Originally Posted by devil1337

Atmosphere is created by the storyline, the natural environment, characters, music, weather, day-night cycle, man-made enviroment ( buildings etc), overall variety, combat and then the graphics. You can have great graphics but without any of the above you'll get something mediocre or less. This is why the atmosphere is the hardest part to achieve in any respectable RPG, and yet you claim it's all about graphics?

With this I still maintain my opinion regarding your experience in the genre. When you'll get more experience come back with a valid argument. Your arguments would apply more to a fps than rpg.

Originally Posted by Hamster

devil1337 you're trying to defend something that doesn't deserve it, if any modern game isn't purposefully stylizing its graphics, it'd better fucking look at least as good as the latest Unreal engine, or there's very little excuse for stuff like water effects to look terrible. Minecraft can get away with it because its graphics were designed with a conscious design choice in mind. Skyrim needs to make as big a jump in graphics as Oblivion did from Morrowind, and right now they're dropping the ball, based on footage from their last tech preview.

Originally Posted by Gorman

Not gameplay.

That dragon fight looked a lot like a cinematic, unless there is a button to not only go 3rd person, but allow free cam (something you could not do in any of the other TES). It also had full UI hidden. There were also flythroughs, that although ingame, were certainly not gameplay.

The only fraction that could be called gameplay was the 2 seconds (total) that showed someone attacking from 1st person.

The rest is just ingame, not gameplay.

Hence, with so much being not gameplay, that cannot be considered a gameplay trailer.

Originally Posted by Pirate

It was cinematic. They said it was on twitter and BGS forums. The UI is supposed to be hidden unless you're in battle. (revealed a while ago) And while only a fraction could be considered "gameplay" by your standards you're grossly underestimating how much footage was shown of ACTUAL gameplay. Just because you're not in first person. The running in the beginning is gameplay.

Also.. 1:27-1:29 is walking in a forest.
1:31 PC is walking towards a troll in first person...
1:32 PC is doing a stealth finishing move in third person...
1:33 PC is smashing a skeleton in first person.. UI is clearly not present looks like they're still trying to hide it OR it only appears if you get hurt.. assuming the PC was not hurt.
1:35 PC is casting a spell from a staff while holding a sword.. cool.
1:36 a spin move attack thingy is being done in 3rd person.. if not then the camera movements are really weird..
1:37 a really far out 3rd person camera shows the PC casting an area spell (like fable 3) which presumably kills skeletons/undead?
1:40 PC draws sword while approaching ice wraths
1:41 PC draws an arrow and aims it at an approaching dog coyote thing..
1:43 player casts spell (important to note that it's a dual-spell char.. I wish we could see how much more powerful a dual wielding spellcast is but the scene ends)
1:44 first person finishing move with a nirnroot in the background!
1:46 PC walking in a nice dark dungeon with what looks like dwarf shit in it
1:46-47 (kinda in the middle) PC hits a giant spider and it flys back/recoils
1:57-2:05 I think this is what absorbing a dragon's soul looks like so it could be gameplay.. could not be.

Originally Posted by Pirate

Right so 16/180=2/180.. Well at least I'm not drastically understating the amount of gameplay. It's cinematic because it's a new engine. Everything has been changed. Slow panning shots of gigantic mountains could've taken up the entire damn trailer as far as I'm concerned. I just want to see how it looks. They talked about gameplay. There is at least 16 seconds, of "gameplay." what the hell did you want to see? It has gameplay in it. Therefore it is a trailer.. With gameplay. It doesn't matter how many seconds it is. It's there. Period.