Dev explains why Skyrim lag wont get fixed.


New member
Dec 9, 2009
Macgyvercas said:
Ha ha! 8 GB of RAM on my PC. Try and lag me now, sucker! Or, at least try when I get Skyrim for Christmas...

Gratuitous amounts of RAM feels good, loving my 8GB.


Dad, I'm in space.
Mar 10, 2010
I'm not a fan of Skyrim (I did try Oblivion) if it fucked up and lagged on my PS3, it be straight back in the shop. Why sell something you won't fix? Jesus.

The Lunatic

Jun 3, 2010
The consoles have rather pathetically low RAM, and have done even since release.

512MB is just an awfully low amount, especially in this day and age.


New member
Dec 7, 2009
Bara_no_Hime said:
Deathninja19 said:
No I think like me you just got lucky there, in fact I had no idea there was a fallout problem until people started to compare it to this.
Oh. Cool. ^^ Here's hoping I continue to be lucky with Skyrim.

Also: Mental note, when playing Skyrim, don't move around unnecessary random objects. The less I touch, the smaller the save file will stay (as I understand the problem as explained above).
Yeah I hope so too, people deserve to play the game they bought. Also I've kind of noticed the amount of dragons you kill affects the memory since the bones never disappear so maybe only kill what you need.


New member
May 4, 2011
Macgyvercas said:
Ha ha! 8 GB of RAM on my PC. Try and lag me now, sucker! Or, at least try when I get Skyrim for Christmas...
Lol you do know that skyrim is limited to 2gigs of ram. Although there is a patch that brings its up to 4gigs so congrats for extra ram.


New member
Nov 20, 2009
I'm glad I'm playing on PC. logged 160 hours so far and no crashes. Weird bugs galore, but no crashes at least lol


Needs more Dakka
Apr 13, 2010
MCGT said:
Yeah but how well would a 6 year old computer handle Skyrim? So unless you have the money to upgrade/update your computer every year that argument doesn't really hold much water.
The minimum system requirements for skyrim are incredibly low. The PC I built almost 10 years ago can play it.

OS: Windows 7/Vista/XP PC (32 or 64 bit)
Processor: Dual Core 2.0GHz or equivalent processor
Memory: 2GB System RAM
Hard Disk Space: 6GB free HDD Space
Video Card: Direct X 9.0c compliant video card with 512 MB of RAM
Sound: DirectX compatible sound card

I've even seen cheap laptops with integrated graphics play it. Please get out of the mindset that you need to constantly upgrade a computer to play current gen games.


New member
Nov 9, 2010
Why wouldn't they just have the game load things in the cells around the player and not the whole world. Thank god I have 8 gigs of ram and planning on upgrading soon.


New member
May 19, 2011
Crono1973 said:
Swyftstar said:
While I'm not excusing Bethesda, I don't think Sony should get a pass on this one either. Not having enough RAM is just silly. Not having cross game chat is annoying and this isn't the first game to exhibit issues because of it. DC Universe Online used to crash religiously because of the low memory problem. Also, when I'm online on my PS3, it will occasionally freeze or tell me there isn't enough memory so the web page is being replaced with a blank screen.
For Bethesda's part, releasing this game when there is a known issue, without at least a warning is shady.
LOL, what?

Blame Sony because Bethesda can't make their games work well on the PS3? Sony may share some of the blame, they should have told Bethesda to fix it before they allowed it on the PS3 but Bethesda's incompetence is not Sony's fault.

If you tried to make a game for the Wii and it lagged really bad, would you really blame Nintendo?
First, don't start a post with "LOL, what?" It makes you sound either goofy or insulting, neither of which are conducive to a discussion. Second, I'm not blaming them for the games issue per se, I am saying that they have a memory problem, that has caused issues across a few games and applications, that has annoyed me in the past and probably will again in the future. And who the hell buys games for the Wii? :p


Sight, Sound, and Mind
Nov 24, 2008
Damn it Obsidian made New Vegas, I actually know that one.

It's not lag unless it deal with network speeds what your referring to is just regular old slow frame rate due to what I would consider a memory leak. (although its not). Gamebryo is ridiculously broken and stupid but I can see why they don't want to redesign the sucker. Nobody wants to make a new engine since it takes forever and in the end you wind up with something that cost a ton and to players looks almost identical.

Exius Xavarus

Casually hardcore. :}
May 19, 2010
GaltarDude1138 said:
The only lag I'm really concerned with is when I bring up the menu and my controls suddenly go dead for about 3 seconds and I can't select anything. It's annoying as hell and it happens whenever I bring up the menu.

