Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:
Greenbelt, MD 08/22

Regularly scheduled events

Report this Comment
Use this form to report the selected comment to the moderators. Reporting should generally be used only if the comment breaks forum rules.

6. Re: Skyrim HD Pack Updated Feb 7, 2013, 01:11 Creston
 
entr0py wrote on Feb 7, 2013, 00:14:
Why not just include proper PC textures in the PC version from the start? I remember other console ports doing the same thing, and pretending like it's a free bonus rather than a patch to complete the game posthoc.

Well, there's a couple of reasons. When they released Skyrim, they had no HD texture pack, and they waited to see how the game did on PC to decide whether to bundle up their high(er) res textures.

Now, with Dragonborn, I'm sure they saw the amount of pre-orders and decided to do one straight away.

And since you do actually need quite a beefy rig to be able to run the game well with this texture pack, if you include it from the start, the people with lesser rigs will get shitty performance.

I have no problem with the way Bethesda has done this. When was the last time a developer

A) Included several major performance improving mods into its actual patches.
B) Released not one but TWO HD texture packs for its game?


On a sidenote, some funny guy was whining at Bethesda's community manager that he wanted the HD textures for his PS3 version. Apparently the word "performance" is something that's not in his vocabulary. Heh, for the PS3. It can't run Vanilla Skyrim at 30fps. With the texture pack in place, I doubt it'd get 5fps.

Creston
 
Avatar 15604
 
 
Subject
  
Optional
Message
 
Login Email   Password Remember Me
If you don't already have a Blue's News user account, you can sign up here.
Forgotten your password? Click here.
 




footer

Blue's News logo