[squarejawhero]

Nothing to do with it. People can criticise but just slagging it off for no good ****ing reason just pisses me off, as I spent money on it and don't think a lot of stuff people have posted has been very fair nor having any grounding in reality.

On a similar note, if I criticise a AG I haven't played people are all over me on that - and rightly so, which is why I've stopped doing it. Same with me and if people have made a comment based on third-hand or peering over someones shoulder for five minutes in a store. I don't care if someone prefers the design of Fear to Condemned, taking SD's recent conflagration with me as an example, but to say Fear is technologically superior when Condemned does more technically with the same engine is just, well, factually wrong.

[squarejawhero]

... oh, and sounds like you weren't an original Morrowind purchaser, otherwise you'd know the issues I'm on about! Believe me!

[Once A Villain]

Well, say what you will, but I'm on the "very disappointed" bandwagon. I was going to get this game for XBox 360 anyway, but given this bad news I figured that the PC version would at least have the dynamic soft shadows as an option. I think it's pretty bad that they don't offer it for PC users who spend a lot on their systems and expect to see some results. Dynamic soft shadows add A LOT to a game in terms of atmosphere and immersion. It's hard to go back after experiencing them. A few months ago I was watching Oblivion clips at IGN. There's a sequence where the player can swing a chain and it creates these spectacular, realistic shadows and I'm going, "Wow. The shadows just add so much..." Now, they will add nothing because Bethesda has decided we can't have them...

[squarejawhero]

Lets wait and see what Bethesda say before we panic because the chains don't cast shadows .

[artwking4]

Originally Posted by squarejawhero

Lets wait and see what Bethesda say before we panic because the chains don't cast shadows .

I'm just happy that they move! I mean, that's so freaking awesome!!!

[Once A Villain]

Originally Posted by squarejawhero

Lets wait and see what Bethesda say before we panic because the chains don't cast shadows .

Hey, I know it sounds trivial squarejaw, but you play enough games to know how much dynamic soft shadows can improve the whole immersion factor. A year or two ago, I wouldn't have cared about the lack of the shadows. This is 2006 though. After all the fancy PC graphics I've gotten used to in the last year or so, it's hard to go back. Even the Source engine feels a bit dated to me already because of the lack of dynamic shadows.

Believe me, I know this could easily come off as sounding like a trivial issue, and the person saying it can seem spoiled or some such... Yet, the fact is, presentation is becoming more important in games and with stuff like Oblivion we all dream of exploring this big, fantastic world and becoming a part of it. We are at a point in time where people can say, "Oh please, they're just shadows, don't be lame!" But they add a lot more than most people think. Would any of you want the best graphics of our time to look like Super Nintendo? No. In another year or two ALL games will have dynamic soft shadows, and everyone will then be in agreement with what I'm saying right now.

[squarejawhero]

http://www.elderscrolls.com/forums/i...owtopic=226493

Here's some good damn reasons as to why they aren't doing it straight from the horses mouth. And they're worthwhile reasons too. Essentially they've turned off the original system for speed and interaction as the previous shadow system slowed everything down and would've meant no world objects.

Every piece of food, every plate, bowl, cup, fork, knife, the books, scroll, soul gems, gold coins, and winebottles, plus everything on the shelves and table in the background, is an object that you can pick up. You can read the books, you can eat the food or combine it to make potions, drink the wine, or sell all of it. Or you can take it somewhere else and put it in a pile. You can drag the items around, you can use telekinesis to manipulate them, you can hit them with your weapon, or you can fire an area effect spell at them and they'll all go flying.

OR, we could change it so that the objects are static -- there's no interaction, they're fixed in place. Instead of an apple in a bowl for example, you'd see a "bowl of apples" object that you could never move, that would act as a container and always looked full of apples even if you took all of the apples out. Either that or there's nothing there but static, non-interactive objects, and we only allow you to place items from your inventory into containers and not into the world. Because that's the type of thing we'd have to do -- on PC or on Xbox 360 -- to allow everything to cast shadows of their own.

So which is more important to you? Shadows on everything, or lots of stuff to interact with, take, drop, use, buy or sell?

The shadows being changed isn't the X360 was to slow or vice-versa, it was because neither platform could run the shadows well.

