Skyrim may be irreparably broken on PS3

[Atmos Duality]

Remember: Skyrim is the automatic Game of the Year.
Any legitimate criticism for it is henceforce discarded. Just because...uh, the hype-train says so.
...I kid, I kid!

My usual sarcasm aside, this is...actually understandable. I did do a bit of Morrowind mod work back in the day, and as I understand, the underlying save-file architecture is still mostly the same for Oblivion, Fallout 3, and (allegedly*) Skyrim.

Based on what I know from my experience with Oblivion and Morrowind:

Spoiler: Data Positioning and Gamebryo

The positioning data for each and every object in the game will have to be saved if it's moved out of the default position. Otherwise, this opens the door for a whole slew of problems including:
1) Item loss (things you stole/found/kept teleporting back to their original position)
2) Duplication abuse (reselling things by exiting the game and reloading)

And there are THOUSANDS of objects in the game, all requiring an equilibrium level to start from (before the physics engine takes over). A simple vector based checksum limits the file size from getting too large (if an object is moved out of its original/on-disc-coded position, then its new position gets saved to the character's file. otherwise, it gets ignored), and is checked every time the player enters a new region or indoor zone.

But it gets worse. Random loot occupies placeholders, and isn't actually generated until the player interacts with its container.

So for randomly generated loot, each item will need its own item coding, since it had no specific default position in the coordinate place.
(that silver sword you found in a chest at the end of a cave could have been generated variably elsewhere, and actually isn't acted upon by the physics engine until it's placed or dropped; compared to the steel dagger you find on the captain's desk, which is static for every game).

Now factor in the number of items a player is likely to interact with (even if it's just hauling it all to the shops for cash) over the course of the game, and you can see how quickly that save file will grow.

Save files like that need to anticipate sizes beyond the range of APIs alone.
PCs could use virtual memory ("page-files") from the hard drive to account for this, which is how one could actually run Morrowind on comparatively little RAM back in the day (the save file size is similarly massive; remember, this isn't graphical data, *just positioning data*. The scale of each game is about the same, with the potential for nearly infinite amounts of generated loot).

Due to my lack of experience with the 360's architecture, I'm unsure if the 360 does something similar, though based on the article, I must assume it does since it doesn't have enough RAM to move a raw file size that big either.

So in a fit of comedy, the limitations of the ancient Gamebryo Engine have finally choked the highly-touted Cell-based architecture of the PS3.

*(I thought Bethesda said Skyrim's engine was going to be brand new and from id Software? What did I miss?)

 

[SidingWithTheEnemy]

I know this news is rather shocking and I would be quite upset if I would use a PS3, but while in this state of mentally atagonizing and crippling pain and abysimal primeval hatred don't forget that there is always a search button to avoid repeating such threads.

Spoiler: disclaimer

As a proud founder of the USE THE SEARCH BAR!!! group I hereby wanted to encourage the creator of this thread to USE THE SEARCH BAR!!! next time and avoid the perpetual repetition of such threads.

Thank you for your attention, this post has been a courtesy of USE THE SEARCH BAR!!! Group.

For further information check Posting and You!

 

[Spencer Petersen]

It funny to see the bullshit Sony pulled to make their console appear more powerful is coming around to bite its users in the ass. Dividing up RAM for separate tasks was a horrible idea in 2006, and now in 2011 its actually degrading game performance.

And for all the people claiming that it qualifies for class action lawsuits, it would be like suing Crytek for Crysis not working perfectly on a PC with 1 gb of RAM. Sure it can technically run it, but the frame-rate would be abysmal, the loading screens would take forever and you would face glitches galore. All the streamlining and patches wont change the fact that the PS3 simply isn't capable of meeting the hardware requirements past "absolute minimum."

 

[newwiseman]

I remember how long load times got on my xbox copy of Morrowind towards the end, I used those load times to make sandwiches that summer...

So long as the save still loads it's not game breaker, just annoying. What would be nice is if they parsed the save file to only load world data for the area your currently in, it's not like they load the whole map in one go, but I imagine that it probably really hard to patch that at this point.

 

[Casual Shinji]

So Bethesda released a patch for what?

Yucks?

 

[robert01]

There are possible work arounds for the PS3 version but with it you sacrifice a lot of the 'immersion' that you all pine for and it also could possibly lead to more instability, and weird shit going down in game(broken re/spawns, failed quest triggers etc.) I honestly just think this game was too big for the PS3.

And in all honesty the game engine isn't broken. It's the developers. As much as I hate to say it Bethesda releases buggy games. I called it for New Vegas, I called it for Skyrim. I could tell you things about Fallout 3/NV that would probably surprise 3 different colours of shit out of you.

