Oblivion to Skyrim is a much, much... much... bigger jump than the Uncharted series.

@Holdmedownma2008

What?

Oblivion:
http://students.guildhall.s...

Skyrim:
http://i751.photobucket.com...

@Holdmedownma2008

What?

Oblivion:
http://fc09.deviantart.net/...

Skyrim:
http://cdn.gamerant.com/wp-...

Technically, it's not a huge jump, but Skyrim's art is much more consistent in quality than Oblivion's and the direction is better too, imo.

Are you guys serious? It is only a big jump cause oblivion on pc AND consoles looked like ass! Glitches galore and the faces come on? 4 voice actors?

I know the game will be excellent but I just hope it doesn't glitch left and right. I'm getting it on pc btw. I hope they sort out the gamepad support cause the first one sucked in that regard.

@nycredude

What?
I didn't know Arena had gamepad support.

It should look significantly better on PC, but it will still be an awesome game on consoles.

Console versions -> awesome game
PC version -> awesome game with even better graphics and animation

Win-win situation for everyone.

It's a pity I can't somehow collect trophies while playing the PC version.

O well, guess I'll get both.

Yeah, it might look great on YOUR PC's. That, of course, is the catch. At least with consoles you can be guaranteed that what looks good on one PS3/360 is going to look the same on another PS3/360. You don't have to worry about it. With PC games I'm always left wondering "Ok, will mine look ok? Do I have to turn off half the features to run at a decent frame rate? Can I run the game at all?"

The majority of us don't have PC gaming rigs so it's always a crap shoot wondering if a game is going to turn out ok. I don't have to worry about that on my consoles, and I'm all for no hassle gaming.

reason to get it on pc is not only better graphics but.

+ faster load times
+ no pop up
+ Way way better graphics
+ 60+ frame rate

and best of all

MODS

can't wait for the realistic arrow mod that makes arrows hurt depending on where they hit and you can make people bleed out from arrows etc.

@darkride666

I know lol, these PC gamers just dont get it.

With console we know its gonna be low res, 20-25fps, no mods, we know what are getting :)

With PC so much uncertainty i mean sure 3-4year old pcs may play this at max settings but thats uncertain.

Most of us console gamers would rather take a confirmed low configuration with no options to change things, then say a high to max setting for a 3-4year old PC. Just soo much uncertainity and options it almost hurts my brains.

do bears shit in the woods?

Someone should do a video showing which one takes the longest to start playing.

i guess since the debate that ps3 has better graphics than the 360 some buttsore people simply switched to PC better than consoles to feel better about themselves.

Are we gonna have a "this game" is better on pc from now on, on EVERY new game that comes out, cause there's been one of these articles every other day since about a couple of months ago.

@BulletToothtony

I've been confused as to why the disparity in graphics need to be pointed out. I'm not sure why anyone would be surprised that the PC version has better graphics. The BF3 submissions were especially strange.

Making a gaming rig that outperforms a console isn't exactly hard. Just because there's a max setting, doesn't mean you need to reach it.

Most of the settings on the PC version will make it a nicer looking game than on the console. The only person to blame about not having a gaming PC over a console is the person complaining.

"It's not really a surprise, but the 360 version is lead platform, so you wouldn't expec the PC version to be THAT much better, just the extra rez etc "

A constantly changing and upgrading platform not much better than a static hardware platform?

Ugh...what happened to logic.

"Not sure what you mean by mods will rape everything else. Are you suggesting that Joe Blow wanna be is a better developer than the developers themselves?"

Graphics wise, yes.

Morrowind:
http://www.youtube.com/watc...

Oblivion:
http://tes.ag.ru/oblivion/m...
http://www.tesnexus.com/ima...

LMAO A console lead platform on a Bethesda game! LMAO, who do you think this is?! Bioware?!

"Funner" ... where did you get this from?

@vil311

Gamepads don't work very well on pc. Go and install the motionjoy drivers for your ds3 and play two games like Bioshock and Call of Duty 4 with the ds3 on your pc.

