Why were these features not implemented?

Post » Wed Jun 13, 2012 11:12 pm

They were way more concerned about making the 11.11.11 deadline than finishing the game. Thats why.
User avatar
Jessica Colville
 
Posts: 3349
Joined: Wed Oct 18, 2006 6:53 pm

Post » Thu Jun 14, 2012 6:20 am

The game's already excellent in terms of graphics, so why did thy waste their time to make improved visuals and whatnot, when they could've added more gameplay?
What? Because things like that have a far higher time/gain ratio.

If you spend 10 hours to alter the visuals, then you experience those visuals constantly while playing.

If you spend 10 hours to add 1 hour of gameplay, then all that work goes into something you experience for 1 hour. They're prioritizing.
User avatar
Zach Hunter
 
Posts: 3444
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2007 3:26 pm

Post » Wed Jun 13, 2012 10:35 pm

What? Because things like that have a far higher time/gain ratio.

If you spend 10 hours to alter the visuals, then you experience those visuals constantly while playing.

If you spend 10 hours to add 1 hour of gameplay, then all that work goes into something you experience for 1 hour. They're prioritizing.
Are you saying that a bunch of over-glorified pixels are a much better addition than a perk tree that could possibly increase the longlevity of the game?
User avatar
Cedric Pearson
 
Posts: 3487
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2007 9:39 pm

Post » Thu Jun 14, 2012 2:27 pm

Are you saying that a bunch of over-glorified pixels are a much better addition than a perk tree that could possibly increase the longlevity of the game?
No, I'm saying fixing the crappy graphics of going underwater (Which was really terrible before) is better than adding something else. Wouldn'y you rather they fix and improv on what's there, instead of adding new content?
User avatar
Paul Rice
 
Posts: 3430
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2007 11:51 am

Post » Thu Jun 14, 2012 1:21 am

No, I'm saying fixing the crappy graphics of going underwater (Which was really terrible before) is better than adding something else. Wouldn'y you rather they fix and improv on what's there, instead of adding new content?
If it was horrible then yes, but honestly; the game was a beast in terms of graphics before they added all of those enhancers. I just don't get what's the point of improving an aspect in a video game that's already well done. Graphics were already incredible.
User avatar
Strawberry
 
Posts: 3446
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2007 11:08 am

Post » Thu Jun 14, 2012 3:53 am

What? Because things like that have a far higher time/gain ratio.

If you spend 10 hours to alter the visuals, then you experience those visuals constantly while playing.

If you spend 10 hours to add 1 hour of gameplay, then all that work goes into something you experience for 1 hour. They're prioritizing.
Except that the gameplay is the game, and the graphics are just the window-dressing.
User avatar
Beast Attire
 
Posts: 3456
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 5:33 am

Post » Thu Jun 14, 2012 4:17 am

Personally, I wasn't very inspired by the vast majority of the "game jam" stuff. But, hey, that's just me. :tongue:


Anyway - why isn't it all in, right now? Because the game jam stuff was thrown together by individuals or small teams in a week. Yeah, they may have "worked" for that video, but that doesn't mean that they weren't crashing left and right the rest of the time, causing other parts of the game to explode, not implemented rationally, etc. To actually bring them up to the level of "real features" could take anywhere from a little work to a vast amount. Or be not feasable at all.

So, no. They can't just snap their fingers and have stuff appear. That's software development for you. :shrug:
User avatar
Bek Rideout
 
Posts: 3401
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2007 7:00 pm

Post » Thu Jun 14, 2012 7:00 am

Personally, I wasn't very inspired by the vast majority of the "game jam" stuff. But, hey, that's just me. :tongue:


Anyway - why isn't it all in, right now? Because the game jam stuff was thrown together by individuals or small teams in a week. Yeah, they may have "worked" for that video, but that doesn't mean that they weren't crashing left and right the rest of the time, causing other parts of the game to explode, not implemented rationally, etc. To actually bring them up to the level of "real features" could take anywhere from a little work to a vast amount. Or be not feasable at all.

