One of the reasons that Skyrim has such Low Res Textures

[Moikko]

why does it have low quality textures? it doesn't.

what are you talking about?

the world looks pretty to me. you guys are just spoilt.

 

 

It looks pretty, but don't you see how good it looks with some small modders work there is!?

Take a look at the enhanced nightsky mod. Or the water effect mod. Or with the new wooden textures on chairs and barrels mod.

 

They are not huge and i don't think that if u know how to do it that it isn't that hard to do it!

 

We are not spoilt we just know what kind of graphics PC's can handle and what kind of graphics can be made!

[Matth85]

why does it have low quality textures? it doesn't.

What? ... Okay. Go to the pillars in the Jarls castle in Whiterun. Go on. See thoose nice pattern on them, from far away? Yeah. Go closer. Even closer. Look at it now? It's about 5 pixels. I'd say 512x512? When new-gen games hold 1024x1024 - 2048x2048. Totally high res textures there!

 

the world looks pretty to me. you guys are just spoilt.

Yup. We are spoilt for not getting the quality we know we couldve had, since Bethesda like 5 year old consoles. Do you know how much 5 years is in computer-year? Computers today are what 3-4 times better?

[WarKirby3333]

I mean, can somebody please give me ONE good reason why there are consoles today? Just ONE valid reason? .... it limits more than anything.

 

simplicity. normal people don't understand computers. i've worked with tons of them. that "desktop" thingy with all those pictures is confusing. Start button? start what? oh god what is all this text. how do i play my email. where is the email button.

 

when you want to play a game on console, you open the tray, put it in, and it works. every time. usually it just starts up immediately without navigating any menus.

 

when you want to play a game on pc, you start it up, sit through several screens of confusing text about bios's and memory and cpus. then you wait for windows to load. Then you install the game you want to play, usually sitting through a process of 20 minutes or so of more confusing text. Install location? I want to install it on my pc. where is the button for that. Once installed, you fiddle with confusing graphics settings the average person knows nothing about. If you're lucky it works right away, else you might have to update drivers. that's assuming that your pc can even play it at all. Ever seen someone complain about their fancy 3D game not working on a crappy notebook with no video card?

 

 

I'm an IT technician and programmer by profession. I've been at the front lines, dealing with tides of people who watch tv, play sports, go clubbing, sit at home knitting, etc, rather than spending their free time on computers. People who struggle to find the power button and think that the monitor is a computer in itself. People who have never even heard of a "forum". These people make up at least half of the world's population. They are the majority. And they are why consoles exist.

 

it doesn't matter that a pc is better than a console. most people don't understand how or why any kind of computer is different from another. If you ask what kind of pc they have, they'll say "a white one". It doesn't matter that pcs can use joypads, because their pc didn't come with one so they have no idea it exists. It doesn't matter that their pc can run through their TV. Because adverts on TV mention nothing about this, and show only consoles being used in such a manner.

 

You might call these people stupid. Certainly, some of them are, a large part of the world is stupid. But for the most part, they're just "not computer people". Their lives haven't exposed them to much technology. The simple fact is, we are geeks. And we do not represent the population at large.

[WarKirby3333]

pillars in the Jarls castle in Whiterun. Go on. See thoose nice pattern on them, from far away? Yeah. Go closer. Even closer. Look at it now? It's about 5 pixels. I'd say 512x512? When new-gen games hold 1024x1024 - 2048x2048. Totally high res textures there!

 

Here's how a bethesda artist would answer that question :P

 

The pillars? why are you looking at the pillars? we put them at the side of the room for a reason. Do you notice how there's no torches on the sides of the room? the lack of light is designed to draw your attention away from there, and up towards the centre of the room. Have you even looked at Jarl Balgruuf's face? The pillars are low res because we could make them low res. Because pillars are background scenery that isn't important. You're supposed to walk past them.

 

We put the texture detail into the things you really look at. Like your own hands, weapons and armor you have, other NPCs, and certain parts of buildings, such as doors, which you're likely to look directly at. We have a texture budget and a framerate target for every location, and we cut corners where it won't be missed, so we can put extra detail into the things that matter. This is how 3D art works.

 

 

 

 

Yup. We are spoilt for not getting the quality we know we couldve had.

Well,isn't that the definition of spoilt? You wouldn't be missing it if you'd never seen it before. you're unhappy with what you have because you've had, or seen something better and want that consistently. Personally i think overall the textures are noticeably sharper than oblivion, especially people's faces and skin. I could see reason for complaint if graphical quality had gone down, but it hasn't. and oblivion was widely recognised as a fantastic looking game in its time.

 

 

Do you know how much 5 years is in computer-year?

i personally hold that computer graphics have long since entered the point of diminishing returns, a few years ago. the late PS2 era had graphics that, to my mind are "good enough" for every game that will ever be made in the future. i'd rather see better AI and larger quantities of actors, objects, etc. YMMV

 

 

[WarKirby3333]

why do i love this thread so much o.o

i should go do something more productive :P

[Matth85]

The simple fact is, we are geeks. And we do not represent the population at large.

Calling people with knowledge of PC "geek" was fine about 30 years ago. Today, everybody knows how to use a PC. However, the consoles are so hyped up the Xbox and Playstation fanboys don't think for themself.

I know of my own generation that everybody is rather good with a computer. So anybody at 18-20.