I bet it's a console thing, too...
If you look in the top left corner, it'll say "Autosaving..." which is what is actually causing your controls to die for a few seconds. It's not a glitch, bug, or anything of the sort.


New member
Sep 24, 2010
ElektroNeko said:
So basically, it's really, really, really bad memory management.

But yeah, it's either this or loading screens. I don't think developers these days have the time and resources to make a efficient file scream mechanism, especially for such a big game.
I'd rather have load screens than this setup. I live with transitions in Zelda games, and I lived with loading with Morrowind (and I love that game more than Skyrim) so I could have lived with this game having loading too.

So either make a good data streaming system already, or go back to loading screens for each main area of the world like in Morrowind. I understand the game is big, but I also understand it already made a fat stinky wad of limburger in its first month. For me, some things aren't worth the trouble, and having everything loaded for the sake of a sense of "realism" that my mind already filled in for me is not worth the bugs, lag, etc. that so many are experiencing, myself included.

Take a break from the franchise you must, but take some money and write a brand new engine already. I'm no programmer but surely at this stage in the console cycle we know the ins and outs of how to optimize everything, right?

If you're making console games, it should be double priority to make sure they're as stable as possible right out the gate. We don't get the luxury of modders fixing everything and we don't all have immediate access to a PC to play the "master race version" on (I for one have a netbook for school and that it. Runs Duke Nukem 3D at a whopping 15 FPS...)


New member
Feb 17, 2010
man there is so much wrong with this topic and with that article the OP posted.
An Obsidan dev talking about bugs in a Bethesda engine is not really something i will take at face value after FO:NV.
If he knows the engine so well: why was NV such a buggy piece of crap?
Also i dont think you can compare the engine version they used for NV with the one used for TESV that easily, plus, the guy did not work on Skyrim.


Elite Member
Jun 24, 2011
United States
Mimsofthedawg said:
TheGuy(wantstobe) said:
Mimsofthedawg said:
Ilikemilkshake said:
Considering that these issues have existed since FO3, why have Bethesda 1) not fixed it. or 2) bothered porting the game to the ps3 when they know that the way their game works will almost definatly cause the game to degrade to a point of unplayability?
Because it's not a universal problem. Everyone's acting like it's some HUGE thing and that EVERY PLAYER ON THE PS3 CAN'T EVEN PLAY THE DAMN GAME!

No... no, that's not true. While IGN did a poll, only 51% of people experience lag, and only a small fraction of them experienced it so bad they had to restart the game. Even a smaller fraction said the game was "unplayable".

You simply have to do some developer magic to get it to work right... but it's not as bad as you'd make it out to be... or anyone, really.
Every single copy no matter the system has the potential for the exact same issue. Playstyle will be the main determininator as to when you experience it though and how you can minimise the impact it will have. That is undisputable fact backed up by developers who have worked on the engine based entirely around the way in which savegames and object data is both stored and loaded in engine.

Other minor thing is this a framerate issue not lag which is a fundamentally different thing altogether.
It doesn't matter the potential. Potentially, the earth could collide with an asteroid and all life cease to exist at any moment - it's actually a statistical miracle that in the time humanity as existed, we haven't had a cataclysmic end to our species (we almost did a few times though). the Yellowstone volcano and a couple other super volcanoes around the world are set to erupt at any moment, which would kill off most plants and animals. There could be a new plague at any second, breeding in some murky, swampy, trash water in Thailand. If you want to talk about the potential of something happening, that's fine, but you might as well be talking about theoreticals here.

Bethesda obviously tested it ENOUGH so that the average experience is stable and fine - otherwise you'd see mention of it in the reviews, sales wouldn't have been as good, and instead of forums being oversaturated with "ZOMGWTFBBQ SKYRIM!!!!!" they'd be oversaturated with "I CAN'T BELIEVE I BOUGHT SUCH A FUCKING GAME!"

Case in point: this is the first serious thread I've seen on the escapist talking about this issue.

I don't hold potentials against a game company like Bethesda who does such a good job of making a type of game that is INHERENTLY buggy, because potentially has never effected me, and based on the polls, seldom effects others too.
Well actually, Bethesda didn't send the PS3 version to reviewers because they knew it was flawed and it would lower the score. I have read that the Official Playstation Magazine UK dropped the score from 9 to 7 though. I read it here:

Your case in point is wrong, this issue has been talked about on the Escapist in a few threads.

You know, so long as people say "not affecting me so I don't care", we will continue to get buggy games that should not have been released.


New member
Jul 21, 2010
I have only had one leggy moment in-game on 360 so I'm fine with that.

Also if one has that much opportunity to interact with every object in game than that's quite a problem.