 

[White_Lama]

As an Xbox 360 fanboy, I think this is hilarious.

But then I think off the fact that this is Skyrim we're talking about, and then I feel sad for those people that can't play this awesome game and enjoy it as much.

I feel for you, poor Skyrim on PS3 players <3

 

[GeorgW]

Remember: Skyrim is the automatic Game of the Year.
Any legitimate criticism for it is henceforce discarded. Just because...uh, the hype-train says so.
...I kid, I kid!

My usual sarcasm aside, this is...actually understandable. I did do a bit of Morrowind mod work back in the day, and as I understand, the underlying save-file architecture is still mostly the same for Oblivion, Fallout 3, and (allegedly*) Skyrim.

Based on what I know from my experience with Oblivion and Morrowind:

Spoiler: Data Positioning and Gamebryo

The positioning data for each and every object in the game will have to be saved if it's moved out of the default position. Otherwise, this opens the door for a whole slew of problems including:
1) Item loss (things you stole/found/kept teleporting back to their original position)
2) Duplication abuse (reselling things by exiting the game and reloading)

And there are THOUSANDS of objects in the game, all requiring an equilibrium level to start from (before the physics engine takes over). A simple vector based checksum limits the file size from getting too large (if an object is moved out of its original/on-disc-coded position, then its new position gets saved to the character's file. otherwise, it gets ignored), and is checked every time the player enters a new region or indoor zone.

But it gets worse. Random loot occupies placeholders, and isn't actually generated until the player interacts with its container.

So for randomly generated loot, each item will need its own item coding, since it had no specific default position in the coordinate place.
(that silver sword you found in a chest at the end of a cave could have been generated variably elsewhere, and actually isn't acted upon by the physics engine until it's placed or dropped; compared to the steel dagger you find on the captain's desk, which is static for every game).

Now factor in the number of items a player is likely to interact with (even if it's just hauling it all to the shops for cash) over the course of the game, and you can see how quickly that save file will grow.

Save files like that need to anticipate sizes beyond the range of APIs alone.
PCs could use virtual memory ("page-files") from the hard drive to account for this, which is how one could actually run Morrowind on comparatively little RAM back in the day (the save file size is similarly massive; remember, this isn't graphical data, *just positioning data*. The scale of each game is about the same, with the potential for nearly infinite amounts of generated loot).

Due to my lack of experience with the 360's architecture, I'm unsure if the 360 does something similar, though based on the article, I must assume it does since it doesn't have enough RAM to move a raw file size that big either.

So in a fit of comedy, the limitations of the ancient Gamebryo Engine have finally choked the highly-touted Cell-based architecture of the PS3.

*(I thought Bethesda said Skyrim's engine was going to be brand new and from id Software? What did I miss?)

Huh, interesting read, thanks for explaining that. Maybe Bethesda should issue a statement that, as a (hopefully) temporary solution, make sure not to pick up anything from chests and bags that you won't use? Would that work (and by work I mean not make it any worse), or do you have to not even open the chest?

OT: Wow, it was pure luck that I chose the 360 version, I was leaning towards the PS3 for a while. Glad I chose the way I did.

 

[TheGuy(wantstobe)]

Remember: Skyrim is the automatic Game of the Year.
Any legitimate criticism for it is henceforce discarded. Just because...uh, the hype-train says so.
...I kid, I kid!

My usual sarcasm aside, this is...actually understandable. I did do a bit of Morrowind mod work back in the day, and as I understand, the underlying save-file architecture is still mostly the same for Oblivion, Fallout 3, and (allegedly*) Skyrim.

Based on what I know from my experience with Oblivion and Morrowind:

Spoiler: Data Positioning and Gamebryo

The positioning data for each and every object in the game will have to be saved if it's moved out of the default position. Otherwise, this opens the door for a whole slew of problems including:
1) Item loss (things you stole/found/kept teleporting back to their original position)
2) Duplication abuse (reselling things by exiting the game and reloading)

And there are THOUSANDS of objects in the game, all requiring an equilibrium level to start from (before the physics engine takes over). A simple vector based checksum limits the file size from getting too large (if an object is moved out of its original/on-disc-coded position, then its new position gets saved to the character's file. otherwise, it gets ignored), and is checked every time the player enters a new region or indoor zone.

But it gets worse. Random loot occupies placeholders, and isn't actually generated until the player interacts with its container.

So for randomly generated loot, each item will need its own item coding, since it had no specific default position in the coordinate place.
(that silver sword you found in a chest at the end of a cave could have been generated variably elsewhere, and actually isn't acted upon by the physics engine until it's placed or dropped; compared to the steel dagger you find on the captain's desk, which is static for every game).

Now factor in the number of items a player is likely to interact with (even if it's just hauling it all to the shops for cash) over the course of the game, and you can see how quickly that save file will grow.

Save files like that need to anticipate sizes beyond the range of APIs alone.
PCs could use virtual memory ("page-files") from the hard drive to account for this, which is how one could actually run Morrowind on comparatively little RAM back in the day (the save file size is similarly massive; remember, this isn't graphical data, *just positioning data*. The scale of each game is about the same, with the potential for nearly infinite amounts of generated loot).

Due to my lack of experience with the 360's architecture, I'm unsure if the 360 does something similar, though based on the article, I must assume it does since it doesn't have enough RAM to move a raw file size that big either.

So in a fit of comedy, the limitations of the ancient Gamebryo Engine have finally choked the highly-touted Cell-based architecture of the PS3.

*(I thought Bethesda said Skyrim's engine was going to be brand new and from id Software? What did I miss?)

For the 360 all the architectural difference means is that the increase in available system RAM just allows the filesize of the savefile esm can be much greater before it has a deleterious effect on framerate. You can still do it but just have to work harder for it.

 

[Anthony Wells]

I know this news is rather shocking and I would be quite upset if I would use a PS3, but while in this state of mentally atagonizing and crippling pain and abysimal primeval hatred don't forget that there is always a search button to avoid repeating such threads.

Spoiler: disclaimer

As a proud founder of the USE THE SEARCH BAR!!! group I hereby wanted to encourage the creator of this thread to USE THE SEARCH BAR!!! next time and avoid the perpetual repetition of such threads.

Thank you for your attention, this post has been a courtesy of USE THE SEARCH BAR!!! Group.

For further information check Posting and You!

oh how hilarious i was about to post the same thing lol. i got ninja'd by our group founder lol.



i already commented all i could on this subject in the other thread. i hope they can fix it. pray they can. and thats about all i cna do

 

[Atmos Duality]

Huh, interesting read, thanks for explaining that. Maybe Bethesda should issue a statement that, as a (hopefully) temporary solution, make sure not to pick up anything from chests and bags that you won't use? Would that work (and by work I mean not make it any worse), or do you have to not even open the chest?

Depends on how the Skyrim's save file handles "extraneous items".

Assuming Morrowind/Oblivion's system:

For randomly generated items, once they have been irreparably consumed (used to create something else, consumed ala potions, or sold and removed through the vendor cycle), they are likely removed from the file since they:
1) No longer occupy a position
2) Had no default position (remember, "loot chests" contain variable items; they won't be the same each playthrough, so the game doesn't generate them until you interact with the container. Empty variable containers will just be marked as boolean "empty" in your save file)

However, static-position items (like that dagger in my example) that you interacted with or even moved will still remain in the save file, even if they no longer exist (or more specifically: Are accessible by the player). If this didn't happen, those items would pop right back to where they were before when the game loads their default zone!

Or to sum it up: Your save file is the ONLY form of reference the game has that something has changed in a zone.

For the 360 all the architectural difference means is that the increase in available system RAM just allows the filesize of the savefile esm can be much greater before it has a deleterious effect on framerate. You can still do it but just have to work harder for it.

So basically, it's a bigger bucket to bail with before the ship goes under?
Thanks for the info.

 

[zehydra]

Wait, Skyrim uses Gamebryo? I thought before release they confirmed they were using something else.

 

[GeorgW]

Huh, interesting read, thanks for explaining that. Maybe Bethesda should issue a statement that, as a (hopefully) temporary solution, make sure not to pick up anything from chests and bags that you won't use? Would that work (and by work I mean not make it any worse), or do you have to not even open the chest?

Depends on how the Skyrim's save file handles "extraneous items".

Assuming Morrowind/Oblivion's system:

For randomly generated items, once they have been irreparably consumed (used to create something else, consumed ala potions, or sold and removed through the vendor cycle), they are likely removed from the file since they:
1) No longer occupy a position
2) Had no default position (remember, "loot chests" contain variable items; they won't be the same each playthrough, so the game doesn't generate them until you interact with the container. Empty variable containers will just be marked as boolean "empty" in your save file)

However, static-position items (like that dagger in my example) that you interacted with or even moved will still remain in the save file, even if they no longer exist (or more specifically: Are accessible by the player). If this didn't happen, those items would pop right back to where they were before when the game loads their default zone!

Or to sum it up: Your save file is the ONLY form of reference the game has that something has changed in a zone.

For the 360 all the architectural difference means is that the increase in available system RAM just allows the filesize of the savefile esm can be much greater before it has a deleterious effect on framerate. You can still do it but just have to work harder for it.

So basically, it's a bigger bucket to bail with before the ship goes under?
Thanks for the info.

