Textures in Skyrim are fail to accomodate consoles

FWIW, I'm still playing it at midnight.

I guess I was just hoping we wouldn't need another QTP.
 
Game looks pretty good to me. I've seen some media. The PC version looks appreciably better than the console versions but sure, we're going to need texture packs and such to put things over the top as always.,
 
A posted noted in another thread that 'Ultra' actually isn't cranking everything - there is an external-to-the-game setup menu that has a bunch more options you can check off, even from 'Ultra' quality.

So that's good to know, and something to keep in mind. Doesn't LOOK like it improves the texture quality any, but should help with graphics some. Better quality shadows, reflections, etc.
 
High-res texture packs will fix this all up in no time, but as a game artist myself, that screenshot is quite beautiful.
 
KazeoHin said:
High-res texture packs will fix this all up in no time, but as a game artist myself, that screenshot is quite beautiful.
Click to expand...

Still sucks that you have to wait for some modder to go in and fix what should be in the shipping game. Although I guess that's to be expected from Bethesda (and from the <6GB install size).

Edit: There's something that seems "off" about that image. Can't put my finger on it - kinda over-sharpened maybe?
 
Well, there is an issue with a world of this size and actually fleshing out the thousands of surface-types. I would much rather have a game that uses average textures cohesive and artistically relevant than to either have a world filled with a garbled mess of 'just for the hell of it' normal maps (see: gears of war, unreal tournament 3) or a later release date.
 
Forceman said:
Edit: There's something that seems "off" about that image. Can't put my finger on it - kinda over-sharpened maybe?
Click to expand...

I've done a bit of graphic work, and looking the image over, I find a lot of things that are "off":

- No directional light sources, therefore no proper shadows, only the forced shadows on the characters. BUT the shadows don't fit properly because a human brain depends HUGELY on shadows.

-"Painted on" shadows on textures go against the light which also does not make sense. This is a trick which shouldn't be used anymore really, especially with hardware lighting these days.

-Funny thing about the textures, because the textures are low resolution, the ones in the foreground look fuzzy while the ones in the distance are too sharp. This is the reverse of real life. This is a biggie!!!

-Textures look flat with no reflections whatsoever.


This is what I see at a quick glance. If they would just add Ambient Occlusion shadows this would enhance this picture 1000%.
 
TheOneKnownAsMe said:
Oh look, more people mindlessly fixating on minor details that in no way impact gameplay.
Click to expand...

When you pay $500+ for a graphics card, and then $60 for a game, you're goddamn right you're gonna wanna see that you get the performance and image quality you paid for.

Doesn't always work out the way you want it to.

I think that soon enough modders will put out texture packs which will increase the graphics quality for this game soon enough. I could have told you the textures are compressed long before you made this thread simply because of Skyrim's 5.8 GB hard drive space needed. That right there screams texture compression.
 
Yakk said:
I've done a bit of graphic work, and looking the image over, I find a lot of things that are "off":

- No directional light sources, therefore no proper shadows, only the forced shadows on the characters. BUT the shadows don't fit properly because a human brain depends HUGELY on shadows.
Click to expand...

What? There has to be a directional light source in this picture. They would have turned off shadows for specific things though. What you said here is so stupid or ignorant it's obvious you don't know what you are talking about. You remind me of my friend who after we play touch is like: "Yeah, guys all we had to do is rock it up!" and I am like "Dude, it's ruck. Just shut the fuck up.".

Yakk said:
This is what I see at a quick glance. If they would just add Ambient Occlusion shadows this would enhance this picture 1000%.
Click to expand...

I see Ambient Occlusion being used in this picture...
 
Bobthecoolguy said:
What? There has to be a directional light source in this picture. They would have turned off shadows for specific things though. What you said here is so stupid or ignorant it's obvious you don't know what you are talking about. You remind me of my friend who after we play touch is like: "Yeah, guys all we had to do is rock it up!" and I am like "Dude, it's ruck. Just shut the fuck up.".



I see Ambient Occlusion being used in this picture...
Click to expand...

