Vindekarr Posted December 8, 2011 Share Posted December 8, 2011 It's hardly the game's fault that it doesn't run on your old PC. That's like bringing a ride-on lawn mower to a NASCAR race and then blaming NASCAR for your inglorious humiliation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RubikNight Posted December 8, 2011 Share Posted December 8, 2011 It's hardly the game's fault that it doesn't run on your old PC. That's like bringing a ride-on lawn mower to a NASCAR race and then blaming NASCAR for your inglorious humiliation.The NASCAR analogy alone makes this post Kudos worthy!+1! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balakirev Posted December 8, 2011 Share Posted December 8, 2011 It's hardly the game's fault that it doesn't run on your old PC. That's like bringing a ride-on lawn mower to a NASCAR race and then blaming NASCAR for your inglorious humiliation. Where does David say that his PC is old, and not a relatively recent one? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReALty Posted December 8, 2011 Share Posted December 8, 2011 Please correct me if I am wrong but I would think that since Skyrim was built on the old X360 and PS3 hardware ported to the pc that just about any decent out of the box office desktop available in the last year or so could run it. Notice I did not say run it on ultra but could run it. That is unless Skyrim is a really crappy port like some people have reported. I guess I really mean if a computer has about the same specs or better than the X360\PS3 then it should be able to run it. Is this the case or not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Einarth Posted December 10, 2011 Share Posted December 10, 2011 (edited) Skyrim is there when I'm bored to be played in small intervals. Nothing more for me, that's just my personal take on the game. I don't find much enjoyment and have a somewhat small list of pet peeves with the game. Same. And I might add, for me the "small intervals" are getting shorter and the duration of pauses is getting exponentially longer. I really wish I had spent my money for something else. Bugs aside (the current list has a length rivaling Tolstoy's War and Peace), Steam problems aside ("we are steam. resistance is futile. you will be assimilated"), CK aside (available on release day? a few weeks later? december? january? after you buy a few $50 DLCs?), Bethesda's attitude aside ("just buy our stuff and shut up"), the game is just meh. The replayability curve is like a road runner cliff and the only hope is user-made mods. The moral of the story: newer isn't necessarily better, unless you're living with fanboy blinders on and you only care about flashy graphics. Edited December 10, 2011 by Einarth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vangar Posted December 10, 2011 Share Posted December 10, 2011 Besides the system requirements (I don't fulfill, even though Oblivion runs perfect) is the game itself a "letdown" too? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Einarth Posted December 10, 2011 Share Posted December 10, 2011 (edited) Besides the system requirements (I don't fulfill, even though Oblivion runs perfect) is the game itself a "letdown" too? The main quest is really well done. Graphics are much better than in Oblivion, but at the same time it's a console port so the textures are quite crappy (hence the huge number of HD texture replacements on skyrimnexus.com). The AI is often broken IMO and you only have a fraction of the dialog choices (and stats) you had in Oblivion. The setting (middle of a war) and landscape (antarctic) are well done, which means no variety, boring as hell. The rest of the game is pretty meh and I won't even comment on the bugs. http://i43.tinypic.com/33a9d7r.jpg Edited December 10, 2011 by Einarth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KratosAurion777 Posted December 13, 2011 Share Posted December 13, 2011 Man are you a ... troll ? I don't know what is your pc but with my 2 core 4000 ram 2.5 years old laptop i have skyrim on "high" without any lag . My laptop isn't a gamer one . Maybe it's because i run it from wine and ubuntu . I can't run skyrim in Best graphism . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aurasoma Posted December 13, 2011 Share Posted December 13, 2011 I've had only a few issues with the game so far.Crashes to the desk top have been an Issue from day one. With patch 1.2 I was in the group that saw them every time the game auto saved. But last weekend with 1.3, I found an entire area of the game had become unplayable. For some reason when I follow the river east from Whiterun in the direction of Eastmarsh I get a crash just past the tower/bridge there near the base of the water fall. When I go south or north of the mountains and follow the pass's into the same area I get the same result. A crash to the desk top, I'd avoid this is I could but I've currently got 5 quest in that area that are waiting for me to go and do them.Also I'm not sure if this is going to help, Since I'm running the steam version I did a "Verify Integrity of Game Cache" Really I think its something they botched with 1.3. But Hey, I"ve got 5 quest to do in that area of the game and who knows where else I might find that problem if I wait around for patch 1.4. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dickban Posted December 14, 2011 Share Posted December 14, 2011 Sir i don't think it is the game, i think it is your definiton of above-average that is a bit wacky. I run skyrim on high on my one year old mid-range 13.3" laptop, on an external monitor with 1920x1080 resolution. There are minimum and recommended requirements stated on the game before you buy it, if you don't meet these then buying for pc may not be a good idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts