It's too easy to point out that Skyrim is smaller than oblivion, and oblivion smaller than Morrowind, and Morrowind smaller than Daggerfall. Just look at the content removed as the series moves forward. We're at a point with Skyrim where all those fun little easter-egg treasures are gone, and thus exploration is discouraged via negative reinforcement. And that's just superficial.

It is melodrama, but you never said it wasn't true. It's the way of gaming: sell-out, go for the easy money, face ruin. It's a cycle.

Beth haven't fallen behind, as you suggest, because they haven't constructed a world with the "size and scope" for a proper TES game. Well, they have. But they've fallen behind due to their reasoning behind it, which I stated previously: money. Everything added costs money. If you're developing for a console audience they expect less, will pay more for less. That's where Beth is.

Look, I've been playing gamesas games since their first Terminator game in the 90s, and I've seen them come a long, long way. I never would have imaged, even with Daggerfall, that they would have gotten as big as they are today. Why did they get this big? Jumping onto consoles with Morrowind. It taught them a lesson (one others before them learned): consoles=fast $$. With oblivion they toned down the content, and Skyrim is barely recognizable as a classic western RPG, noting that just because someone has a sword and wears armor does not mean it's a role-playing game.

Skyrim is so scaled back, and feels so rushed I can't believe that gamesas doesn't feel some since of shame in releasing it- much akin to a college student that turns writes a paper one hour before class when they had three weeks to do it. But that's my PC-user take on it, and I can see that what I feel is rushed, shortened, and trite, is really the upper-limits for the average console player.

None of this changes facts: for the console market to flourish, you must have an investment in PCs. If you neglect one, the other will fail. Reason: console development on it's own tends towards a negative extreme (again: delivering less content at a higher price for greater profit). PC users expect more. The PC market drives expectations, directly, for console users. Without the PC market everything a console user would play would be the same game with a different hat, a la PS2/Japanese RPG.

That's where we're heading with Beth. It's hard for those not old enough to remember what things were like, or to compare this same effect over time with other companies and systems. It's equally difficult, I'm sure, for those long-time gamesas employees to see the forest for the trees. But this isn't new, this cycle, and what gamesas has entered into is a very slippery slope.

You could also put some blame on Microsoft here. Every (cheap) CPU is 64bit, so why not make Windows 64bit only. They had their chance with Vista when they decided to go DX10 only, they should have also stated it would be 64bit only and then on. There is no excuse to have a 32bit Windows...if you want that use XP, otherwise upgrade to Win 7 (Vista if you are mad

I'm no Todd Howard, but I can happily answer those questions, not sure what you have to gain from hearing these answers in Todd's soothing voice.

The focus was on the consoles despite them being outdated because the market is much larger, it's where the money is. Compare how many people have an xbox 360 or a ps3 in their living rooms to how many people have (and are prepared to use) a PC capable of running Skyrim on ultra settings at 1080p. I mention ultra because you say Skyrim doesn't make use of what current gen hardware is capable of producing, but it's hardly like thats an issue if you can't already max the game and yes, I'm fully aware that the optimization regarding things like shadows and the light sources affecting them aren't anywhere near the standard they could be on the PC. But would it be worth the production time to cater to a smaller slice of the market at the expense of the majority? Not in Bethesda's opinion, and as much as I'd like to lie about it, I'd do the same thing in their $400 Salvatore Ferragamo shoes.

Yes I'm well aware of the sales figures on PC, and I'm truely happy with them as perhaps people will start realizing that it's been decades since people said "PC gaming is dieing" when the price drop in fairly high end hardware (looking at you 560ti's) as compared to their predecessors is actively encouraging it. But the consoles sell more, that's just how it is.

As for PC's DRM, this I don't understand and it would be pretty swish if someone could come up with a reasonable explanation for it, as PC games regardless of their DRM are cracked within days of release, usually on the day of release and occassionally before retail release. Yeah the 360 version was up there first but getting a cracked copy into your 360 requires more effort. As such, I guarantee the PC release will be hit hardest through piracy, an unfortunate fact that just serves to further shrink the PC's slice of the $ pie. But again, that's just how it is.

I'm sorry I couldn't get you Todd for Christmas though, maybe a Todd Howard plush toy would be the next best thing?

