Skyrim is a port for PC

[Ghogiel]

I'm kind of wondering how the self-hiding bars will work when not in combat, for example if you need to check your health at a shop. Can a console controller spare a button to bring up the HUD?

Maybe it's as simple as drawing you weapon brings up the bars? I didn't look out for that when I watched the E3 demo.

[Corakus]

It was one of the things I was paying attention the most, your health only pops up when it's being depleted or restored when it's not full, any other time it will fade into the background.If you wish to check your stats you bring up the skills page which is also a character page where it shows your race, the name of your character, your skills, and your main status bars, and I believe your progress to the next level. Edited June 13, 2011 by Corakus

[chipndip]

The whole Skyrim is a port for PC doesn't really bother me, look at the bright side at least were getting it on PC. The way I see it everything really just boils down to making money. Certain type of games caters to certain systems. I'm afraid the Game Developers have priorities for Skyrim and that's Consoles first and PC last :mad: . Well at least Star Wars The Old Republic caters to PC Gamers.

[Bloodinfested]

Never checked out starwars but most mmos have to cater to pcs, well besides ff14 that absolutely stinks of console love from major lack of bindings and common options. From what I seen everything is still there in the ui in skyrim just displayed a bit different, I really didn’t mind the new ui at all. Thats all pretty much personal preference doesn’t matter what kind of a ui that they make someone will always dislike it for one reason or another its quite a minor detail

[Halororor]

If consoles didn't exist PC gaming would have been FAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR better games.

 

But they do exist, so either man up or gtfo and go play Baldur's Gate 2 again.

[Vagrant0]

If consoles didn't exist PC gaming would have been FAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR better games.

Not true, although consoles may not push the limits of things graphically, they have led to developers trying to squeeze as much performance and appearance as they can out of games using existing or mid-range technology instead of the old process of building a game and hoping that the technology out there can run it well enough on high settings. This is most evident with FO3/NV and DA, which were both designed around the limitations on the console hardware but still remain comparable graphically with some more demanding games. Additionally, as the economy has been in the crapper the better part of the last decade, console sales are what has allowed many larger companies (IE Bethsoft) from going under or selling their rights to others peacemeal. Although PC is where most innovation takes place, console is where that innovation and style can reach the largest audience.

 

I hear you, console games in general are dumbed down, bogged with annoying confirmation menus, and generally lack depth, but gone are the days when there was any real difference between the two. Most PS3 and Xbox games these days have limited keyboard functionality, and in many ways resemble a PC more than Apple products, and usually only differ from their PC counterparts by means of a proprietary file format and some adjustments to control setup.

 

Bottom line is this, blame bad UI and HUD elements on the GAME DESIGNERS, not just because a game is a console port. When every controller has an analog joystick, the decision to make display elements a button instead of something you click is more of a design choice to make selections easier to click through than anything. As more console games are being created for PC, there will undoubtedly be a move away from simplified selection boxes and 20 menus just because it's easier to code fewer menu levels.

 

From what I've seen of the UI in Skyrim, it's far more seamless and integrated than any TES title before, which while strange, scary, and different, just feels cooler. People wanted immersion in Oblivion, but somehow like the dozen or so menus for various numerical statistics and the total break (and sudden blindness when in caves) from the game environment just to open inventory. Instead we get menus which are more graphically appealing, closer in line with immersion, and from what I've seen lack the sudden shock of transition. Yes, the depth of being able to plan out a character is nice, but both Morrowind and Oblivion ended up being too dependent on having to micromanage stats and less about just playing the damn game and enjoying a new interactive piece of storytelling without all the extra stuff getting in the way.

[Ghogiel]

Th only thing I don't like about the new UI is 1 thing. I kinda want to see my all skills in a single list, for obvious reasons, though it's not a OMG the game is ruined thing, because what they replaced it with is pretty fun looking.

 

And I didn't so much like that F3 didn't show the character and what is equiped in the inventory screen. I missed that a bit.

 

I liked the new UI as a whole

Edited June 13, 2011 by Ghogiel

[antonkr]

If consoles didn't exist PC gaming would have been FAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR better games.

Not true, although consoles may not push the limits of things graphically, they have led to developers trying to squeeze as much performance and appearance as they can out of games using existing or mid-range technology instead of the old process of building a game and hoping that the technology out there can run it well enough on high settings. This is most evident with FO3/NV and DA, which were both designed around the limitations on the console hardware but still remain comparable graphically with some more demanding games. Additionally, as the economy has been in the crapper the better part of the last decade, console sales are what has allowed many larger companies (IE Bethsoft) from going under or selling their rights to others peacemeal. Although PC is where most innovation takes place, console is where that innovation and style can reach the largest audience.

