360 "review" copy leaked already

#1 Edited by alternate (2707 posts) -

I know they usually do but 10 days seems like some kind of record (probably not).

Wasn't Brad just boasting to Jeff how fast his ISP upload was? :D

So far an awful lot of bedroom pirates butt-hurt about how low res some of the textures are up close.

"OMG! WTF is this shit? This looks worse than Oblivion. Ima gonna wait for the PC release. Waste of a Verb. Fuck this derpbox crap!"

#2 Posted by Cloudenvy (5891 posts) -

Sorry for asking, but isn't this pretty much the normal thing now? I feel like this always happens before a big multiplatform game is released, maybe that's just me.

#3 Posted by alternate (2707 posts) -

@Cloudenvy said:

Sorry for asking, but isn't this pretty much the normal thing now? I feel like this always happens before a big multiplatform game is released, maybe that's just me.

I guess. I am not that up on the "scene" but it is usually more like a few days I think. Indie games stores sell it early and such. Maybe a week early if someone walks away from the disc pressing plant or the distribution hub. 10 days means - to me anyway - says someone was trusted with a copy who should not have been.

#4 Posted by CL60 (16906 posts) -

Judging from that video that came out of the starting of the game, the textures on the console versions(At least 360) are indeed awful.

#5 Posted by Contro (2040 posts) -

Yea, well sacrifices have to be made in a game of this type on consoles, games like these are pushing 360 and PS3 to their limits, mainly because of their dated RAM which is required to stream large packets of data within open world games.

A few dodgy looking textures wont put fans off, they can be easily remedied.

#6 Posted by RankRabbit (394 posts) -

I just want to know about the bugs and how long I should wait for bethesda to fix the game as much as possible.

#7 Edited by Rowr (5669 posts) -

Well considering RAGE has the same publisher, i'm going to go ahead and believe the low texture stuff - and on that basis I doubt the PC version is any different.

Recently John Carmack from ID stated that he doubted they would bother releasing a high texture pack for RAGE for PC because - "blah blah no-one cares about PC anymore they arent our market blah blah"

Coming from ID and the father of FPS and a PC game developer idol.

So yeh, nice one Bethesda.

#8 Posted by CL60 (16906 posts) -

@Rowr said:

Well considering RAGE has the same publisher, i'm going to go ahead and believe the low texture stuff - and on that basis I doubt the PC version is any different.

The hell does the publisher have to do with anything? And they've shown lots of footage of the PC version and the textures aren't that bad.

#9 Posted by themangalist (1736 posts) -
@Rowr said:

Well considering RAGE has the same publisher, i'm going to go ahead and believe the low texture stuff - and on that basis I doubt the PC version is any different.

Well two entirely different developers known for doing entirely different things on two entirely different engines... i don't think that factors into anything.
#10 Posted by Rattle618 (1463 posts) -

@Rowr said:

Well considering RAGE has the same publisher, i'm going to go ahead and believe the low texture stuff - and on that basis I doubt the PC version is any different.

Well the good news is that even if textures look like ass on pc a mod for it will surface eventually and problem solved.

#11 Edited by Rowr (5669 posts) -

@CL60 said:

@Rowr said:

Well considering RAGE has the same publisher, i'm going to go ahead and believe the low texture stuff - and on that basis I doubt the PC version is any different.

The hell does the publisher have to do with anything? And they've shown lots of footage of the PC version and the textures aren't that bad.

@themangalist said:

@Rowr said:

Well considering RAGE has the same publisher, i'm going to go ahead and believe the low texture stuff - and on that basis I doubt the PC version is any different.

Well two entirely different developers known for doing entirely different things on two entirely different engines... i don't think that factors into anything.

Yeh ok granted the PC version is bound to look much better.

But do you think ID voluntarily made a console game with a shitty pc port?

That was surely Bethesda's call.

Edit = i guess what i'm trying to say, is after seeing what happened to rage it would not at all suprise me to see that the PC version of Skyrim is mostly a console port. The low resolution issue is something that has surfaced on PC for RAGE.

