC. Basically, the game looks like a console game on PC, because that's actually what it is. "Melt your face off," hahahaha... although I knew it wasn't true, I still don't appreciate being lied to, tbh.

» Sun Dec 11, 2011 12:32 am

"Melt your face off" was obviously pure marketing hype, and I don't think anybody should be surprised by that, since Todd had said it essentially looks the same on all platforms, and because experience says that games don't look drastically different on PC and console unless they're designed for PC and then stuff is removed for consoles (and even then "drastically" is a bold term to use)... and we knew that Skyrim is a console game being ported to PC. Basically, the game looks like a console game on PC, because that's actually what it is. "Melt your face off," hahahaha... although I knew it wasn't true, I still don't appreciate being lied to, tbh.

You see a clear difference between Xbox 360 and the ultra graphics on the PC. Todd even said himself (several times) that the PC will look even better, when people "oooeeeed" and "aoowweed".

» Sat Dec 10, 2011 5:04 pm

Ultra's texture quality is the same as High, but there is a Depth of Field effect that blurs them somewhat.

Naw, the textures on Ultra are blurry at all distances. It might be different texture filtering or PP AA settings. In Battlefield 3 using PP AA makes the textures blur a bit, I think.

» Sat Dec 10, 2011 12:22 pm

You see a clear difference between Xbox 360 and the ultra graphics on the PC. Todd even said himself (several times) that the PC will look even better, when people "oooeeeed" and "aoowweed".

If you compare them you can spot the difference mostly in higher res textures, but a glance at the PC version makes it apparent that it's obviously working from console graphics as its foundation.

» Sat Dec 10, 2011 8:17 pm

Pete confirmed even the lowest setting on PC is better than Xbox. http://twitter.com/#!/DCDeacon/status/124153952416698368

Yeah yeah Ive heard and seen that a million times, but PR does what PR does, and now that PC screens are out its much easier to judge for myself, thanks. Low PC settings are definitely lower than how the 360 looks. It's plainly evident.

» Sat Dec 10, 2011 8:55 pm

Does the game support Tesselation ??

» Sat Dec 10, 2011 9:36 pm

Does the game support Tesselation ??

no

@Exor

They don't look lower at all, maybe you should go look how low PC look whit Oblivion that was lower but 360/PS3 was actually decent. 360=low Deal with it

or

don't mind it since your not playing PC verison you don't have to worry beth tried their best

» Sat Dec 10, 2011 12:26 pm

The foliage density on ultra is much greater than on high.

» Sat Dec 10, 2011 1:50 pm

what about optimisation?
i have computer with 260 gtx, 4 quad, 4 ram
so according to Bethesda i`m fine with high settings
but will there be a big framerate difference if i switch to ulta?

» Sat Dec 10, 2011 3:23 pm

what about optimisation?
i have computer with 260 gtx, 4 quad, 4 ram
so according to Bethesda i`m fine with high settings
but will there be a big framerate difference if i switch to ulta?

The difference between High and Very High are going to be minimal most likely, with that card you shouldn't have too much of a problem. But with a game like this VRAM is a pretty big deal so keep that in mind.

» Sat Dec 10, 2011 1:58 pm

The difference between High and Very High are going to be minimal most likely, with that card you shouldn't have too much of a problem. But with a game like this VRAM is a pretty big deal so keep that in mind.

thank you for replay

» Sat Dec 10, 2011 10:52 pm

Pete confirmed even the lowest setting on PC is better than Xbox. http://twitter.com/#!/DCDeacon/status/124153952416698368

He also said the graphics on PC would "melt your face off!," and he also said not to take the small disc size of Skyrim to mean much because of their advanced compression techniques... when obviously the small size did in fact mean low quality textures.
But that aside, the difference in low and ultra on PC is clearly not that much. Not as many shadows, lower res textures (High and Ultra shot textures still don't have "high" res)... don't see much else that's different.

» Sat Dec 10, 2011 10:38 pm

[img]http://img210.imageshack.us/img210/503/5ultraaf.jpg[/img]

This one is on Ultra, forcing 8xAA and 16xAF via driver.
Also, I disabled FXAA, since it tends to blur the textures a little.
I tweaked the gamma and saturation on the Nvidia driver.

» Sat Dec 10, 2011 10:46 am

Stunning, big improvement over Oblivion, that's for sure.

» Sat Dec 10, 2011 3:57 pm

It really is beautiful and definitely an improvement over oblivion. Thanks for doing the pictures.

You've done well Bethesda, and modders will only make it 10x more appealing.

» Sat Dec 10, 2011 9:00 pm

[img]http://img210.imageshack.us/img210/503/5ultraaf.jpg[/img]

This one is on Ultra, forcing 8xAA and 16xAF via driver.
Also, I disabled FXAA, since it tends to blur the textures a little.
I tweaked the gamma and saturation on the Nvidia driver.

Yeah, I'm sorry consolites, but the xbox version doesn't look ANYTHING like that. I've see it live now at my friend's house. On the xbox version I saw a ton of jaggies, the textures are clearly of lower quality and all of the shadows are pixelated. Nevermind the lack of AF and the low resolution (which blurs everything).