 

I hear you, console games in general are dumbed down, bogged with annoying confirmation menus, and generally lack depth, but gone are the days when there was any real difference between the two. Most PS3 and Xbox games these days have limited keyboard functionality, and in many ways resemble a PC more than Apple products, and usually only differ from their PC counterparts by means of a proprietary file format and some adjustments to control setup.

 

Bottom line is this, blame bad UI and HUD elements on the GAME DESIGNERS, not just because a game is a console port. When every controller has an analog joystick, the decision to make display elements a button instead of something you click is more of a design choice to make selections easier to click through than anything. As more console games are being created for PC, there will undoubtedly be a move away from simplified selection boxes and 20 menus just because it's easier to code fewer menu levels.

 

From what I've seen of the UI in Skyrim, it's far more seamless and integrated than any TES title before, which while strange, scary, and different, just feels cooler. People wanted immersion in Oblivion, but somehow like the dozen or so menus for various numerical statistics and the total break (and sudden blindness when in caves) from the game environment just to open inventory. Instead we get menus which are more graphically appealing, closer in line with immersion, and from what I've seen lack the sudden shock of transition. Yes, the depth of being able to plan out a character is nice, but both Morrowind and Oblivion ended up being too dependent on having to micromanage stats and less about just playing the damn game and enjoying a new interactive piece of storytelling without all the extra stuff getting in the way.

Look at a game like ArmA 2 for example. It was made for a PC. Why it wasn't made for a console? A console simply cannot be able to handle it. Think about games like Fallout 1 and Fallout 2. Fallout 3 was designed as first person and was hell of a lot simpler? Why? So a more casual gamers could play it who don't notice how lacking the game is compared to the game before it. In reality if you think about it. DICE will make A LOT of money simply because they said hurr durr we are making the game for PC.

I don't get one thing though, why not design multiple interfaces. One complexer one for PC and one less complex for consoles.

[Halororor]

Ok, you not only missed the entire point of Vagrant's post, you also made me laugh. But not in a good way, more the kind of laugh that says 'you're part of the reason my soul is stabbing itself in an effort to get out'. That kind of way.

 

Look at a game like ArmA 2 for example. It was made for a PC. Why it wasn't made for a console? A console simply cannot be able to handle it.

 

*Sigh* This is the same old tired rubbish that is really killing gaming forums. It's not 'consolization' or anything like that. It's this rotten core of PC elitists who sit behind their PCs every single day, moaning about every single game to be released that isn't Baldur's Gate 2. I don't know, maybe I just never noticed them before, but 2011 seems to be the year of The Rise of The PC Elitist. Suddenly every gaming forum has become a cesspit. The only thing they can do is moan and groan about how 'this game has been consolized' and 'consoles are killing the PC' and 'gaf gaf gaf gaf'. They don't acknowledge that times are changing. Games are changing. Not, it's a conspiracy to kill PC gaming. The saddest part is, they don't realise, people like the games they moan about every day. It's only them that sit and be gloomy about it, because quite frankly, they don't seem to want to enjoy games.

 

Gaming forums (at least PC gaming forums) has become some kind of emo scene, just minus the razor blades. It's exhausting, to say the least, and not just metaphorically, literally. Often I simply browse through a discussion of a game, and it's like a little part of me dies inside. Games are meant to be fun. Why is this very vocal minority on all gaming forums trying to convince us they aren't? They seem to have forgotten what games are all about. Relaxing and having fun.

 

Think about games like Fallout 1 and Fallout 2. Fallout 3 was designed as first person and was hell of a lot simpler? Why? So a more casual gamers could play it who don't notice how lacking the game is compared to the game before it.

 

Oh please, Fallout 1/2 and 3 fall into entirely different genres. Despite coming from the same series, you can't even begin to compare them. It's asinine to even try. Besides that, Fallout 3 was heralded (mostly by PC gamers, mind you) as one of the best games in the year of its release. Stop trying to get 'proof' for your cheap conspiracy of 'game devs think we're stupid gaf gaf gaf consolitus gaf gaf mainstream' rubbish.

 

In reality if you think about it. DICE will make A LOT of money simply because they said hurr durr we are making the game for PC.

 

Yes, why did they say they're making it for PC? To cash in on fools like you who run around forums yelling 'consolization' gaf gaf 'pc gaming master race'.

 

I don't get one thing though, why not design multiple interfaces. One complexer one for PC and one less complex for consoles.

