no, no, no, you're doing it wrong.Simalacrum said:.......
You know what? Screw Bethesda's flimsy explanation, it's time to get the pitch forks and torches out cause they're blatantly using witchcraft.
Burn the heretics!
Except that it was, it was extremely bearable, i might even call it fantasticMudze said:Ha, playing this on consoles? Oblivion wasn't even remotely bearable without mods crammed right up its rear end.
PS3 doesn't have to change disks, its just xboxKahani said:Why do consoles not have decent hard drives? There's no excuse for anyone to ever have to change disks during gameplay, regardless of what platform they're using. It's not the '80s any more.
I also dislike mods. I disliked OblIVion more. Much more. Not as much as I disliked Borderlands, but close.Macrobstar said:Except that it was, it was extremely bearable, i might even call it fantasticMudze said:Ha, playing this on consoles? Oblivion wasn't even remotely bearable without mods crammed right up its rear end.
Mods don't appeal to me, I want a game made by developers
Hmm, that's pretty awesome, but it appears that storing the data that way means the computer has to reconstruct every object and retexture it every time it loads an area, which for a FPS corridor shooter leads to an "Extensive loading time" I shudder to think how it would handle generating a progressive sandbox game like Skyrim, I don't know, I'm just speculating without proper figures, but there definitely seems to be several ways of compressing large amounts of detail without compromising quality, and as soon as someone cracks it with no drawbacks games will get a lot more interesting.Blaster395 said:They should be able to make the game under 1GB if they used more advanced techniques.
.kkreiger managed to get these graphics for an FPS level:
In less than 200kb.