[squarejawhero]

BTW if you read the official line, I'm willing to bet money it's programming, not hardware, that's the issue. Two seperate shadow systems on top of Radiant AI and a fully functioning RPG? What, people want cream with that? Get over it! Can't expect this kind of leap in one gen straight off the bat. It's enough there's an entire country to explore, with towns and caves, then there's the enemies and combat, the trade and interaction... all this comes first above shadowing... and the shadowing isn't being completely removed either.

Hell, I'd love it if they could manage it. But they can't and chances are, even with the option ON you wouldn't be able to use it for a good while without the game chugging because of programming issues, not hardware being unable to do it. Suck it in.

[Once A Villain]

Ok so...Bethesda has incompetent programmers. John Carmack wouldn't settle for this even if he did make games where you can pick everything up and interact with everything.

Look, I'll still play the game, but it's kinda like Fable. Promises, hype, videos that show the promises and hype in motion, etc. Then the inevitable "scale back". I hate that progression with a passion.

[squarejawhero]

It's not that big a deal, seriously. The game will still be the same. I'll admit being a little bit disappointed, but to be honest the baby looks quite comfortable and the bathwater's rather warm. Plus the drop may kill it as I'm several stories up... baby brains can be messy!

RE John Carmack, I wouldn't mind if the gameplay lived up to the hype caused by the graphics.

edit - and I wouldn't compare what Doom 3 does to what Bethesda are trying to achieve. When it comes to the crux, without shadows it'll still be the most complex RPG out there in what it attempts to do. Thats a jump in itself.

[Once A Villain]

Originally Posted by squarejawhero

When it comes to the crux, without shadows it'll still be the most complex RPG out there in what it attempts to do. Thats a jump in itself.

MMORPGs are more complex and more fun in my opinion, but if you mean in terms of graphics and object interaction, then you're probably right. Everquest 2 does look quite great at max settings though (no pics show it at max settings).

I had to quit playing Everquest 2 because it's too addictive (I still sort of miss that damn game after stopping 8 months ago), but MMORPGs I find to be so much better than single player RPGs. Oh well, that's kind of off topic I guess.

[Intrepid Homoludens]

Originally Posted by Once A Villain

Ok so...Bethesda has incompetent programmers. John Carmack wouldn't settle for this even if he did make games where you can pick everything up and interact with everything.

But then Doom 3 was not a fully 'realized' roleplaying game world where every single NPC is intelligent, has his/her/its own daily schedule and personal and unpredictable agendas, large numbers of sub-stories and subquests waiting to be discovered, day/night cycles, a huge, HUGE world chockful of towns, deep forests, intricate caves, large outdoor scenes, elaborate indoor scenes, a big-ass number of various weaponry, skills management and upgrades, and most likely hundreds if not thousands of individual items you can grab and interact with in more ways than any adventure game.

Look, I'll still play the game, but it's kinda like Fable. Promises, hype, videos that show the promises and hype in motion, etc. Then the inevitable "scale back". I hate that progression with a passion.

You ever work as PR for a games developer? Because it must be atrociously stressful. A lot of times you have no idea which features you show people in year one of the game's progress might get yanked for any number of reasons. But you have to show them some kind of progress to keep them excited and interested. See, it's essentially no different from most any industry.

Take the fashion industry, for example, in which I had worked for over 10 years. Too keep the newspapers and magazines reporting on you (thus keeping your clients interested so they'll buy) you have to tell them what you're up to. But along the development of your next collection for, say, Fall 2006, your expected shipment of a large order of topaz wool boucle cannot be fulfilled because the mill in Italy cannot (for whatever reason) offer that colour anymore, even though they said they're securing a big order from you. And you've already told the press that you're featuring that colour and everyone's looking forward to it. Is that your fault as a designer? Who's to blame?

[squarejawhero]

I loved Everquest 2, but damn that game was a real hog all the way from beta. Don't know if the performance has gotten better though. MMORPG's don't have much in the way of AI in the same way, either!

