PDA

View Full Version : Elder Scrolls IV Oblivion Details



Nato King
09-02-2005, 01:32 PM
Front page (http://img198.imageshack.us/img198/2995/oblivion18dj.jpg)
Page one (http://img168.imageshack.us/img168/770/oblivion23al.jpg)
page two (http://img208.imageshack.us/img208/1415/oblivion35zx.jpg)
page three (http://img222.imageshack.us/img222/695/oblivion45qe.jpg)

studepaber
09-02-2005, 02:21 PM
Aaahhh Elder Scrolls bliss!!! Between this, PDZ and PGR3 I'm gonna have a hard time getting out of the house :yikes:

Nato King
09-02-2005, 03:00 PM
Aaahhh Elder Scrolls bliss!!! Between this, PDZ and PGR3 I'm gonna have a hard time getting out of the house :yikes:


You dont' have to tell me. I am going to take all my vacation time that I have for the year and take off from work so I can play and not sleep. I can't wait. I am going to see how long I can stay awake and play xbox360. hahahaha

George89
09-02-2005, 03:42 PM
Oblivion is going to be 16 square miles, which is BIG. But for some reason, i think Morrowind was bigger.....was it? and isn't GTA: San Andreas like 30 something square miles (they said it was about 6 times bigger than Vice City--which is 6 square miles.)

Nato King
09-02-2005, 03:56 PM
Oblivion is going to be 16 square miles, which is BIG. But for some reason, i think Morrowind was bigger.....was it? and isn't GTA: San Andreas like 30 something square miles (they said it was about 6 times bigger than Vice City--which is 6 square miles.)

Oh I see never heard anything about the square miles or not. but if you are right Oblivion is going to be 6*6= 36 square miles wow :yikes:

Conchord
09-02-2005, 07:50 PM
The only reason San Andreas was so big was because of all of that damn rural land that I always crashed my car in and had to walk for thirty minutes.

George89
09-03-2005, 10:40 AM
Oh I see never heard anything about the square miles or not. but if you are right Oblivion is going to be 6*6= 36 square miles wow :yikes:


no, i said San Andreas was about 35 sqare miles.....the land of Oblivion is giong to be 16 square miles--which doesn't include the 200+ dungeons.

Nato King
09-03-2005, 02:27 PM
no, i said San Andreas was about 35 sqare miles.....the land of Oblivion is giong to be 16 square miles--which doesn't include the 200+ dungeons.

so it's going to be smaller. OOOHHHH man. I wanted it to be bigger why would they make it so small I wonder.

th3 p0p3
09-03-2005, 02:35 PM
you have to figure that they did not want to make the map too large because there is a lot of walking involved, as opposed to GTA where you are driving your car around at 80 mph. Also, the sq. mileage doesnt include the dungeons, which would be big im assuming.

BORNGD
09-03-2005, 03:29 PM
i have seen this, looks very good indeed now!

Nameless
09-03-2005, 03:37 PM
That was a good read man. This is THE gane I'm lookin forward to for the 360. It sounds 100 times better than what Fable was supposed to be. And that was sposed to be money.

Nato King
09-03-2005, 04:08 PM
That was a good read man. This is THE gane I'm lookin forward to for the 360. It sounds 100 times better than what Fable was supposed to be. And that was sposed to be money.


thanks I am on the look out for any information about this game. so look out for more. I will keep the information coming in like running water. hahaha

Ford Mustang
09-03-2005, 06:53 PM
Just. Plain. Awesome.

Conchord
09-03-2005, 08:15 PM
so it's going to be smaller. OOOHHHH man. I wanted it to be bigger why would they make it so small I wonder.

dude are you kidding the only reason any GTA game seems big is because u are cruisin around in third person...Elder Scrolls is first person, and you are runnin around everywhere, not drivin (ok horseback sometimes, but its still slow), so it will still seem big...plus, all the space was wasted on GTA, u didnt use any of it except for driving, everythin in Elder Scrolls is interactive...

TheCovenant
09-03-2005, 08:22 PM
last time i checked, morrowind was 1 square mile...16 seems ridiculous.

Conchord
09-03-2005, 08:24 PM
last time i checked, morrowind was 1 square mile...16 seems ridiculous.

holy **** man, morrowind was only 1 square mile? **** me, that game was massive. anyone second guessing this game has been spoiled by the suckness that is GTA.

Nameless
09-03-2005, 09:41 PM
last time i checked, morrowind was 1 square mile...16 seems ridiculous.
:yikes:

Excuse me...I have to pick my jaw up off the floor.

laughs
09-03-2005, 10:35 PM
That was a good read man. This is THE gane I'm lookin forward to for the 360. It sounds 100 times better than what Fable was supposed to be. And that was sposed to be money.

I loved Fable... If this game turns out to be half as good as Fable, I'll be happy with it. By the way, Oblivion is the one I'm getting at launch :cheers:

laughs
09-03-2005, 10:37 PM
GS: We learned that the gameworld is approximately 16 square miles in size. How large is that in comparison to Morrowind's world, roughly? Will we see the same kind of variety in terrain and locales like we saw in Morrowind, which had deserts and mountains and lush forests? Tell us about how this world is being generated, and what the new terrain generation system adds to the game?

