I agree... I see texture differences, I see some slight shadow differences, and I see some slightly better AA with higher settings, but these are barely noticeable. There are no "night and day" differences, the Ultra PC version doesn't even look that much better than either console version (Higher resolution, slightly better textures, and smoother shadows, sure... but still not the large of a difference), and developers need to be pushing hardware better than that if they're going to point out the obvious advancements the past few years have brought in graphical rendering technology to properly promote a new console generation.

Just spent $2500 for a pc that can run it at textures that require a low power magnifying glass to descern the differnece and at 10 FPS higher than a $200 XBox. Am I pissed? You bet I am.

You spent 2500 bucks on a PC for Skyrim...eek? People who spent a fraction of that will be running it as well as you my friend. I dare say Battlefield 3, the Witcher 2, and Metro2033 are the only games that have pushed the graphics envelope lately, and I run all of them smooth as butter at highest settings and I initially spent about 1000 on my PC 2.5 years ago and recently upgraded the video card for another 260. It pays to build your own PC I guess.

I still think some of you are crazy, I am loving these screenshots! I don't care what platform they are on nor what settings, they look great!

I see a game that looks pretty #hatersgonnahate

That's great, but completely irrelevant to the topic at hand.

There are differences in texture quality and shadows, but not much difference in geometric detail.

Well, it is refreshing to know that if I have to run Skyrim on low, it will look alright.

U mad brah?

Very cool, how can you not see the difference. Between high and ultra the trees look much softer and more real than the jaggery. On low there is no detail in the thatched roofs. Shadows especially on coming off the little bridge are more defined and in line with the planks of wood than on low. If you can't see how jagged low is compared to medium and Ultra then you aren't looking close enough.

There was never going to be some kind of earth-shattering difference to those who don't care much about things like AA/AF, better texture/shadow rendering, blah blah in the first place.

It's not like the graphics are different in terms of art. They're just more in "focus", so to speak. And the shadows & stuff. And from what I can tell, even on PC there are still a lot of low-res textures...some inconsistency about the quality of them from thing to thing/place to place as you run around the game.

And no, I'm not a console player. I love my PC & I can see the difference. Just sayin' it's not melt your face difference...

For the difference, I'm happy with my 360. Ease of access ftw.

As a 360 gamer I have been looking at the PC screens to see what the diff is and frankly I don't see any difference that would matter in full motion. Yes, I see the higher res textures and longer shadow distances, but when actually playing the game I don't see any of this mattering.

It's almost comical to me how folks are dealing with Steam and spend a couple hundred on PC upgrades and the consoles pretty much run it the same way. Not as high res or with the same draw distances, but 'good enough' when the game is in motion.

Comical until we get mods

Can we just shut these lame ass threads down. Tired of the platform bickering.

Still comical.

By the time decent mods are out everyone will have bought a new $600 PC that walks circles around today's upgraded PCs. The best Oblivion mods took 1-2 years to develop. By that time I will be bored to death with Skyrim. Sure, someone will release some buggy, does much of nothing mod in a few days, but the good stuff takes at least a year.

Wow, and to think I was actually considering to buy a pc for Skyrim. I honestly don't see a huge difference, not worth it at all.

I'm a 360 gamer myself. Such is not a concern for me, not used to playing on a pc.

High settings look better than Ultra in those four screenshots on the first page

This looks amazing imo.

http://iceimg.com/i/12/0d/485b665567.jpg
http://iceimg.com/i/62/3b/ad1fb28241.jpg
http://iceimg.com/i/49/64/7e60ad5370.jpg
http://iceimg.com/i/7b/28/96f65009b8.jpg
http://i.minus.com/ijmasy.jpg
http://i.minus.com/ilyUPq.jpg
http://iceimg.com/i/cf/37/8dfcab4dc8.jpg
http://iceimg.com/i/38/11/ccdd394ea9.jpg
http://img13.imageshack.us/img13/2831/witcher2201107211500066.jpg

For everyone laughing at the PC people, I would like to point out that the minor differences are the result of Bethesda not making the difference. It was their call to make the graphics similar across all platforms...it means nothing to anyone.

Look at GTA IV if you want to see a large difference in graphical quality between platforms...not Skyrim. We're here for the gameplay anyway, not the graphics. I'm happy that I can run it in Ultra on my 2 year old PC, which would not have been the case if they spent the extra time upgrading it for PC which would have either delayed release for you console people, or allowed you to play it sooner by delaying the PC release.

FYI: very few people spend more than $1500 on a PC, and tons spend well under $1k.

Even if Skyrim has marginally better graphics, the PC version will get mods that will make it look generations newer.

Look at BF3 and tell me a PC isn't worth it ... LOL.

Enjoy the consoles, they are 'good enough'. For now I'm still at twice the rez of a console with better controls, higher FPS/FOV, etc.

There is no comparison. In motion PC is that much better.

Im impressed by the 360 versions graphics, comparing them to the low medium etc pics of the mage standing by a river with a water wheel in the backgound, i stood my character in the same spot and aside from some of the textures being a bit smudgy compared to PC, the tree textures are def lower, overall they seem to be medium / high settingish (but obviously at a much lower res) at least. So am well impressed!

O man this really is disappointing

The biggest difference is the shadow quality, and the draw distance. Grass, shadows and small rocks are displayed at a much larger distance on High/Ultra than on consoles, and distant mountains have more trees on them with high PC settings.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o921p4TIzH4. At 1:10 where it goes from 360 to PC you can see the increase in draw distance for shadows and grass, and on the distant mountains there are only trees on the PC version. At 0:21 you can see the shadows.

That along with support for higher screen resolutions, higher FPS, and faster loading times naturally.


It's impressive how much they managed to get out of those consoles though, it still looks great on 360/PS3.