The topic of Microsvck and what they do is a WHOLE nother issue and topic with me, which this thread is not the place for. That being said, it is true that almost every cpu out there is x64 (even the el cheapo dell's running low-end dual cores), however most laptops still run x86 cores. Consoles, and the mobile gaming platform, limit what the true fans receive to some extent. With MS shoving DirectX down everyone's throats, its a wonder why new-age games like Skyrim don't either use it or OpenGL (which is superior in my opinion, but again another topic/another thread)

Console games are developed for the console with a PC. There is no reason why you cannot enable a few extra graphical options for PC users, as it is (presumably) as easy as a few 'flags'

Very well put and 100% correct.

There is also the other argument of course...we all went out and bought these really powerful graphic cards before there was software (games) to really use them - bragging rights anyone?. No one made any promises the software was coming out - all the card manufactures state is what the card is capable of doing, are we not our own downfull here I do realise it's a bit of a chicken and the egg senario though.

You cannot effectively publish games making use of the new features until people have the cards that support them. That being said, A large portion of PC gamers have DX11 cards. Be it 1gb, 2gb, or somewhere between of VRAM, their rigs may differ. Still, a large portion of PC gamers have the ability to support DX11.

Not to mention new age games are being released with the option to choose between DX9 and DX10/11. Saints Row 3, for example, just came out. It's been on XBox for what, a month or so now? It has the option for DX9 or DX10/11. Batman Arkham City I am sure will have the same option, and its been on XBox for a month now. Point is developers realize that PC's are capable of so much more while delivering the exact same story. I view consoles as 'casuals' and pc's as 'diehards', If you are on a console, you don't really give a crap about what the game looks like as long as you can play it. PC, however, we care about what it looks like because we have the power to push the engine to its limits.

That's why you accuse other people who are making sensible points as trolling. I think I understand your 'respectful'

Do not kid yourself just as many games get pirated on consoles as they do the PC considering the most popular games overall are console only ones and also being that all xboxes and most ps3 consoles can be hacked to allow it these days.

Yes agreed, but it still comes down to putting more time and effort into the PC version for those extra bells and whistles (which is at a cost) and the publishers deciding to take a risk that they will see a good return for the extra expense. Most look at what they have produced for the console version (after working a lot of time on that) and beleive they have produced a decent product...then spending even more time adoting it for the PC when in their heads they already have a finished product is always going to suffer. Also, apart from some good improvements in DX11 (the hardware ones), DX9 and DX10 are really the same - 10 is supposedly more optimised, unfortunately, Vista was never the best advert for it and so 10 did not really have a chance to shine.

Well, it was a slightly educated guess based on the proportion of sales are PC based, and then the proportion of Steam players with DX11 hardware, but I was exaggerating a little, it could be as high as 3%, I'll give you that.

More like $150 actually as I was using pounds , but it was just an example of the fact that any change to content costs extra development - even if the art is already done they have to test what the impact of using it is - when you share that cost between only a few people (ie, the ones who will benefit from it) there's a relatively higher cost associated with it. It's another way of saying 'put your money where your mouth is' - if we, the minority PC gamers, want to have features made exclusively for us then we should be willing to pay for it. All this talk of console focused design would go away if the PC revenue exceeded console revenue. As there are far fewer PC gamers buying games that means we would each need to pay much more per game or DLC that tailored to us.

Despite that, many more console players buy games than PC players.
Todd said it was 90:10 before - initial sales are 85:15, so better than the norm, but still, you'd design your game for the 85%, not the 15%.

Perhaps despite the fact games are hacked on both, piracy is more ingrained on the PC.

Yes, but has already stated by someone else, playing a pirate version of a game on a console usually means modifying it, which comes with some hassle, risk and expense - not to mention warranty issues. You have none of this on the PC - I would have to argue there is a greater issue of piracy on the PC, therefore a greater risk to the publisher.

Yeah, I'm sure Todd is scouring the forums 24/7 to have a conversation with somebody.
I'm pretty sure the team don't want anything to do with the game, I would be anyway after spending all of that time.

Some people in this thread have clearly lost any and all connection to reality.

reading my thoughts

sad but true ((

Good old piracy, remember the flashing screens at the start of your Commodore64 games! Hehe ahh those were the days.
Anyway, I shamefully added an extra +1 to console purchase after PC version [censored] itself, now my PS3 version [censored] itself Sad panda indeed.