#12 Posted by geirr (2575 posts) -

Well that's kinda sad but also expected. :<

However the PC version might look when this game is published, I can guarantee that the huuuge mod community will make everything look better .. and in some cases more interesting.

.. Unless the construction kit has been removed. Which I hope it hasn't!

#13 Edited by Sooty (8082 posts) -

@pepsimaxofborg said:

Well that's kinda sad but also expected. :<

However the PC version might look when this game is published, I can guarantee that the huuuge mod community will make everything look better .. and in some cases more interesting.

.. Unless the construction kit has been removed. Which I hope it hasn't!

Fallout 3 had pretty good textures on PC (in places, the ground detail was always pretty sharp for example) and I doubt Skyrim is going to look any worse than Fallout 3 did.

@Rowr said:

@CL60 said:

@Rowr said:

Well considering RAGE has the same publisher, i'm going to go ahead and believe the low texture stuff - and on that basis I doubt the PC version is any different.

The hell does the publisher have to do with anything? And they've shown lots of footage of the PC version and the textures aren't that bad.

@themangalist said:

@Rowr said:

Well considering RAGE has the same publisher, i'm going to go ahead and believe the low texture stuff - and on that basis I doubt the PC version is any different.

Well two entirely different developers known for doing entirely different things on two entirely different engines... i don't think that factors into anything.

Yeh ok granted the PC version is bound to look much better.

But do you think ID voluntarily made a console game with a shitty pc port?

That was surely Bethesda's call.

Edit = i guess what i'm trying to say, is after seeing what happened to rage it would not at all suprise me to see that the PC version of Skyrim is mostly a console port. The low resolution issue is something that has surfaced on PC for RAGE.

I don't really care about what ID did or whatever they do, they haven't made a good game since Quake III.

I'm not sure what you are talking about anyway, as RAGE on PC has MUCH better textures than the console version, you'll want to open these in a new tab for full size:

http://www.gamereactor.eu/media/92/grafikduell_259231b.jpg

http://www.gamereactor.eu/media/92/grafikduell_259233b.jpg

#14 Edited by MrOldboy (869 posts) -

Not surprised at all. It does get frustrating that pirates are able to play a game for free (minus bandwidth and time and whatever else they need to do it) and EARLY when people patiently waiting for a game that is completely finished to be released. I wonder if any publisher would release a major game early because of a leaked copy. Might make the pub look bad to major media sources, but you already let us preload the game, unlocking it once a leak is made public would definitely give them some cred on the internets. Ignoring the fact that your game was leaked over a week early only pushes more people towards piracy. This specific leak doesn't affect me at all. But if the PC version was leaked and cracked early I would be majorly pissed off right now, if it is dont tell me.

#15 Posted by bioblood22 (420 posts) -

Anyone else think this idiot wasn't on an HD tv?

#16 Posted by SirPsychoSexy (1329 posts) -

We are way over due for new consoles if you ask me. The hardware in those machines is so outdated, I am surprised developers can make the games look as good as they do.

#17 Posted by theWarren (101 posts) -

I would be interested to see if more companies would do the "Hi Rez Texture Packs" that they did with Battlefield. If you have the hard drive space and an internet connection, you get a better looking version. I don't see how that's a bad thing. I'm sure that's always something that could be done after the fact too.

I'd really like to see it start a trend. If we have to wait two more years for new consoles, find a good work around to squeeze the most we can get out of these consoles.

#18 Edited by Ravenlight (8040 posts) -

@Rowr said:

Well considering RAGE has the same publisher, i'm going to go ahead and believe the low texture stuff - and on that basis I doubt the PC version is any different.

Recently John Carmack from ID stated that he doubted they would bother releasing a high texture pack for RAGE for PC because - "blah blah no-one cares about PC anymore they arent our market blah blah"

Coming from ID and the father of FPS and a PC game developer idol.

So yeh, nice one Bethesda.

id != Bethesda.

While it's true that they are both part of the parent company Zenimax, they are completely separate entities. In short, John Carmack and RAGE have nothing to do with Skyrim.

