Skyrim 'mostly a DirectX 9 game,' PC mods could make it to consoles

@Tradio they made so much more money this gen then ever before. Their current success is to consoles.

@Tradio

maybe PC gamers should actually buy games before complaining about developers who cater to the people who actually ... buy their games.

@atrimus

Give us a developer who actually designs games for our system, and doesn't give us half-assed ports.

"Piracy is up. So we're not going to release our game until 6 months after the console version. Then we're going to release a half-assed port, and load it with DRM that limits the installs."

"Our games aren't selling! Pirates! We're not going to release our next game for the pc."

Actual logic used by some developers.

@Tradio It's not a big deal for this, is it? TES games look pretty at release, but it's never been about the graphics, unlike Crysis.

I'm actually for this decision, because maybe it'll mean more stability than the previous games, though I would appreciate DX10 and 11's improvements.

@Tradio

I doubt it has anything to do with leaving the PC behind. I think it has to do with an excuse to hide the fact that they are indeed using a modified Gamebryo engine and an excuse to slack off in development.

@Anticrawl

or you know... the 70 million+ 360s and PS3s that are out there.

no. you're probably right they just want to slack off.

@eat it 70million of those consoles maybe, I own 1 of each, my brother owns 1, 3 friends own one, but we all want skyrim on PC, my faith in my preferred platform is waning because developers refuse to take advantage of the extra room given to them

@Nuisance TES! I would like some milk with my cookies.

@ShadowSoldier89 DICE recently noted that the PC is being held back by consoles, in fact: http://bf3blog.com/2011/04/dice-consoles-are-holding-pc-games-back/

@Babelfish

Just goes to show that power isn't everything if it isn't making you monies, monies!

@Nuisance: The problem is that the software is written inefficiently. DirectX 9 is nothing more but an API in a virtual machine translated to call another API (DirectX 11) in newer Windows versions.

@ShadowSoldier89

a dragon on a computer with DX11 is going to take more time and talent to make than a dragon on a 360. they have to think about whether it's worth it or not. it's not something that can be done with the flip of a switch.

They might have to hire a new artist. They might be able to find a new artist for that in time to meet their deadlines.

@eat it

Or perhaps the developer made famous for cutting corners is cutting corners yet again.

@Babelfish

"He went on, saying that most games are made for the lowest common denominator (i.e. consoles), and that console games are generally ported to the PC with some higher resolution textures."

What does that remind us of?

@atrimus

Wtf are you talking about. There are more PC gamers who buy their games then there are console gamers who buy all their games new. Devs don't profit from used games sales. I in fact have over 80 PC games, from only a year and a half of PC gaming. I highly doubt you buy that many consoles games in the same time period.
Pc gamers got Bethesda to where they are, and again they screw us over. Just like with oblivion.
Console gamers should be getting the port, not Pc gamers. They wouldn't notice the difference of a bad port, like the Pc gamers will. Not to mention it would produce an overall better game.
The game is getting so simple now. Its press a and you win. This is ridiculous. Why can't console gamers handle ANYTHING complex? I played on consoles only for 15 years. So I'm not bashing, and now what I'm talking about.

@atrimus
Tool.

@eat it
Umm, that statement does not make any sense. Why would they need to hire a different artist for the same dragon object unless they want, you know, a different dragon?

The object will still be the same. DX11 is allowing developers more flexibility and putting more features (like tesselation) to the same object so it will look better. They dont have to redesign the dragon unless they want to do that.

If anything, they need to hire a new engineer to work with newer tech (DX11).

@vrait Dude, I can't think of a single person outside of the extremely wealthy or kids who live at home who has dropped over 3K on video games alone in the past year. Regardless of PC or console gamers. That's a metric crap ton of games. In this economy the only thing I can say is that you either A) Live at home rent free, B) Have a very screwed up sense of priorities or C) Super rich and have nothing to spend your money on. You buying 80 games is far from average for any gamer. And one has to wonder how the hell you even play all of those games.

@Predatorian234

You forgot D: Obsessive compulsion of getting bored and seeing games cheap and buying them.