Then after that, go play those two games on a ps3 with a ds3. There is an extremely huge difference. Gamepads are only a viable alternative to consoles on CERTAIN games, and when I say certain, I mean very very few. There are only a few games in which it works PROPERLY.

@Merivigian Yea because my 27" 1080p monitor is soo 12". Also, 27" from 2-3' away looks bigger that 48" from 8-10' away imo... You have have a way larger FOV and still feel natural.

"Anyway, you obviously don't have a gaming PC, because if you did, you wouldn't complain about lack of controller support for a first person shooter. In other words, you don't know what you're talking about."

So just because I prefer using a controller for FPS, that means I don't know what I'm talking about? I can't prefer a different method of controls other than keyboard and mouse? Are you really THAT offended that people have different tastes and opinions as you? Holy crap dude, get some help.

And yeah, I do have a gaming PC. It's not top of the line, but it's enough to run most of my games at high, and I've been buying a sh*t ton of games from steam on the sales, so yeah, I do know what I'm talking about. Add me on steam and look at the games I've purchased if you want proof, my username is the same as my steam name.

I also recently bought a 360 gamepad, and while it works better for more games, it's still NOWHERE near even close to working properly for even 30% of PC games.

So your whole argument about simply using a gamepad on a PC is bullsh*t, as it's not a viable alternative to consoles.

Until developers implement native and proper controller support (has to feel the exact same playing with a pad on both console and pc, which right now it doesn't), then I and a lot of other people wont consider switching to PC primarily.

Controllers simply don't work very well on the majority of PC games. You may think I'm wrong for wanting to use a controller to play FPS (even though I'm not, as controls are entirely subjective, but I wouldn't expect someone as immature, disrespectful and ignorant such as you to understand that concept), but if I'm to switch over to PC, which I really wish I could as it has a lot of advantages over consoles, then every PC game (barring the RTS/MMO genres) must have PROPER controller support, and as I will repeat myself again, proper means using a controller on the pc version must feel EXACTLY THE SAME as using it on the console version.

@Moragami

I prefer the DS3 for FPS's, I like the greater sense of immersion.
Your statement is immature and childish, "only a retard would try to play FPS's on PC with a Playstation controller"

echoing vickers's sentiments, when I see a comment like that I know that I'm dealing with a particularly immature individual... I have been trying to get motionjoy to work with battlefield BC2 on PC for the best part of an hour now, and it sucks... Its not a simple task especially if your 64bit, you have to disable force driver option at start up..... even then the analog sticks fail to work.. A PC is not = all controllers. If you want to play with a PS3 controller at least, just get on PS3.

I prefer a gamepad for FPS's, why? because I find it more immersive.

"Anyway, you obviously don't have a gaming PC, because if you did, you wouldn't complain about lack of controller support for a first person shooter. In other words, you don't know what you're talking about."

Maybe if you'd try using a DS3 on most games you would see the problem at hand, but instead you judge through your pre twisted pathetic ideals.

You sure you didn't mean "more funner".

my pc screen is 24" and i find it almost too big because im so close to it...with a pc you don't need a 40" screen but if i really wanted to i could hook up my pc to my 46" 1080P HD Plasma Tv but i like the way my pc is set up the only thing i would change is get a better chair and not a wooden one...but i have a job so thats next on my list..

FPS titles with a DualShock 3... ugh... what a broken concept. PC gamer here. If I had to use any controller for my PC, it would be a 360 controller, or nothing at all.

Also, yes. You can easily plug in a PC to a gargantuan TV. You know what's funny about doing that? Your console version on the TV will run at 720p or less native, and have it upscaled to 1080p, while the PC will have it at native 1080p on your TV.

@arnon-I used to game exclusively on PC when it came to shooters and used a keyboard and mouse for years but the thing is I moved to console for shooters because K/M ISN'T immersive for me anymore AND on consoles everyone has the same tech and, by and large, uses the same control input resulting in a better test of skill and a fairer test of skill.