 

I will agree most people don't know enough about a PC. Heck, I barely know more than I need to know to work 3d! RAM and graphic card. Yet I can easily google for 2 minutes, and find a PC worth the same as my Xbox, but is 25 times better.

 

You could say consoles are more casual than PC. I don't believe that though. Let's say Xbox games worked with our PCs. You turn on, you log on, you put in the disc, you got it plugged in to the pc, you got a USB plugged in for a wireless controller. Suddently the screen flashes up and the famous "XBOX", or whatever, jumps up. It's no worse.

 

It is simly akward today to use consoles. You limit people from certain games, which could limit sales. If Sony started to make PCs, instead of consoles, we might get somewhere, for instance. That way you know that the new SOny PC is a good gaming PC for Playstation games! It could even host special "Playstation Software" to play the games. Crackable, of course, but so is a Playstation 3.

 

My point being:

 

1) "Geek" is what I call somebody with:

A) A hobby gaming. Also called a "gamer", but I prefer "geek". I am sorry, people who don't join me out on the city a Friday night because they are going to "game" are idiots in my book. I know a few of thoose sadly.

B) Somebody with extensive knowledge of a PC. Know what the components, and generally what each thing means. I see nothing wrong with that, but I will never understand it myself. I know RAM and Graphic Card. Anything else is beyond me.

 

2) Consoles are so outdated today. You could easily have PCs made by Microsoft/Sony with the same colors as the Xbox/PS3 and any non-PC people could buy it. Now everybody got every game, increasing sales for console-specific games and the quality of the games will always be as good as possible, not gimped by 5 year old consoles.

 

I personally own about every gaming console there have been since I was old enough to play. Which means from PS1, N64, some other random thing my parents had and a gameboy non-color all the way up to the next-gens, exept the new DS. I realize what a waste it's been.

 

We put the texture detail into the things you really look at. Like your own hands, weapons and armor you have, other NPCs, and certain parts of buildings, such as doors, which you're likely to look directly at. We have a texture budget and a framerate target for every location, and we cut corners where it won't be missed, so we can put extra detail into the things that matter. This is how 3D art works.

Problem with the last statement: I am a 3d artist. I know how everything works. You know what? You don't "cut corners" if you don't need to. As of now, the low-res is not "cutting corners". I bet you they made the texture as 1024x1024, and scaled it down since the consoles are so retardedly bad.

 

Well,isn't that the definition of spoilt?

If I knew Bethesda would have given me the same texture res if there were no console, then that would be called "spoilt", yes. However, we knew it was better at one point, and scaled down because of consoles. So not as much.

 

i personally hold that computer graphics have long since entered the point of diminishing returns, a few years ago. the late PS2 era had graphics that, to my mind are "good enough" for every game that will ever be made in the future. i'd rather see better AI and larger quantities of actors, objects, etc

As a 3d artist, I spend more time looking at a rock than most do playing a game. So personally, I want better graphic. If I want good games, I play old games. If I want amazingly beautifull, I play newer games. Would Skyrim be good with Daggerfall grahics? Hardly.

 

 

P.S. Yes, I hate people even trying to call me a "geek" or a "gamer". My definition of both tells me I am not, and I got a few friend who is both. I am afraid to be seen as that. It is... sad. Talking about games and computer hardware in your sparetime? Geez, that is sad in my eyes. My point is: I am sorry if I come off very ... harsh.

P.S.S. Too many quotes, and a too long post. This is getting confusing! 2 replies into 1 topic is bad. Sorry for the rather... confusing layout!

[Karasuman]

 

i personally hold that computer graphics have long since entered the point of diminishing returns, a few years ago. the late PS2 era had graphics that, to my mind are "good enough" for every game that will ever be made in the future. i'd rather see better AI and larger quantities of actors, objects, etc. YMMV

 

This is true. That is one reason why there is a much larger difference between Morrowind vs Oblivion's stock graphics as opposed to Oblivion vs Skyrim's (I still hold that Oblivion's maxed shadows look better than Skyrim's.) Yes, part of it is because of consoles, but Bethesda is also quite aware that no matter how much time and money they pump into the graphical end of things, a large portion of PC users will be using player-made textures within a year of release anyways, maybe sooner.

 

While I can certainly understand this from a business perspective, I still believe there should be more graphical settings that could be adjusted on the PC. The current amount of options is very underwhelming.

Edited December 5, 2011 by Karasuman

[andersonmatt1125]

Official 4GB Skyrim coming next week!

 

http://gamerfront.net/2011/12/skyrim-1-3-patch-released-on-steam-coming-soon-to-ps3-and-xbox-360/14750

[TheOutlander]

Official 4GB Skyrim coming next week!

 

http://gamerfront.net/2011/12/skyrim-1-3-patch-released-on-steam-coming-soon-to-ps3-and-xbox-360/14750

:blink:

 

Never thought Bethesda would add it in officially. Now I wonder seeing as the vanilla (patched) game will be able to handle them, if we'll see an official release of higher res textures... ;)

 

Also I am severely disappointed in all you folk who dragged my topic down the console argument path. :down:

[Masternaut]

If you want the real reason Skyrim isn't living up to it's potential you will find it sitting under millions of people's TVs with a big ugly green X on it.

 

 

This, its too bad I am an owner of one of these ugly things. I wish everyday I had a PS3.

 

If you would just save your money you can make a good pc for 1000. Consider the xbox you bought plus the games controllers xbox live and probaby a tv and maybe a sound system... you could have a pc and no more shite xbox.