Elder Scrolls 5:Skyrim
- Thread starter Evilknightz
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
- Status
Can't they hurry the **** up and release an alpha or something? I'm dying with longing here.
Yeah, I remember that. Skipped it on account of not wanting to get my hopes up back then. Seeing as it was still somewhat uncertain whether they'd be able to finish at the time.
Sound Chaser
Grandmaster Knight
Anyone know if they have made any progress with quests yet? I don't think I'm going to play it until they've finished quests, because I've done enough walking-around in that world already.
It's really cool to see my favourite game updated to 2006 graphics.
PoisonCourtesan
Count
2006 graphics = best graphicsDocm30 said:
At least back then they actually gave time to making games atmospheric.
I don't understand the constant desire for better graphical fidelity. IMO the last gen's graphics are entirely fine. I'd much prefer the extra performance afforded by new machines to be used elsewhere instead. Like having hundreds of characters on the screen at the same time, for instance. I wonder if Bethsoft made Oblivion again now, for the new consoles, would they have the battle of Bruma actually be an epic battle with thousands of troops like it's supposed to be? Or would they just have a dozen dudes like the original game has, only better looking?
Ringwraith #5 said:
Well, the hope for better graphical fidelity is mainly an immersion thing. People like the idea of it almost 'feeling' like real life, as if they were actually there. Which is why Virtual Reality has always been a dream of most gamers. The better it looks, the more realistic (and I used that term to mean in terms of objective quality, irrelevent of art style), then the easier it is to put yourself there. It's thing like simulated physics can add a whole tonne to immersion. Seeing sand blow as you walk in a desert or a fire flickering or natural looking fauna can look amazingly beautiful these days, and it can create immersion the likes of ancient sprite-sheet flickering flames or billboarded units never could.
It's just a shame most developers still don't know how to create an atmosphere with all this fancy tech, and it seems to be used exactly the bloody same in every game. Some don't seem to be able to hold back. WE CAN USE BLOOM, SO WE MUST. WE CAN USE BROWN FILTERS, SO WE WILL. And they try to cram all this **** in without thinking about it. See: Rome 2 or Skyrim. One was orange and the other was blue. It sucked in both cases.
The problem with the trade off that you suggest is that in games where millions of people aren't required on screen, there will be huge graphical fidelity. So you'll be playing this reinvented Bruma battle with thousands of people, but they'll all look like
and then you'll look at games which soldiers whos face look like
and you'll think, "Why can't all these thousands of people look like and feel like people?"
Saying that, I am perfectly ok with the trade-off of older graphics to performance playing epic battles and such. Graphics are weird for me. I like them subjectively based on art style, but I want the fidelity of that art style to be objectively good, unless its something like Papers, Please where the low fidelity adds to the atmosphere. Bethsoft's artstyle is just so generic and boring that it requires any form of high quality fidelity to make up for it.
tl;dr I just rambled a tonne of **** unrelated to your point. I am happy with older graphics but I am pleased and excited by the idea of pushing the boundaries of graphic fidelity.
I've got a daedric invasion overhaul mod for Oblivion which makes the battle of Bruma feel a bit better. Still just about fifty NPCs per side but damn it if it doesn't make a hell of a difference.
I'm a huge stickler for simulated physics as well. That's part of why I don't get this drive for ever more polygons and ever higher res textures. Yeah, okay, the guy in the second picture looks very good. Not realistic per se, he's way too... crisp for that, somehow. But even if you could make an insanely high fidelity character model and a rendering engine that produces something indistinguishable from a photograph, how does it look in motion? That's the big thing for me. How does his face move? How do his clothes move? The problem with graphical realism is that it's way easier to make a realistic model than to realistically animate it, so usually you end up with good looking models that move ever so slightly strange. And the more realistic the model, the more jarring any imperfection in animation becomes. If a cartoony or low-fidelity model moves a bit weird, it's not a big deal. If a realistic model moves a bit weird, you end up in Uncanny Valley Noire. That's why I'd prefer lower graphical fidelity and not entirely realistic art styles and go for quantity instead. In fact, I personally find much more immersion in unrealistic art style graphics with natural movement (typically enabled via physics simulation of some kind) than in realistic graphics with stiff and unnatural animation. For me, it's all about the movement.Vieira said:Well, the hope for better graphical fidelity is mainly an immersion thing. People like the idea of it almost 'feeling' like real life, as if they were actually there. Which is why Virtual Reality has always been a dream of most gamers. The better it looks, the more realistic (and I used that term to mean in terms of objective quality, irrelevent of art style), then the easier it is to put yourself there. It's thing like simulated physics can add a whole tonne to immersion. Seeing sand blow as you walk in a desert or a fire flickering or natural looking fauna can look amazingly beautiful these days, and it can create immersion the likes of ancient sprite-sheet flickering flames or billboarded units never could.