Would I murder EVERYONE if I used a mouse? Yes. Yes, but just because an input is most effective doesn't mean it's the BEST. I got very suick of never knowing if I won or lost purely because my mouse was worse or better than the next guys or whether the other guy had painted out the backgrounds to highlight enemy players and so on.

For SP games I also prefer using a pad these days(the only time I use a mouse is playing TF2 on PC)where it makes sense and that's most shooters to be frank because, again, a mouse is TOO effective and with it aiming on two planes gives my gaming a very artificial feel(for me)so it's not a case of someone being some kind of noob for wanting to use a pad.

Also, I've used a DS WAY more than a 360 pad(which I don't like much) so why must I use a pad I don't like to please you?

I keep a rig because I like to keep up with what#s available and possible but i also like to get lost in my games and, for me, that usually improves with a pad and as I also work a lot at my ONE desktop I diobn't always want to game on it AND the missus dioesn't like it invading the living room and as such I can't hook mine up to a big enough screen to sit back and relax like I can with the consoles-and I wouldn't miss Brawl,wouldn't miss Gears and wouldn't miss Uncharted or Wipeout or any of the other console only series I love just because I have to use a pad.

I just think PC gamers let themselves down with this thought that the only right way to play any game with a gun in it is with K/M when it isn't true. In terms of fairness and a test of your own skill it's misleading on PC and I don;'t find a mouse as immersive even IF some of that is down to it making human leads seem superhuman ion what they can do-a victim of the input's own quality in a way. It's not like console only gamers laugh at PC gamers who don't use a pad for fighters or platformers, now is it?

@mastiffchild

I could not have put it better, my feelings exactly.

I Love gaming on my pc but the kb/m hinders my immersion a lot of the time. For me that's more important.

"I could not have put it better, my feelings exactly.

I Love gaming on my pc but the kb/m hinders my immersion a lot of the time. For me that's more important."

Same here. With a controller, I forget that I'm holding a controller and get completely immersed in the game I'm playing.

With a mouse and keyboard however, I'm ALWAYS reminded that I'm using a mouse and keyboard, and if you lose your left hand position on the keyboard, you either have to look back down at your keyboard or feel around for that little nub that sticks out of the F key so you can reorient yourself, which kills the immersion even more (and yeah, I know how to type without looking and that crap).

the ram can be used as one so its 512MB same as 360 people just a lil more work at best for developers

IMO sony should of gave the ps3 at least 512 system 256 video, it would have been the biggest edge over the 360. PS3 released a year later and im pretty sure the system ram was cheaper by then.

So microsoft & sony stop bein cheap with the damn ram it better be plenty next gen.

Actually ps3 is limited in that anything pushing 256 mb of ram can't be done. It means 360 can put out larger amounts of memory while you have to split it in half on ps3

@Cee773

Your right about the RAM, 512MB is 512MB.

But the system RAM in the PS3 is XDR RAM. That is already more expensive than DDR3 RAM and is much faster.

EDIT: System RAM being 256MB of the total 512MB.

@briang

You do realise that the System Ram on PCs is not used for any graphical tasks. Its the Ram on the GPU thats used for graphical stuff.

A 4 year old GPU like 8800GTX which launched along with the PS3 has a memory bandwidth of around 90GB/s.

The Cell is much talked about for its graphics ability, now please realise the Cell must use XDR RAM for its graphics. XDR on the PS3 rated at about 25GB/s.

Now compare that to the 8800GTX from 4 years back and we infact come to a realisation that XDR ram for Graphics is infact very slow.

8800GTX infact came with DDR3 RAM. Conclusion XDR isnt really faster then DDR3. Graphics memory specifications do not equal system memory specifications, Hence we note when DDR3 is used on Graphics cards dating back to the time when PS3 was launched DDR3 was infact much much faster then XDR.

You just had to get the consolites started on the tech-talk, didn't you?

You're better off having a discussion about rocket science with a 4 year old.

CLEAR UP!

PS3 has a combined 512 mb of ram

half of this can be used for graphics and half can be used for other tasks.

Xbox has 512 mb of ram

The developer can choose to split this in whatever ratio he chooses.