 

Why waste time and money on something that is absolutely stupid? The only people moaning about the interfaces are people who run around actively looking for reasons to hate games. I wouldn't waste resources on those fools either. That's also ignoring budgets, deadlines and all the other important bits of game developing you seem totally oblivious to. Besides that, there's nothing wrong with the interface. Most of us think it looks pretty good, and we're not about to leave a deuce in our pants because 'hurr we have to scroll durr'.

 

TL;DR

 

You're killing off gaming forums. You're not going to get another Baldur's Gate 2, so go back to playing that game instead of souring everyone's mood with your mindless drivel.

 

Edit: Oh, and you know why ArmA2 wasn't made for consoles? Because it's a fact that FPS games work better on the PC. And you know what's better? Nobody actually gives a damn.

Edited June 13, 2011 by Halororor

[antonkr]

Ok, you not only missed the entire point of Vagrant's post, you also made me laugh. But not in a good way, more the kind of laugh that says 'you're part of the reason my soul is stabbing itself in an effort to get out'. That kind of way.

 

Look at a game like ArmA 2 for example. It was made for a PC. Why it wasn't made for a console? A console simply cannot be able to handle it.

 

*Sigh* This is the same old tired rubbish that is really killing gaming forums. It's not 'consolization' or anything like that. It's this rotten core of PC elitists who sit behind their PCs every single day, moaning about every single game to be released that isn't Baldur's Gate 2. I don't know, maybe I just never noticed them before, but 2011 seems to be the year of The Rise of The PC Elitist. Suddenly every gaming forum has become a cesspit. The only thing they can do is moan and groan about how 'this game has been consolized' and 'consoles are killing the PC' and 'gaf gaf gaf gaf'. They don't acknowledge that times are changing. Games are changing. Not, it's a conspiracy to kill PC gaming. The saddest part is, they don't realise, people like the games they moan about every day. It's only them that sit and be gloomy about it, because quite frankly, they don't seem to want to enjoy games.

 

Gaming forums (at least PC gaming forums) has become some kind of emo scene, just minus the razor blades. It's exhausting, to say the least, and not just metaphorically, literally. Often I simply browse through a discussion of a game, and it's like a little part of me dies inside. Games are meant to be fun. Why is this very vocal minority on all gaming forums trying to convince us they aren't? They seem to have forgotten what games are all about. Relaxing and having fun.

 

Think about games like Fallout 1 and Fallout 2. Fallout 3 was designed as first person and was hell of a lot simpler? Why? So a more casual gamers could play it who don't notice how lacking the game is compared to the game before it.

 

Oh please, Fallout 1/2 and 3 fall into entirely different genres. Despite coming from the same series, you can't even begin to compare them. It's asinine to even try. Besides that, Fallout 3 was heralded (mostly by PC gamers, mind you) as one of the best games in the year of its release. Stop trying to get 'proof' for your cheap conspiracy of 'game devs think we're stupid gaf gaf gaf consolitus gaf gaf mainstream' rubbish.

 

In reality if you think about it. DICE will make A LOT of money simply because they said hurr durr we are making the game for PC.

 

Yes, why did they say they're making it for PC? To cash in on fools like you who run around forums yelling 'consolization' gaf gaf 'pc gaming master race'.

 

I don't get one thing though, why not design multiple interfaces. One complexer one for PC and one less complex for consoles.

 

Why waste time and money on something that is absolutely stupid? The only people moaning about the interfaces are people who run around actively looking for reasons to hate games. I wouldn't waste resources on those fools either. That's also ignoring budgets, deadlines and all the other important bits of game developing you seem totally oblivious to. Besides that, there's nothing wrong with the interface. Most of us think it looks pretty good, and we're not about to leave a deuce in our pants because 'hurr we have to scroll durr'.

 

TL;DR

 

You're killing off gaming forums. You're not going to get another Baldur's Gate 2, so go back to playing that game instead of souring everyone's mood with your mindless drivel.

 

Edit: Oh, and you know why ArmA2 wasn't made for consoles? Because it's a fact that FPS games work better on the PC. And you know what's better? Nobody actually gives a damn.

I am killing off gaming forums? lulwut? You posted a completly violent response than you basically said f*** you without any intention to hide it. The point I tried to make that you complelty missed is that most games even those who have a huge PC community on their side try to go and make money by making the game on a console for a 12 year old kid to be able to play and enjoy while most of the community suffers from the simplified/consolfied interface. Look at Crysis. Crysis 2 was a bloody disaster for PC compared to what it could have been as a direct sequel for PC only. Oblivion. If not for limitation of consoles there would have been a far more complex system of quests and topics that you hear about which was removed from the game. Why? Console wouldn't handle it.

 

And ArmA 2 is a simulation game that could never be handled by a console. Going to google images and typing the game doesn't give you full knowledge about it

Edited June 13, 2011 by antonkr