EDIT: The previous posters already covered this, it seems :/

Yes, Skyrim was definitely developed for consoles, but Bethesda has a much better track record than id does when it comes to this sort of thing. Worst case scenario, I'll be installing a day-one bugfix through Steam.

#19 Posted by BasketSnake (1209 posts) -

I just watched "the making of" video on my xbox. It looks great! I think once people fire up their console copies they won't be disappointed.

#20 Posted by Tumbler (161 posts) -

As a consumer I don't really care if people are playing the game once it's been shipped to stores. I know they want everyone to wait until the launch day but I feel like the game is "released" the moment it's out of the warehouse and on the way to stores. After that it seems like a silly game stores play to try and keep the game out of the public hands until "launch" day. I don't even consider this a leak. Some people get it before me. Oh well.

#21 Posted by scarace360 (4828 posts) -

Did you really expect it not to look like shit up close on 6 year old hardware.

#22 Posted by Hitchenson (4682 posts) -

Textures looking not-good on hardware so old, I'm surprised you don't have to turn a cog to get it to run, in a large open world game? Hot damn. I'm shocked.

Next someone will moan they have jaggies in their console games.

#23 Posted by Cloudenvy (5891 posts) -

@Hitchenson said:

Next someone will moan they have jaggies in their console games.

Next? someone did this a few days ago on this very forum!

They're waaaaaaaay ahead of you.

#24 Posted by Hitchenson (4682 posts) -

@Cloudenvy: Why. Just, why.

#25 Posted by DonPixel (2585 posts) -

I BLAME ON JIM STERLING!

#26 Posted by Landon (4144 posts) -

I saw the the first 20 minutes or so of the Xbox version on youtube before it got deleted. The game looked great. But, it's a big open world game, that kind of stuff is pretty much expected.

#27 Posted by Hashbrowns (650 posts) -

Just going by the walk through Howard narrated, I'm still very impressed with how this game is looking.

#28 Posted by Cloudenvy (5891 posts) -

@Hitchenson said:

@Cloudenvy: Why. Just, why.

Only to lower your opinion of this forum!

#29 Posted by iAmJohn (6120 posts) -

@Rowr said:

But do you think ID voluntarily made a console game with a shitty pc port?

That was surely Bethesda's call.

Yeah, it's not like that game was in development for years and had multiple publishers but was always intended to be a game on consoles with an engine optimized to run on consoles or anything. You figured it out, it was all Bethesda's doing in the two years they've owned iD (even though Rage has been in development since back when iD had a publishing deal with Activision).

#30 Edited by MrOldboy (869 posts) -

ES games are not about the visuals, people need to accept this. Be grateful a large and expansive game world even exists in 2011. Bethesda could have easily made a much smaller, condensed, better looking, less-buggy, and directed game. I was full expecting a bait-and-switch with Skyrim.

New engine, it'll look better, play better. But the cost would be a smaller game world when players were expecting a large expansive one. I might have accepted this scenario, but in the end I am glad Bethesda continues to make games the way they do.

#31 Posted by Jost1 (2077 posts) -

People who moan about textures oughta shampoo my crotch

#32 Posted by bioblood22 (420 posts) -

@Jost1 said:

People who moan about textures oughta shampoo my crotch

^Quote of the week^

#33 Posted by Jost1 (2077 posts) -

@bioblood22 said:

@Jost1 said:

People who moan about textures oughta shampoo my crotch

^Quote of the week^

:D

#34 Posted by Obsidian (346 posts) -

It's ridiculous how early all the big games leak on the 360 and yet every publisher still just cries about piracy on the PC. At least once the 11th rolls around I'll get to see some stupidly high res textures on my PC.

#35 Posted by Cincaid (2956 posts) -

@bioblood22 said:

@Jost1 said:

People who moan about textures oughta shampoo my crotch

^Quote of the week^

#36 Posted by Krakn3Dfx (2490 posts) -

Review copy of Fallout 3 leaked on the 360 almost a month before it was in stores. It was madness I tell you!

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.