[Once A Villain]

Originally Posted by Intrepid Homoludens

But then Doom 3 was not a fully 'realized' roleplaying game world where every single NPC is intelligent, has his/her/its own daily schedule and personal and unpredictable agendas, large numbers of sub-stories and subquests waiting to be discovered, day/night cycles, a huge, HUGE world chockful of towns, deep forests, intricate caves, large outdoor scenes, elaborate indoor scenes, a big-ass number of various weaponry, skills management and upgrades, and most likely hundreds if not thousands of individual items you can grab and interact with in more ways than any adventure game.

Well, that's what I was getting at when I said, "...even if he did make games where you can pick everything up and interact with everything." Granted, you went more in depth than I did, but what I meant was that in this day and age Carmack would release NO engine without dynamic soft shadows.

Originally Posted by Intrepid Homoludens

You ever work as PR for a games developer? Because it must be atrociously stressful. A lot of times you have no idea which features you show people in year one of the game's progress might get yanked for any number of reasons. But you have to show them some kind of progress to keep them excited and interested. See, it's essentially no different from most any industry.

Take the fashion industry, for example, in which I had worked for over 10 years. Too keep the newspapers and magazines reporting on you (thus keeping your clients interested so they'll buy) you have to tell them what you're up to. But along the development of your next collection for, say, Fall 2006, your expected shipment of a large order of topaz wool boucle cannot be fulfilled because the mill in Italy cannot (for whatever reason) offer that colour anymore, even though they said they're securing a big order from you. And you've already told the press that you're featuring that colour and everyone's looking forward to it. Is that your fault as a designer? Who's to blame?

Trep, I understand your point. However, unfulfilled promises are still disappointing to the consumer. That's all I'm saying. Just ask Peter Molyneux who released apology after apology to fans when Fable was released with about half the promises intact. Now, I remember how much you loved Fable and in your eyes Molyneux can probably do no wrong... But speaking for myself and many others, that game was disappointing.

[Intrepid Homoludens]

Molyneux learned the hard way to not gush excessively and verbally with his childlike excitement about what he's working on. Emphasis on 'childlike', because that is where his vision has always come from. He learned his lesson. Personally I still think he's one of the greatest games designer out there.

However, I think Bethesda's situation is, as squaresie delved into, more an issue with technical inevitabilities more or less beyond their control. They were very proud to share those shadow effects with us while the work was in progress, but you have to remember, at that time it looked like a sure thing. They're not psychic, so how could they predict unforseeable problems with getting that feature to run effortlessly combined with ALL the other GPU and CPU demanding features simultaneously on most current systems? In the end it was a tradeoff, they had to decide which feature we would miss the least.

As in the quote squaresie posted:

So which is more important to you? Shadows on everything, or lots of stuff to interact with, take, drop, use, buy or sell?

They had to tell us something, anything to keep us interested and looking forward to the game, to stay newsworthy til release. If it's not the dynamic world shadow effect taken away if would have been all the normal mapping features, or whatever else feature.......and you or a bunch of other people would be complaining anyway.

Damned if Bethesda do, damned if they don't.

[SoccerDude28]

I might be the only one on this board who doesn't give a damn, because I found Morrowind so incredibly boring.

[Once A Villain]

Despite my Carmack comments, what I'm saying is that even if this loss was unforeseen and unexpected, it's still a disappointment. That's all. Because it was promised, and then taken away. The reasons don't matter really, as far as most consumers are concerned. All I know is that I was looking forward to those shadows damn it, and I saw them in videos, and now they won't be there. If the designer responsible for shadows in the game was murdered in a back alley and the shadows had to be removed for that reason...I'd STILL be disappointed. Heh.

[Intrepid Homoludens]

Originally Posted by Once A Villain

Despite my Carmack comments, what I'm saying is that even if this loss was unforeseen and unexpected, it's still a disappointment. That's all. Because it was promised, and then taken away. The reasons don't matter really, as far as most consumers are concerned. All I know is that I was looking forward to those shadows damn it, and I saw them in videos, and now they won't be there. If the designer responsible for shadows in the game was murdered in a back alley and the shadows had to be removed for that reason...I'd STILL be disappointed. Heh.

Well, why didn't you just say so?

[insane_cobra]

People, people, there's still no official word on this whatsoever. Aren't you acting a little immature? Let's wait and see what comes out of it.

[squarejawhero]

Check my link from my post above for word from inside.