So, no. They can't just snap their fingers and have stuff appear. That's software development for you. :shrug:
When I said why it isn't in there, I didn't mean why they don't make things in an instant. Sure, I'll wait, but half of this stuff is not even confirmed.
User avatar
Sabrina Schwarz
 
Posts: 3538
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2006 10:02 am

Post » Thu Jun 14, 2012 1:17 pm

When I said why it isn't in there, I didn't mean why they don't make things in an instant. Sure, I'll wait, but half of this stuff is not even confirmed.

Because, as mentioned in the post you quoted, half of this stuff may not even feasibly work in the game, thus will be stuff that will never be implemented.

Plus, there is confirmed DLC (Dawnguard), so why don't we wait to see if some of this stuff makes it in there?
User avatar
Hot
 
Posts: 3433
Joined: Sat Dec 01, 2007 6:22 pm

Post » Thu Jun 14, 2012 8:11 am

If it was horrible then yes, but honestly; the game was a beast in terms of graphics before they added all of those enhancers. I just don't get what's the point of improving an aspect in a video game that's already well done. Graphics were already incredible.
You're not listening... We're talking about the water. They improved the water transitions. Have you ever gone underwater before in Skyrim? It was a complete mess. Now it's super awesome. So they were improving something that was a poorly done left over from previous games.

You're arguing about stuff you don't even seem to know anything about... >.>

Except that the gameplay is the game, and the graphics are just the window-dressing.
But for how long will you experience that 1 hour of gameplay? For one hour. How long will you experience the graphics? Up to an infinite amount of time, so long as the circumstances for displaying them are met. (Being underwater for that, etc) Of course there must be a balance. You can have epic graphics but horrible gameplay makes the game no fun. But they saw a spot that they could quickly improve, that gave them in a really good time(put in)/gain ratio. So they did it...
User avatar
Dalia
 
Posts: 3488
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 12:29 pm

Post » Thu Jun 14, 2012 1:15 pm

Plus, there is confirmed DLC (Dawnguard), so why don't we wait to see if some of this stuff makes it in there?

That's my best guess( finger crossed ), they are going to add some if not most of what you see in the game jam vid. into the DLC. :banana: Come on lycanthropy tree :bunny:
User avatar
Claire Jackson
 
Posts: 3422
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 11:38 pm

Post » Thu Jun 14, 2012 9:42 am

You're not listening... We're talking about the water. They improved the water transitions. Have you ever gone underwater before in Skyrim? It was a complete mess. Now it's super awesome. So they were improving something that was a poorly done left over from previous games.

You're arguing about stuff you don't even seem to know anything about... >.>

But for how long will you experience that 1 hour of gameplay? For one hour. How long will you experience the graphics? Up to an infinite amount of time, so long as the circumstances for displaying them are met. (Being underwater for that, etc) Of course there must be a balance. You can have epic graphics but horrible gameplay makes the game no fun. But they saw a spot that they could quickly improve, that gave them in a really good time(put in)/gain ratio. So they did it...
I think you're a bit confused. You don't experience graphics, it's just eye-candy for your eyes. The gameplay is what's important. I mean, the creators of PACMAN didn't spend their whole time trying to make him look good now did they?
User avatar
Mason Nevitt
 
Posts: 3346
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 8:49 pm

Post » Thu Jun 14, 2012 7:15 am

I think you're a bit confused. You don't experience graphics, it's just eye-candy for your eyes. The gameplay is what's important. I mean, the creators of PACMAN didn't spend their whole time trying to make him look good now did they?
Are you really using a game from the 80's that couldn't have looked any better as an example for graphics?

You most certainly do experience graphics. I'm not exactly saying that they are more important than gameplay or anything like that. I'm simply saying they saw making an improvement to water graphics a very effecient use of their time, so they did that.
User avatar
Sara Lee
 
Posts: 3448
Joined: Mon Sep 25, 2006 1:40 pm

Post » Thu Jun 14, 2012 2:02 am

That's my best guess( finger crossed ), they are going to add some if not most of what you see in the game jam vid. into the DLC. :banana: Come on lycanthropy tree :bunny:

I'd rather a vampire tree myself, as I've never been a fan of werewolves.

Not that I will complain if there is a lycanthropy tree, and given the GameJam video, I would say it's a good bet.