How about selling or consuming items lying around? Wouldn't that completely fix the problem in that case, if you do it with enough items?
I would actually like if some things would reset, I knocked a few things over in my house and it's so damn hard to put it back so it looks okay.

As for the 360, it has twice the possible RAM, but it takes that from the graphics if I'm not mistaken. So before it becomes ridiculously slow it will look horribly ugly. So we may not have as much time as we'd hope. And the PC will run into this problem eventually, but it will take a few hundred hours.

 

[Samurai Silhouette]

Couldn't you just, I don't know, DELETE the old save files?

It's not the amount of save files, it's the amount of data in the save file you're currently using. The more involved you get into a play through, the laggier it gets.

 

[mrgerry123]

Welcome to our world (pc gamers). We have to deal with poorly optimized games and crap console ports. Shame for ps3 owners though.

 

[Atmos Duality]

How about selling or consuming items lying around? Wouldn't that completely fix the problem in that case, if you do it with enough items?

Depends on where the items come from. To prevent duplicating items, static-placement items will have to remain in the save file, once interacted with.
Everything that's generated dynamically (from random enemies, loot containers, etc) however, can be removed from the save file once permanently consumed/removed.

EDIT: Assuming that this is in fact how Skyrim operates, the best method of combating this limitation, sadly, is avoiding interacting with static items (so no stealing displayed items from shops and/or homes).

I would actually like if some things would reset, I knocked a few things over in my house and it's so damn hard to put it back so it looks okay.

It would be very difficult to make a unifying program that does that, since your house's layout and contents can (and probably will) vary with what you place in it.

As for the 360, it has twice the possible RAM, but it takes that from the graphics if I'm not mistaken. So before it becomes ridiculously slow it will look horribly ugly. So we may not have as much time as we'd hope. And the PC will run into this problem eventually, but it will take a few hundred hours.

I prefer "Performance before Beauty".
Though in regards to this limitation: I'd wager even a "meh" gaming PC (which today, is comparable to an average desktop with a discrete VGU), will outlast the 360 by a factor of 4; just due to the potential increased RAM availability alone (even if the programming is still only at 32-bits, that's still over 3gb of RAM).

 

[demoman_chaos]

For the 360 all the architectural difference means is that the increase in available system RAM just allows the filesize of the savefile esm can be much greater before it has a deleterious effect on framerate. You can still do it but just have to work harder for it.

A friend has Oblivion on the 360 and had so much loot his main save is unplayable due to lag.

 

[RedEyesBlackGamer]

After this mess, I'm done with Bethesda. Maybe I'll be their games used from now on, but one thing is for sure: they will never see another penny from me. I'll buy from devs that can actually design a game properly and one that cares about its consumers.

 

[GeorgW]

How about selling or consuming items lying around? Wouldn't that completely fix the problem in that case, if you do it with enough items?

Depends on where the items come from. To prevent duplicating items, static-placement items will have to remain in the save file, once interacted with.
Everything that's generated dynamically (from random enemies, loot containers, etc) however, can be removed from the save file once permanently consumed/removed.

I would actually like if some things would reset, I knocked a few things over in my house and it's so damn hard to put it back so it looks okay.

It would be very difficult to make a unifying program that does that, since your house's layout and contents can (and probably will) vary with what you place in it.

As for the 360, it has twice the possible RAM, but it takes that from the graphics if I'm not mistaken. So before it becomes ridiculously slow it will look horribly ugly. So we may not have as much time as we'd hope. And the PC will run into this problem eventually, but it will take a few hundred hours.

I prefer "Performance before Beauty".
I'd wager even a "meh" gaming PC (which today, is comparable to an average desktop with a discrete VGU), will outlast the 360 by a factor of 4; just due to the potential increased RAM availability alone (even if the programming is still only at 32-bits, that's still over 3gb of RAM).

If you don't interact with objects lying around, will they take up less save data?
Only problem with PC is that from what I've heard, PC is capped at 2GB RAM, so it doesn't matter how good a PC you have, it will at maximum only outlast the 360 by a factor of 4. It'll last you a long time, but not infinitely. However, the benefit of playing a TES game on the PC is that any problem, even this, will be modded. Maybe someone will find a way to simply delete a whole bunch of objects lying around, just to get rid of them from the memory. Wouldn't that be a good emergency solution for the PS3?

 

[Freaky Lou]

As an Xbox 360 fanboy, I think this is hilarious.

But then I think off the fact that this is Skyrim we're talking about, and then I feel sad for those people that can't play this awesome game and enjoy it as much.

I feel for you, poor Skyrim on PS3 players <3

I'm playing it on PS3 and the lag wasn't that bad even at launch (except in certain patches of Whiterun.) It did get crippling for my brother as he pushed level 50...but after the patch, it's been running pretty smoothly.