I got my 360 at the end of 09 and since then I've piled up over 130 games.
I've finished maybe 50 of them.

@This Little Man Says His Name Is

Man oh man I wish I had that kind of disposable income. I'm lucky if I get 3 games in a year.

@Drakkenfyre
you have to understand that developers have to balance pleasing their customers with running a legitimate business. Software piracy is a huge issue, and has been for decades.

As early as the 1980's, publishers began to give customers incentive to buy instead of pirate by including exclusive extras with their products(sound familiar?). Nowadays, some publishers are trying to use technology to make piracy impossible. they think the compexity and power of a pc rig will give them sufficient control over their product.

this cannot work because no current computing technology is immune to hacking. computers follow strict rules, but a hacker can just change the rules. PC publishers should stick with what worked, and go back to a strategy that rewards buying.

So, the only practical way of curbing piracy at this point in time is to stick with the concept of rewarding customers who buy instead of pirate. thats one reason why almost every big game that comes out also has a special edition with extra stuff, and some publishers include extras with standard versions of the game, like Mass Effect and the Cerberus Network.

i know all this cuz i wrote a paper on it for my technical writing class. hope this helps put the piracy issue in perspective, and explains why pc gamers seem to be getting the shaft.

@Drakkenfyre
Dice, Bioware, Blizzard

@DarrylKensley

Of course? They have been saying that mods *might* make it to consoles since Morrowind was released. And have they actually followed through yet? Exactly.

@Colin

My thoughts exactly.

The amount of hoop jumping involved to get MS or Sony to let something like that happen on their systems (with no monetary incentive, no less) seems like their biggest hurdle, and it's not going to get out of the way just because Bethesda wants to do it really bad. They've wanted to do it forever but haven't followed through, I doubt it's a problem on their end.

@Colin

Uuuh, Yes?

I know I was using em on Oblivion on my 360

@DarrylKensley

I'm sorry, but you are one billion percent mistaken. There is physically no way to use mods in Oblivion on the Xbox 360. You cannot do it.

Are you thinking of DLC like Horse Armor? Because that load of tripe made it to 360 no problem.

@Colin

Really? Id post a screenshot, but then I dont have the game no more.

I could change the color of the sky, rain, snow ect

Character skin color, could even change character into Daedre.

@DarrylKensley

Then you have a hacked console.

There is no legitimate way to mod oblivion on a console.

@DarrylKensley

I'm dead serious here. It's impossible. You could change the weather in Shivering Isles with an item, and you could do all of the stuff you mentioned on PC, but Microsoft just would not let mods onto the Xbox. I repeat, you are one billion percent mistaken.

@Lucky48

Well, no. It is the console makers' fault, or at least Microsoft. It's the same reason L4D maps are charged for on 360 and TF2 doesn't get updates - Microsoft has a limit on the free content you can provide. They have a really closed system that is hostile to user generated content.

Also keep in mind the PS3 version of Bethesda games has always been the third string console, with the lowest sales and least amount of support. It's hard to justify setting aside development time for something that will only be enjoyed by less than 1/3 of the audience when you could be adding stuff that all of the audience will enjoy.

Also, Move support on Portal 2? Why would Valve even consider it? So far only Sony exclusives have used it, and even those have been hit and miss. Seems like a complete waste of development resources for a multiplatform title.

@Colin

Tell that to games like Burnout Paradise and Super Meat Boy.

They've had a shit ton of content given out for free.
Burnout gives you a 1gig update to the game for free.

@This Little Man Says His Name Is

Yeah, but did you see the hoops SMB had to jump through? They can't use conventional patches, they needed to build an elaborate system using server space in an unintended way. And even then it's just best picks from the dev team, you can't upload whatever level you please.

And Burnout had plenty of paid DLC as well. Microsoft just gets antsy when you try to give away everything for free.

@Colin

I dont wanna take the bait but Ill have to.

Stop being a cock. Realise youre wrong.

I dont have, or have ever had a hack console. You're just wrong, sorry dude. Was a simple USB mod with help from a simple program.