I would really like to borrow your glasses... must make everything else look much better than they are too...lol...
 
Yakk said:
I've done a bit of graphic work, and looking the image over, I find a lot of things that are "off":

- No directional light sources, therefore no proper shadows, only the forced shadows on the characters. BUT the shadows don't fit properly because a human brain depends HUGELY on shadows.
Click to expand...

Even a novice 3D level designer would be able to point out that the directional light-source is off-screen. The shadows for the distant objects match up with the objects in the foreground.

Yakk said:
-"Painted on" shadows on textures go against the light which also does not make sense. This is a trick which shouldn't be used anymore really, especially with hardware lighting these days.
Click to expand...

Those are normal maps, and their shading angle is coherent to the dynamic shadows being cast.

Yakk said:
-Funny thing about the textures, because the textures are low resolution, the ones in the foreground look fuzzy while the ones in the distance are too sharp. This is the reverse of real life. This is a biggie!!!
Click to expand...

This is a limitation with current computer graphics in ALL games: Once the screen-space a given texel occupies is greater than a pixel on-screen, the surface appears 'blurry' or 'pixelated'. Naturally texels in the distance would have a higher chance of taking up < one pixel, as perspective makes distant object seem smaller to the viewer.

Yakk said:
-Textures look flat with no reflections whatsoever.
Click to expand...

Dirt is not relfective.

Wood is not reflective

However, I agree with you that the surface seems too flat especially with modern innovations like Occlusion Parallax mapping and hardware tessellation.

Yakk said:
This is what I see at a quick glance. If they would just add Ambient Occlusion shadows this would enhance this picture 1000%.
Click to expand...

I agree here, either some HBAO or an improvement of the current implementation could do wonders to bring out the detail.
 
Forceman said:
I would argue that, in a game like this, immersion is a key part of the gameplay, and screwed up visuals have a strong impact on immersion.
Click to expand...


I'm not going to have any problems getting immersed in this.
 
There is really nothing they could do graphically to ruin this game for me. Even if it looked exactly the same as Oblivion, I would be extremely happy. Knowing that it's going to look better, I'm overjoyed.
 
Yakk said:
I would really like to borrow your glasses... must make everything else look much better than they are too...lol...
Click to expand...

...Okay...but if there is no directional light source how is this scene being lit?

KazeoHin said:
Even a novice 3D level designer would be able to point out that the directional light-source is off-screen. The shadows for the distant objects match up with the objects in the foreground.
Click to expand...

Interesting Note: Directional lights don't actually have positions :p
 
KazeoHin said:
Even a novice 3D level designer would be able to point out that the directional light-source is off-screen. The shadows for the distant objects match up with the objects in the foreground.
Click to expand...

You are correct, I was going somewhere else with that... and forgot to delete the line.

KazeoHin said:
This is a limitation with current computer graphics in ALL games: Once the screen-space a given texel occupies is greater than a pixel on-screen, the surface appears 'blurry' or 'pixelated'. Naturally texels in the distance would have a higher chance of taking up < one pixel, as perspective makes distant object seem smaller to the viewer.
Click to expand...

Yes I know, having low rez textures just accentuates the problem. Shogun 2 seems to do a great job with close textures from what I have seen of it.
 
Bobthecoolguy said:
...Okay...but if there is no directional light source how is this scene being lit?



Interesting Note: Directional lights don't actually have positions :p
Click to expand...

In reality a directional light source is physically impossible. Directional lights are used to simulate large, powerful light sources in which are positioned at extreme distances relative to the primary environment.
 
Last edited:
KazeoHin said:
In reality a directional light source is physically impossible. Directional lights are used to simulate large, powerful light sources in which are positioned at extreme distances relative to the primary environment. Your argument is an argument, but your argument has no point.
Click to expand...