Sure if you only count box sales. Digital sales on PC are as high as 6:1 versus box sales. Even if Skyrim, which was one of Steam's best sellers ever, was only half that at 3:1 that puts PC sales more or less even with Xbox sales.


Really? Is that why pretty much every major release these days gets pirated on Xbox weeks before any other platform?

The lack of respect for what these guys do is overwhelming.

I'm not sure if a few of you are talking about a subject that you know nothing about or if you're just flat out lying to yourselves, but there's a hell of a lot less piracy going on for the consoles for reasons I can't go in to without some overly keen moderator shutting me down, but for the love of god if you're gonna pull the "360 version was leaked" arguement at least research the process, yeah it was leaked and yeah a number of people were playing it. A number that has since been eclipsed by the amount of people playing a cracked version of the PC release.

Piracy doesn't only affect PC sales, fair enough. We know that. It does manifest itself far more commonly for PC releases however.

And for those of you writing steam off completely as opposed to just hating on the DRM side of things - the steam sales are generating a very large amount of sales and reducing production cost whilst doing so. In an ideal world, wouldn't such a system be prefferred as it saves Bethesda time and money, time and money that could be put to use elsewhere, possibly even in QA and optimization?

One word. Greed.

Many words:
You're basically admitting to a company selling out. We're not iditots, we realise Bethesda wants to make more money because the business model and the guy in the suit says that the company must do that. Oh no! We'll go out of business if we don't make more sales. Pffft. It's pure [censored]. You did it for years without caring about console markets, and you can easily do it again if you could only see past your own greed.
But the people here that love their PC and have supported the gaming industry via their PC for years, feel that they deserve at least some respect for being there with YOU and all those other sell out companies over those years... And rightly so! Without them the comapny would never be where it is today. Those guys supported you, they played and loved your games and they made mods, gave feedback where needed, and they truly helped put Bethesda where they are today, and for what? "You can't just toss me aside like a soiled cloth!"

If you made something awesome and memorable, and reached a point in your life that you can say "Hey I've truly achieved something - look at all those happy people - they love my game and they made me rich, they gave me a career that I love and enjoy" that's got to be a helluva feeling, right? But when you go on to say "Okay you guys, I've served you, I'm going on to serve people who don't really care or respect my game, they own a console and have money to spend - I'll get seriously rich now" - that's just pure and simple selling out = zero respect. 'Console man' might have money to waste on games, but he doesn't give two [censored] about patches, mods, shadows, textures, engines, anything. He doesn't notice bugs, he doesn't notice lag, or frame rate. He has no idea about how it works, he has no respect for any of the work and trouble that has gone into the game. He cares about one thing - when the next cool game will be out. He got bored and totally forgot your game after a few weeks because something new and equally boring and short lived came along. Console life is short and sweet. PC life is loved and long.

Todd - you guys need to get your heads out your asses and realise where your loyalties (not excessive royalties) and fan base lies, you need to realise that console owners have never even heard of you, let alone appreciate what you have achieved! If you don't, you'll go down the tubes because you sold out.

I don't know how to put it into words without sounding like a hippy but we loved you and you f*ked us in the eye, man.
You can pass the message on to Carmack too since he's in the same building.

For the console guys out there - of course I realise that not all console owners are brainless idiots, but those of you who know where I'm coming from, will know exactly the type of person I mean.

what u call greed a business anolyst will call it the right answer to the market.

what you think it's evil from your point of view for an anolyst it's just the result of a spreadsheet the right number.

sorry to say but a business now day can't be run in a "casual" way there is people and family depending on that business they are not evil they are just doing what it is most probable to make them survive and survive means grow in a capitalist market

if you were CEO in the company and you would have the data/responsibility he has most probably you would choose the same or a very similar path

Have you even played Skyrim, or do you just whine on the forums about it? If you have really played it for any length of time it's immediately obvious how much more care was put into building the world, and what a joy exploration is when compared with previous games. The scripting is finally coming along and the variety of situations and events I've encountered far surpasses that of Oblivion or Morrowind.

If you really think Skyrim is scaled down in terms of quantity and quality of content, you've got blinders on and there's no point in arguing.

I never said it was evil and I said we understand it. Doesn't mean we have to like it.

What you're forgetting is that the creative people involved in making a game aren't the people responsible for selling you a game. Therein lies the confusion for most people. It's the many legged beast of the corporation.