Amen to that. I can't go more than a few minutes without crashing since the last patch. I thought patches where supposed to fix things, not make them worse?

I love the gameplay, story and all, the graphics are nice(love the wind and fog effects) but when i think about what they could be... to bad its a 1:1 xbox port :/ i think they should have spent more time working on the pc version. My task manager says it uses only 900MB or RAM, but acording to steam most people have 4GB. Why not use more and have beter detail in the distance? why not let the gpu calculate the shadows?
My only question is: Will anything be changed? or will you just fix some bugs and leave it to the moders?

Todd isn't going to respond here. If you are REALLY lucky, you might get something from Nick, or GStaff.... don't hold your breath though. All you will get is platitudes, "We are working on fixing those issues".. etc. Beth isn't the same company it was when morrowind was produced/released. Things started going downhill with Oblivion, (in a major way....) they have improved some since then, but, they have backslid in others. Look forward to ALL future beth games being xbox ports.

I'm a PC user. I happen to own a XBOX, but I never use it. That having been said, Bethesda does not seem to put much stock into the PC. It's been stated several times, by Todd if my memory is correct, that the PC has too much piracy and that they would rather just do console versions. Given that and the fact that PC sales account for less than 15% of Skyrim sales. I can't say I blame them. So, just because you own a PC, have played TES since Area and are a big fan of the series (like me) doesn't meen you are entitled to ANYTHING. Get over yourself and either play the game or don't.

I'll bet he'll post here with, "Post limit", then lock the thread.

Good luck gang. As a PS3 user with the lag bug, I empathize with the PC community. I won't buy an Xbox but may get this for the PC if I can't resolve my PS3 issue with the patch. However, reading your forum makes me shiver.

If you do talk to Todd, please let him know the PS3 users need 5 minutes too.

Agreed. The PC port is in pretty terrible shape. For a DX9 game, the large amount of low res and just plain bad textures, small size of the towns and numbers of npc's, and lack of ambition overall on the PC version it is surprising how poorly it runs.

I've been running Batman Arkham City since it came out with all its DX11 features, tessellation, impressive high quality textures, cloth physics, brilliant lighting, 32x CSAA, MVSS, HBAO, all running and I get a steady 60 fps, smooth as silk. I step foot in an interior cell in Skyrim with a couple light sources and some fog and I'm crawling at 25-30 fps with (obviously) no DX11 features, the native AA and AF seem to be broken and I have to turn them off and force it through the vid card driver. The UI is terrible even without the plethora of bugs causing problems with the keyboard/mouse devices. Beth's PC ports seem to get worse with every game.


That's all just talk paid for by MS. The console version was pirated nearly a week before the PC version and PC sales are less than 15% of overall sales only if you only count box sales. Digital sales on PC are as high as 6:1 versus box sales. With as big a hit as Skyrim was on Steam, PC sales are likely running neck and neck with Xbox sales.

I think that Fallen Enchantress may redeem them.

Regardless of the success War of Magic, no one communicates with their customers like Stardock!

*ahem*


http://www.theesa.com/facts/gameplayer.asp. Thanks for making me feel old by underestimating that though

o7

Firstly, i am 100% sure Mr Tod Howard get's his orders from the big bosses. Secondly the main reason would be this:
http://www.techzine.nl/extern-nieuws/27470/skyrim-sales-soar-to-3-4-million-in-just-two-days.html

Now what i hope is the profit will be invested back into the elder scrolls by 1: Writing a new engine wich isn't outdated, 2: Making some awesome expansions for Skyrim including the so called 'High resolution textures', 3: Bring us TES 6

I understand it from a business point of view, ive looked into it and the sad part is us PC gamers are becoming rare... The console market is GOLD at the moment, thats where the cash is to be made, and luckily these companies can still make that cash as you all should agree that the economy isn't that stable anymore... Hell, i'm pretty sure if Bethesda dindt released Skyrim for the console it would be all over with TES. Us need to keep that in mind, thanks to the console they can keep going making awesome stuff. All we can hope for is that they listen to our cries.

They haven't really listened so far. Games have been getting progressively more simplistic, fewer skills, now even attributes are gone. They DID come up with dual weilding, finally..... but, I still miss crossbows.

I agree ,i never had one problem running this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=72agy4KXNA8&feature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G1Pt5RgA3f4 game on ultra in DX11 1080p,this is where devs should be now,not on DX9 FFS

PC's are more prone to piracy? The XBox version of Skyrim was leaked 1 week before the release, and the PC version wasn't leaked until steam preloaded it. And it wasn't until AFTER it was released that it was finally cracked. ANY and EVERY console game can be pirated. There are PLENTY of PC games that have not/will not/cannot be pirated. Just look at almost any game Ubisoft has released.

Just talk, possibly. But the 15% number includes all sales: box and download.

No it doesn't.

I didn't say te PC was more prone or not. I mearly stated what Todd has said publicly. Of course any game can be pirated; PC or Console. I not sure why you would say some can't be, but that's not really the point. The point is, according to what gamesas spokes people have said, the don't seem to think very highly of the PC market.

Rightly - Todd estimated it was only worth 10% of the market compared to consoles. It doesn't matter whether it's piracy related or not - the fact is PC players don't buy games like Skyrim compared to their console brethren, so it's hard for developers to argue the case to their paymasters (who are running a business, not a charity) to focus on the PC at any kind of detriment to the market which is actually buying their products.

If you want to be counted as a gamer, you have to vote with your wallet, not forum rage.

I doubt that bit is something TH said as well.

