No way, the community can do a way better job. Proof from the previous TES games:

Fauna: https://s1.file1.info/UwLXErsh
Signs: https://s1.file1.info/IggpR5Bh
Qarl's: https://s1.file1.info/np3mbMuh

These textures look way better than Skyrim, although Skyrim is 5 years newer :thumbsdown:

Theres even the MW2011 mod kit that makes MORROWIND look better than Skyrim, developed by the community. Hell, the water looks better in MW2011 than Skyrim does naturally.

Absolutely not. Charging money for enhanced textures would be worse than charging money for horse armor.

1. No, because modders will, and already are, doing it better.

2. Re: "so they could charge us extra money for use created content that we currently get for free on Nexus", they've already said they weren't going to charge for mods. No one would use SW if they did.

Why would I pay for something that the community would do for free? Especially something that should have come with the game already?

there are some mods id gladly pay for. expansions rather. look at the expansions created by the community for amnesia (white night and la caza are the two i know).

id GLADLY pay for those.

PAY for something that should have been done as a matter of artistic pride? Stop snorting that moon sugar. It's totally lame and disappointing that a 2011 game has worse textures than a 2006 game. Yeah, yeah—graphics don't make the game.

But CONVINCING graphics make it more immersive. Is that too much to ask?

Yes.

Mods do textures really bad. They don't know how to do them properly. They go MEGA high res which looks good, but kills your performance, thus being completely useless in reality. Or the modders make high res textures that has really bad art that distracts from the feeling that Skyrim is supposed to have.

In short, mods do textures really bad.

No. Qarl made some great texture packs for Oblivion. So did Koldorn and a few other people. The redimized versions of these packs were a nice to have too. They all really looked great and added some flavor. The thing with me though is after a while I stop noticing the fossils in the rocks, the clovers in the grass textures, and the soft grain vs hard grain textures in wooden structures. It's just not as important to me as story content, quests, or gameplay. I guess it depends on your focus as to whether or not you are just taking some pretty screenshots or out there playing. Regardless, I'm not paying for textures in DLC form.

No.

Of course I wouldn't buy a freaking texture pack, don't be ridiculous.

no. will never buy dlc.

Yes, sure, and I would happily pay for patches as well. :rolleyes:

No. I think it breaks immersion. Flaws, such as low polygon models, seams, become visible. HD textures need Hi-Poly models.
So, NEVER.

Already paid for their PC fraud i will not give more money to this band of thieves unless they release a full pc version.
Modders can do their best (thank you guys i respect you very much) but if the base engine is limited by design there will be a blood-bath everytime a single byte goes over the patetic xbox-like limits.

So low/high texture, sound, horses, quests and also bugs are not the real problem or something hard to solve, but how you suppose to play with really hi-res textures when the vanilla game have already his own problems with low res one?
How can you put in highpoly models if you need to use an ugridtoload very low or you will go out of memory when you turn the camera?

With the numbers today PC can put out you can code sh1t and you will find people that will say "well, seems good to me!" but is not!
There is no excuse to go out of memory with a system that have rougly 23 times the memory of a single consolle.. or to use low quality scenario, poly etc.

Now the only money i should pay would be paid to modder, the only honest "developers" around here.

No, but I might just by a downgraded texture if it got rid of the fps drops, lol.

Wait, are you saying that the Steam Workshop thingy is going to enable modders to charge cash money for their mods?

That sounds like that's what you're saying. Is that true? Is that confirmed? Why is no one else reacting? Did they read the OP?

WHAT IS GOING ON HERE?! :shocking: :shocking: :shocking: :shocking:


P.S. Everyone's been saying this but it needs to be said more: some of the textures are ridiculously, worse-than-Oblivion, low-res, pixely bad. It's just so jarring because of the inconsistency of random bad textures thrown in all around the shiny good ones. This definitely needs to be fixed and if paying money made it happen faster, the idea is tempting... but it just seems so wrong.

No, I'd be quite a bit insulted if they offered a hight texture dlc for money.

Depends on how much it costs and where it's coming from. If it's coming from Bethesda themselves, they most likely have the textures created at a much higher resolution before they are scaled down for consoles and touched up, so the time needed should be minimal. But I would pay more for someone third-party, like Qarl from Oblivion fame, replacing ~80% of the textures.

I would feel so insulted if that's the reason the shipped textures look so bad.

If they improve performance by at leas 20% i would definetly, seeing how bad the game performs i would definetly not... the game has a hard time by itself unmodded, just imagine how much FPS will drop with a HD Res DLC.

Definetly would like to see it, but i rather have Bethesda raise performance first.

This sums it up nicely.

Pay them for something they should have done themselves to begin with as others pointed out already? No not with me! And then there is the thing the community already takes care of that so why would I want to buy that?
Also others came to the conclusion the textures they had provided were sub-par so they released a pack rather quick and for free (before patches at the buttom of that site): http://social.bioware.com/page/da2-patches

Why would they charge for an HD texture pack when modders out there will go and create one for free? Kinda silly when you think about it.

And for the record, no, I would not pay for such a texture pack for that very reason.

Pay for what should of been in the game in the first place NO.

I done the main quest and I have to say I like the game. But love the game nope. No Dx11, low frame rates, lots of quest bugs.

With most people thinking how good the prelease shoots were for the xbox and thinking the Pc version will a lot better. Bethesda did not work very hard to say no the xbox is the best version not the PC. I feel very let down by Bethesda. It is looking more and more that the 113k players that are online right now on steam where sold down the river. Forget all this cross platform stuff give Pc user a PC game. Rant over sorry.