@DarrylKensley

"Unofficial mods cannot be played on the Xbox 360 or PS3. While it is possible to access the Xbox 360 with some programs, it is not possible to add mods since doing so would require creating an Xbox 360 container file, which is only possible if you know the encryption method and private key used to generate the hashed security certificates."
- from the fans at UESP

There are way to edit stats and inventory. That's not mods, that's just hacking a save game, which is fairly easy and might be what you're thinking of.

Supposedly there are illegal ways to run the most basic of mods (but I never found any and I've looked) but you need a modded Xbox to do so. Sorry if being right makes me a cock.

@Draugdraugr Unreal Tournament 3 had mods on the PS3 version. So the PS3 version might have a fighting chance for mods.

@bigwhiteyeti So why can't a game have good gameplay, music etc and good graphics? Especially when they are all done by seperate people?

Oh right. Its because most devs are lazy and don't want to spend resources on something that would only benefit PCs (when consoles couldnt handle it).

@AMonkey

Wait, are you the business? If you were Bethesda, would you care more about a minority of PC elitists with super spec pcs or the mass majority of gamers using a variety of consoles? Which one do YOU think would make you more money? Second question, which one is more likely to give you the resources to make a sequel?

Need I say any more.

@AMonkey Prediction: If you ran a game development studio you would quickly go out of business.

@AMonkey Internet logic: if you don't do what I want, then you're lazy.

@AMonkey You got told!

@Spunky Monkey 190906

I would personally care about making the game the best it can be with the technology available.

It is unalienable fact that hardware from 6 years ago holds back innovation. If I were a developer I'd make my game, then cut what needs to be cut in order for it to run on old hardware, not tailor it FOR the old hardware. It's kind of like building a new supercar only to put square wheels on it.

This kind of business model is what holds back INNOVATION. Aiming for the lowest common denominator gives us more of the same and does not let things stand out.

DICE have the right idea with battlefield 3 - their 100 million dollar marketing campaign notwithstanding - the fact that they're actually calling consoles outdated does their advertising for them! Making a game for better hardware then trimming out things lets developers bleed the consoles absolutely dry for performance. Aiming at a console only lets you look like everything else on it.

@(Unverified)

Outdated though they may be, people need to stop bitching, developers can't bite the fingers that feed them, if the so called outdated consoles are making money, developers will have to deal with it. How many times has a console with godly graphics compared to its rivals flopped? Dreamcast, NeoGeo, Atari 5600, need I go further?

Like I said, graphics means jack shit if people aren't buying into it, as far as I see it, there are who knows how many times over more console owners then there are high spec PC owners, in all honesty, the average PC owner's PC can just about handle Sims 3 and even then it chugs for some. Not everyone has the time or knowledge to put into building a PC, so people need to stop bringing that up as well.

The fact of the matter is that High Spec PC owners are not making the businesses any money or not enough money, the sales of Crysis are a representative, pretty pathetic for modern day standards, in contrast, Smash Brothers sold far more with tremendously less graphical power.

This topic proves that some gamers know everythign about specs but absolutly nothing about business, business gives you those specs, business gives you those high tech games, business gives you the life you live, if it ain't making chaching, it ain't worth shit, simple as, end of discussion.

@(Unverified)

Right, because new light shaders is innovation. Yeah.

@bigwhiteyeti
You claim to be a PC gamer and yet you fail to realize that DX11 also brings a slew of performance optimizations for more modern hardware.

Yeah. Sure. Keep spouting the tired "GRAPHIX AREN'T EVERYTHIN" line. It's true, they aren't. DX11 is more than just graphics, my boy.

@bigwhiteyeti

Why would there be a flamewar? Bethesda never confirmed DX11 support for the game and PC gamers never expected it (and still don't) as most of the underlying technology behind the game is over a decade old; Skyrim's engine may not be Gamebryo per se, but it utilizes much of the same underpinnings. This is stark contrast to Crytek which confirmed that Crysis 2 would be a DX11 showcase six months before the game went gold only to ship the game without a DX11 renderpath and then went on to deny ever saying the game would make use of DX11 in any capacity; it wasn't until PC-centric reviewers tore Crytek to PC and after their official portal was lit up with "Why did you lie to us?" that they announced they were going to release a DX11 patch. I see a pretty clear difference in never promising a feature and confirming a feature that later did not exist in the product at launch while saying, "We have not confirmed such support and have no intention of implementing it in the future."