In fact, in my honest opinion, I really believe that the GameJam video was essentially a preview of many game enhancements that we will see in Dawnguard.
User avatar
Erin S
 
Posts: 3416
Joined: Sat Jul 29, 2006 2:06 pm

Post » Thu Jun 14, 2012 2:07 pm

I'd rather a vampire tree myself, as I've never been a fan of werewolves.

Not that I will complain if there is a lycanthropy tree, and given the GameJam video, I would say it's a good bet.

In fact, in my honest opinion, I really believe that the GameJam video was essentially a preview of many game enhancements that we will see in Dawnguard.

Vampires are overrated.

Anyways, I'd say they're more general improvements we MIGHT see. There is no guarantee for any of them and we already have 3 (or 4) of the improvements listed. We already have the Kinect support as seen in the video, improved underwater visuals and killcams for both arrows and magic.
User avatar
Charlotte Lloyd-Jones
 
Posts: 3345
Joined: Fri Jun 30, 2006 4:53 pm

Post » Thu Jun 14, 2012 11:53 am

I want the assassin vision and pitch black dungeons!
User avatar
Karl harris
 
Posts: 3423
Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 3:17 pm

Post » Thu Jun 14, 2012 3:52 am

I want seasonal change!!
User avatar
Andrew
 
Posts: 3521
Joined: Tue May 08, 2007 1:44 am

Post » Thu Jun 14, 2012 5:52 am

i want a bean feast!
User avatar
kat no x
 
Posts: 3247
Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2007 5:39 pm

Post » Thu Jun 14, 2012 4:43 am

As I said in another topic:

If lycanthropy becomes a new skill, I want more lycanthropes. The lore already has different types, like Werebear, Wereboar and Wereshark, so why not add some of these into the game?

A vampire skill-tree would be nice too.
User avatar
Vincent Joe
 
Posts: 3370
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2007 1:13 pm

Post » Thu Jun 14, 2012 9:55 am

I wish they did. I don't mind getting a product 10 years later, as long as it'll be 10x times better if it did.

More time doesn't necessarily mean more quality. I'm looking at you, Duke Nukem Forever.
User avatar
Mandy Muir
 
Posts: 3307
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2007 4:38 pm

Post » Thu Jun 14, 2012 12:10 pm

I wish they did. I don't mind getting a product 10 years later, as long as it'll be 10x times better if it did.

Did not help Duke Nukem.
User avatar
pinar
 
Posts: 3453
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2007 1:35 pm

Post » Thu Jun 14, 2012 5:55 am

I wish they did. I don't mind getting a product 10 years later, as long as it'll be 10x times better if it did.
If you told me pre-11.11.11 that I would have to wait for Skyrim for 10 years... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_Lg3lf87So
User avatar
Mark Churchman
 
Posts: 3363
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2007 5:58 am

Post » Thu Jun 14, 2012 10:17 am

Diablo 3 is another recent example of a game that was in development for a very long period of time and still had a rocky release with bugs and server issues.


Yes, there are plenty of additions I would like to see put into skyrim, but I know that the game I got on 11/11/11 was well worth the price I paid for it.
User avatar
Juanita Hernandez
 
Posts: 3269
Joined: Sat Jan 06, 2007 10:36 am

Post » Thu Jun 14, 2012 12:50 pm

Aaaargh not more "why isn't the gamejam stuff in Skyrim" questions.

The presentation at gamejam was basically saying: this is what we could do given an open canvas, but there are lots of toher things that go into making the game.

Watch the whole presentation by Todd, as well as the extra features. Yes, some of the stuff could go in. But it's not like Beth sat there saying "well, there's all this cool stuff we could put in... nah, sod it, let's not bother" and rub their hands with wicked glee.
User avatar
Nikki Lawrence
 
Posts: 3317
Joined: Sat Jul 01, 2006 2:27 am

Post » Thu Jun 14, 2012 2:18 pm

This just sums gamers up as a collective whole. The developers had a bit of fun for ONE WEEK messing around with the game, and Bethesda decided to show us what they did and were kind enough to release some of it for FREE.

Yet some people still whine and complain. Seriously, if you're complaining about this no wonder the forum is in meltdown whenever Bethesda releases something major.
User avatar
Darren Chandler
 
Posts: 3361
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2007 9:03 am

PreviousNext

Return to V - Skyrim