How game series, and eventually the companies which made them, fail:

1) Make game for PC. It's awesome, and the people love it
2) Make another game for PC, awesome. Port it to console this time.
3) Take everything you learned developing expansive and immersive games for the PC and refocus on easy-money, ie: the console market (increased cost, less content, fewer expectations)
4) Increase profits from less development time since console market expects less, and pays more
5) For all the reasons you claimed to have left the PC market (piracy, fewer purchases, higher cost to develop/risk) the console market now fails you as you discover piracy even more rampant, liability becomes intrinsically bound with value, and since with each generation/game you decrease the value...
6) Your company falters, and so you accept a bid from a Japanese game company, or EA
7) your fan base becomes as homogenized as your games. Bland re-hashes of the same content which appeals to everyone, rather than a niche group.
8) you completely pull out of the market, possibly starting a new company, which fails in less than 5 years, in no small part to the intellectual property rights you signed away when you left.
9) you're remembered as a horrible person, all your achievements forgotten.

the short: PC gaming is directly responsible for console gaming. Big on PC, smaller on console. If you develop for console, you develop start with the mindset that "less is more", and so deliver less, until all content is linear and streamlined, and no one buys your games.

This hasn't happened you say? Oh, but it has. *cough*Origin Systems*cough**Eidos*cough**3D Realms**cough**Atari* and on and on. It's a cycle of betraying ones roots for the new, hot way to garner the most bucks. It's a cycle of destroying value, and value is everything.

It's funny that beth now doesn't want to support the same audience that is responsible for them still being around in the first place... Morrowind was the first game Beth released on the box, and that was ported FROM PC, not TO it. Now, everything is geared toward an "xbox friendly" UI, and gameplay. Wonderful.

Everything is pirated. There is no avoiding it. It is flat out impossible to put out software that cannot be pirated. Beth is just killing the secondary PC game market with Steam.

It's not happened yet with TES - each one has been more successful than the last, not less. Not necessarily in terms of profit (we'll probably never know that), but in terms of players certainly.

Speak for yourself. You are overstating your case, graphics do not improve the story whatsoever. The two are unrelated. Saying that the story would be "50 times better" simply due to some higher res textures and DX10 features is crazy-talk. I have plenty of problems with Skyrim, but the level of graphics technology is not one of them. The thing that matters most for graphics is consistency, and that is where Skyrim fails in many ways. You have the blocky shadows that quiver every 10 seconds, lots of aliasing/shimmering that is impossible to get rid of even forcing higher AA through your card, and pop-in (though the latter is much improved over Oblivion).

It's also important to keep in mind that there is always going to be a sacrifice between graphics and depth given a fixed budget. Skyrim is quite possibly the largest game (in scope) ever created, and that scope wouldn't have been possible if they were focusing their resources on advancing their graphics engine. The Witcher 2 is a perfect example actually. Great game, but short and quite tiny overall. The quality of the gameplay throughout was very high, but the game was very short and there wasn't much replay value either due to the limited scope of the skill trees and crafting. It didn't possess near as many sandbox features, and the game world itself felt closed off and limited. For all your talk of PC gamers being the most mature, the amount of whining I've seen from gamers who clearly don't understand the concept of limited resources puts that into question. In a perfect world, we'd be able to get a game with the size/variety of Skyrim, the polish (pun not intended) of The Witcher 2, and a variety of multiplayer options to boot. This ain't a perfect world though, and expecting that is unrealistic.

Crucifying Bethesda for not meeting your graphical expectations when there are so many other more worthy criticisms (instability, bugs, and graphics flaws like shadows quivering/pop-in) is missing the point. Worse though is denying yourself the amazing open-world adventure of unparalleled scope that Skyrim provides simply because of some entitlement issues you have from your elitism. In many ways, PC gamers are actually much more immature when it comes to assessing games. For most, it's all about eye-candy and gameplay is secondary. Hate on console gamers all you want, but in the end they're the ones enjoying their games while the PC man-children are throwing tantrums about texture resolution.

(note: I am a PC gamer, and don't even own a console)

Why haven′t this been locked down and thrown away yet?waste of internet space!



//Stu out

You know, kind of thinking out loud here, if TES will be from now on a console optimized game, please Beth, at least make a CK that has many advanced features and above all, realtime editing so we can edit the console UI and the rest of the freaking features that we don't need. I'll be a happy guy because we have modders that are very talented and can make things really great as it should if only they had the right efficient tools.

Oh, the melodrama. I won't argue that Skyrim was designed for consoles, but I'm not seeing how that at all affected the scope and ambition of the game in this case. Does anyone really want to argue that Skyrim is smaller in scope than Oblivion or Morrowind? Before the mods which eventually turned both into games with seemingly never-ending amounts of novelty, they were far more limited than Skyrim at release. Being designed first and foremost for the Xbox 360 certainly limited the graphics, but I honestly don't think we can expect much more (besides providing us with all the existing improvement options without having to dig around the ini) without sacrificing the scope and freedom that makes ES games great. The day that an ES game starts sacrificing scope and variety for improved graphics (i.e. The Witcher 2) is the day I stop giving them money. There are plenty of companies that do highly polished games focused around a well-written main quest with amazing graphics, we don't need another company doing that.

Bethesda have always been pioneers at the cost of polish and stability. The only difference is where before they were generally at least close to the cutting-edge of graphics, they've now fallen behind as the cost of constructing a world with the size and scope necessary for a proper ES game while maintaining production values comparable to The Witcher 2 or BF3 far outstretches their resources and even potential revenue the game would provide. I know I'm saying this a lot, but it's important: you can't compare a game like TW2 or BF3 with Skyrim, it's apples and oranges and any idiot can see how much tinier those games are. They're great games, but they don't provide the open-world country-in-a-box experience that ES games do.

well, because so far nobody has insulted anybody in a very bad way. So far, it has been for the most part civilized until you showed up.