It's just a shame most developers still don't know how to create an atmosphere with all this fancy tech, and it seems to be used exactly the bloody same in every game. Some don't seem to be able to hold back. WE CAN USE BLOOM, SO WE MUST. WE CAN USE BROWN FILTERS, SO WE WILL. And they try to cram all this **** in without thinking about it. See: Rome 2 or Skyrim. One was orange and the other was blue. It sucked in both cases.
The problem with the trade off that you suggest is that in games where millions of people aren't required on screen, there will be huge graphical fidelity. So you'll be playing this reinvented Bruma battle with thousands of people, but they'll all look like
and then you'll look at games which soldiers whos face look like
and you'll think, "Why can't all these thousands of people look like and feel like people?"
Saying that, I am perfectly ok with the trade-off of older graphics to performance playing epic battles and such. Graphics are weird for me. I like them subjectively based on art style, but I want the fidelity of that art style to be objectively good, unless its something like Papers, Please where the low fidelity adds to the atmosphere. Bethsoft's artstyle is just so generic and boring that it requires any form of high quality fidelity to make up for it.
tl;dr I just rambled a tonne of **** unrelated to your point. I am happy with older graphics but I am pleased and excited by the idea of pushing the boundaries of graphic fidelity.
Yeah, sure there's going to be a trade-off between fidelity and quantity. But that's expected, isn't it? I mean... when people play Dynasty Warriors, they expect and accept that the soldiers aren't going to look like that CoD dude, don't they? Or whatever game he's from, I don't even know. Or care.
That guy is from CoD? That'll be why the textures on his clothing is ****e. I just picked the first decent looking face I could find on google images.
I agree with everyone you said there, really. Animation is key. Animations have been getting better, but unless it's a highly sequenced cinematic thing like Ryse or they just have a huge budget to make really good looking animation blending such as in Assassins Creed, but there is still pretty poor on the lower budget end of the scale. I honestly think Assassin's Creed series has set the benchmark for in-game animations, because they are fantastic, from the running and parkour to the fighting animations (if we forget about how simple and boringly repetitive the combat is for a second). I also remember when I first saw Crysis, and I was like, "whoooaaaaaa", that looks amazing, and the way the plants move when you walk through them and sway in the wind. It just felt amazing to witness.
However, I don't see why we can't focus on both movement and graphical fidelity - it tends to be a job done separately in most studios.
I agree with everyone you said there, really. Animation is key. Animations have been getting better, but unless it's a highly sequenced cinematic thing like Ryse or they just have a huge budget to make really good looking animation blending such as in Assassins Creed, but there is still pretty poor on the lower budget end of the scale. I honestly think Assassin's Creed series has set the benchmark for in-game animations, because they are fantastic, from the running and parkour to the fighting animations (if we forget about how simple and boringly repetitive the combat is for a second). I also remember when I first saw Crysis, and I was like, "whoooaaaaaa", that looks amazing, and the way the plants move when you walk through them and sway in the wind. It just felt amazing to witness.
However, I don't see why we can't focus on both movement and graphical fidelity - it tends to be a job done separately in most studios.
There's one feature that caught my attention over the past few years that I first noticed in GTA 4. I can't quite think of what it's called, but it involves procedurally animating characters based on their environment. That's why Niko's legs kinda adjust accordingly to fit with where he's standing on a ledge and such.
That's where animation needs to move. Mo-cap is nice and all, but eventually you're going to notice the transition between animation sequences.
The next big thing to fix is 3d model clipping. Particularly on clothes and carried gear.
That's where animation needs to move. Mo-cap is nice and all, but eventually you're going to notice the transition between animation sequences.
The next big thing to fix is 3d model clipping. Particularly on clothes and carried gear.
Oh yeah, that stuff's awesome. It's the Euphoria animation software package thingy. Lots of games have that these days, though. Or something similar. Even Skyrim. Tomb Raider makes particularly good use of that and other interesting techniques. And yeah, animation blending is totally the way of the future. Watch some of the development videos for Overgrowth. The dynamic animation stuff in that is pretty damn amazing.Splintert said:
Yeah, it's ****ing frustrating, I just want to play the **** out of it.
- Status