@ Spunky monkey,
You do realize that Bethesda's PC fanbase is comparable in size to what it has on the Xbox 360 or PS3, right? To dismiss any entire audience that has bought millions of copies as a "minority of PC elitists" seems to be a bit disingenuous in the grand scheme of things, wouldn't you agree? One thing I've never quite understood is the "consoles sell more" argument people like you routinely spout off is that you're comparing the aggregate sales of two platforms to the sales of one. This is akin to someone saying, "Why should a Developer X appeal to PS3 fans, when the Wii and Xbox 360 have more gamers?" That logic is obviously flawed, so why do people get a free pass when they use it against PC gamers? What really annoys me with your comment (actually, your comments in general) is the "super spec PC" bit. As of November 8, 2006 (3 days before the PS3's launch), PC's have had a substantial edge in terms of both hardware performance AND technology in all performance segments but entry level compared to current generation consoles. It isn't too much to ask for developers to start taking advantage of the new technology available to them (that MILLIONS of PC gamers ALSO HAVE). I find it quite odd how console gamers have their torches ablaze and pitch forks sharpened when PC gamers ask developers to use their hardware to an extent further than simply slapping a "PC-DVD ROM" sticker over an Xbox 360 decal; weren't you the same crowd decrying how multiplatform developers were sloppily porting Xbox 360 games over to your PS3s without making any attempt at exploiting the system's potential?

@Spunky Monkey 190906

Also, quit citing Crysis sales as, "teh PC is doomed!1!1!" The game sold 3 million copies, a comparable amount to several critically acclaimed PS3 and Xbox 360 exclusives; you can't say the game was a failure while in the same breath saying Killzone 2 and Uncharted were massive successes.

@jackal

One fanbase as opposed to 3, possibly 4 = less money, I shouldn't need to explain that, it's just common sense. Thirdly, in all your talk about fanbases, you forget that fanbases don't necessarily = sales. What's the point having a massive fanbase if as soon as you change your game slightly, half of that fanbase moan and whine about it and refuse to buy it like half of the planks here moaning about it now. If this is how PC owners react to a little bit of news, I too would start focusing on consoles as well.

And your point about why developer x should make exclusives for PS3 or 360 is absolutly correct, which is why most developers bar first parties have gone multiplayer, you can see that for yourself. Quite often PS3 owners complain that a game going to 360 cripples the game's potential and again, this arguement comes up, money.

I can see the logic in developers pushing the PC to it's full capacity, and hell, I don't care, I'm not a PC enthusiast, so yeah I'd miss out, but to the few who are, it might be great, but have you noticed that hardly if any developer is doing that now, have you ever wondered to yourself why? The fact of the matter is that hardcore pc gaming isn't sufficient enough to keep a business afloat, if it was, circumstances would be different.

Not all hardcore gamers have gaming pcs, far less casual gamers, and casual gamers often bring in the most income if they like something.

So there's your answer, facts and business decisions speak for themselves, I hardly need to explain the industry.

@Spunky Monkey 190906

And just to pinpoint my statment before people jump down my throat:

"The fact of the matter is that hardcore pc gaming isn't sufficient enough to keep a business afloat, if it was, circumstances would be different."

That's talking about 'most' developers, not the casual developers making games like farmville and hundreds of generic MMOs, I'm talking, hardcore gaming developers. For the developers still making money on smaller RTS type games, that's great news, but they are hardly pushing the PC's potential, except for Starcraft, which too wasn't pushing the PC's max potential, just accept that consoles are where the money is, unless you are willing to buy a million copies of each PC game to allow them to push PC to the max, I hardly think that you alone is enough to prove that PC gaming is profitable enough on its own that developers don't need to think about how much more money they could be making by including the consoles.