I know all of that but I wasn't making an argument. :confused:
 
Fail said:
When you pay $500+ for a graphics card, and then $60 for a game, you're goddamn right you're gonna wanna see that you get the performance and image quality you paid for.
Click to expand...

doesn't mean you're entitled to them giving a shit though, about the 1% of us who can or want to afford this kind of hardware. bethsoft doesn't see a dime from these hardware sales, even if they're endorsed by ati/nv. only time you should expect this kind of iq is when they advertise specific engine and physics features that take advantage. this is a multi platform release, wtf did you expect.
 
Since Reddit is a joke for posting anti-Skyrim opinions, maybe you guys here can actually understand what I'm trying to get at.

So I'm playing through Skyrim, the game looks alright, gameplay is impressive, immersion is good, when I notice...hardly any shadows on character models...in a lit room, outside, torch light sources etc. Sometimes there is a retarded shadow with the sun directly over head, but it seems so lacking (cough port cough).

Grass seems so scarce...maybe I was spoiled by Oblivion modding - or just don't remember how bad vanilla Oblivion looked - but the game just feels sub par in the texture quality/LOD department. IM NOT SAYING ITS ABSOLUTE SHIT - to make that clear - it looks fine for a DX9 game on an older engine - but it seems like they could've done a lot more. I'm glad I play and enjoy these kinda games for the story/gameplay.

The UI, fuck the UI. That is all.
 
Digital download copy was 4.3GB. Battlefield 3 was 12GB. That should tell you all you need to know on texture quality.
 
This game is not worth playing on PC for maybe another year. I'll pick it up on 12/12/12. By then, some decent mods, including a big texture pack should come out.

It's still not going to make up for the crappy "Gamebyro with sprinkles on top" engine and the crappy console based textures the modders have to work off from. Everything still looks like mud and the lighting and shadows and yellow glow of Oblivion is still present in many scenes.

The other problem with having to rely on fans to make the game decent for PCs through mods (other than the time and effort), is that bolting on mods is what makes the Gamebyro engine get slower and slower and more and more unoptimized as opposed to the developers designing the engine up to take advantage of better graphics in the first place.
 
In the case of this game, who cares if the game play is good. This isn't like Crysis 2 or Rage where the product is billed as a technical marvel. Even if it doesn't look as good as it could, still looks and runs better than an Xbox so PC still technically gets the best version (provided it's not completely broken).
 
tree stump..


those graphics look as good t me as Gothic 3 graphics looked years ago....
 
MrGuvernment said:
tree stump..


those graphics look as good t me as Gothic 3 graphics looked years ago....
Click to expand...

For real, and Gothic 3 was an amazing game. One you got past how much it pissed you off. I loved the way the Orcs looked in that game and the fact that hey called me Mora :p
 
Ya, short of running it off a raid 0 drive so loading wasnt such crap it had so much potential, too bad it took the community to fix most of it's bugs.

Gothic 3 which is how old? sure not as detailed on the clothing but foliage looks similar.


gothic3_killed_ogre.jpg
 
With the sheer scale of Skyrim, I didn't expect too much from the texture quality (too massive).
That being said, the game installed is 5.6 GB which is ridiculously small these days... I would have accepted 14~20 GB on this one if it meant higher quality textures.

Very noticable, but honestly I didn't expect anything better.
 
Am I the only person who thinks the game looks fine? It's an RPG, and it's not billed like Crysis was, as a game that pushes the technological envelope. It's about story/gameplay and so far the graphics look good to me. The effects and environments are very well done.
 
It looks good I guess but the textures suffer from typical console 'smudginess'. It's like the game has negative anisotropic filtering. :|
 
This is why I'm waiting for mods. I figure that if I can wait several years for a game, I can wait a few extra months for a far better experience. (Not to mention that I will probably pay half the price.)
 
MrGuvernment said:
Ya, short of running it off a raid 0 drive so loading wasnt such crap it had so much potential, too bad it took the community to fix most of it's bugs.

Gothic 3 which is how old? sure not as detailed on the clothing but foliage looks similar.


gothic3_killed_ogre.jpg
Click to expand...


Yeah now that you mention it , the foliage in Skyrim does give off that Gothic 3 feel.

LOL at that picture by the way RAWWR!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top