TH: The outside world, in terms of square miles, is a bit larger than Morrowind's, but it doesn't feel that way with the fast travel. So each of our games has had a different scale, and we mess with that early on and change it depending on how the game is flowing. So if you had to walk everywhere, I'd make it much, much smaller. In terms of terrain, there are several varieties, from beaches, to mountains, to open planes, to forests, snow, etc.

http://www.gamespot.com/xbox360/rpg/theelderscrollsivoblivion/preview_6128767.html

George89
09-04-2005, 10:48 AM
last time i checked, morrowind was 1 square mile...16 seems ridiculous.
Morrowind was A LOT larger than 1 mile. A lot of people complained that Morrowind was too big and hard to get around places fast, so that's probably also why there are horses in Oblivion.


If this game turns out to be half as good as Fable, I'll be happy with it.

Fable was good, but by no means amazing. I don't know if all of you were as hyped up about it as me (i thought it'd have the scale of Morrowind with deep character customization and great graphics), but i thought this was the biggest disapointment i've ever experienced in video games--but that's only because PM made me expect so much from it and then didn't deliver.

Hangnail
09-04-2005, 07:53 PM
Man of man, this is the game I've wanted all my life... With the size of Oblivion at least as large as Morrowind, and an even more interactive environment with NPC's that are just about the same as you, this is surely going to be one of my all-time favorite games... :hardcore:

Nato King
09-04-2005, 08:01 PM
this is surely going to be one of my all-time favorite games... :hardcore:

You can say that again. hangnail. I look all over different web sites for information about this game. I can't get enough of this game until I am playing it on my xbox360. :yikes:

laughs
09-05-2005, 09:23 AM
Fable was good, but by no means amazing. I don't know if all of you were as hyped up about it as me (i thought it'd have the scale of Morrowind with deep character customization and great graphics), but i thought this was the biggest disapointment i've ever experienced in video games--but that's only because PM made me expect so much from it and then didn't deliver.

I loved Fable....Of course, my major beef was the lenght.

J4320
09-05-2005, 11:35 AM
I hope the loading times in this game are gonna be faster. It's not like the Morrowind loading times were bad or anything but I just think it would be nice to have faster loading times.

Nato King
09-05-2005, 12:11 PM
I hope the loading times in this game are gonna be faster. It's not like the Morrowind loading times were bad or anything but I just think it would be nice to have faster loading times.


I know what you mean I hate when a game loads period. I liked those days when loading wasn't in a game.

FatBox
09-05-2005, 01:00 PM
last time i checked, morrowind was 1 square mile...16 seems ridiculous.
Umm Morrowind was 9 square miles...

Nameless
09-05-2005, 01:01 PM
I loved Fable....Of course, my major beef was the lenght.
To be honest, if it weren't for the length I could have over-looked everything else that the game didn't deliver on but was said to. But 18 hours for an RPG is just weak, I took my time even.

Conchord
09-05-2005, 01:06 PM
Umm Morrowind was 9 square miles...

OK guys someone find out for sure damn it.

FatBox
09-05-2005, 01:10 PM
OK guys someone find out for sure damn it.
A dev quoted this on these forums http://www.elderscrolls.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=73603&st=80&p=1715978&#entry1715978

This is what he said.


For the umpteenth time, Morrowind was approx 10 square miles. And the devlopment process to produce a system that would automatically generate the things you're mentioning took far more time and research to do than you think. If it didn't, the place would look terrible and you guys wouldn't appreciate that. So, yes, it is bigger, but no, it wasn't easier.

So yeah it was around 9 or 10 square miles.

LTM360
09-05-2005, 01:11 PM
But 18 hours for an RPG is just weak, I took my time even.


Clearly; took you 18 hours?! haha, took me only 9. I was pissed. Elder Scrolls IV looks great, sounds great, but I hated the combat in Morrowind; as long as the fighting is more... "action" I guess is the word, this could be the best RPG there is.

Nato King
09-05-2005, 01:19 PM
Clearly; took you 18 hours?! haha, took me only 9. I was pissed. Elder Scrolls IV looks great, sounds great, but I hated the combat in Morrowind; as long as the fighting is more... "action" I guess is the word, this could be the best RPG there is.


ya it could be the best. What am I talking about it is the best.

laughs
09-05-2005, 01:50 PM
Took me about 9 or 10 hours to beat Fable. I never played Morrowind....How long did it take you guys to finish that?

George89
09-05-2005, 01:58 PM
I never finished morrowind....it was soooo long. and i don't think that there are many people that completed all the missions in the game, there are just so many. And for Fable, it took me about 12 hours, though i actually played a little longer because if you die and it reverts back to your last saved game, it doesn't add that time.

greg756
09-05-2005, 06:41 PM
the AI will be cool too so..and to see far into the distance. and it not be a picture of a mountain but the mountain you goto if you want....ah finally next gen
this is one of the better titles....

George89
09-05-2005, 07:42 PM
the AI will be cool too so..and to see far into the distance. and it not be a picture of a mountain but the mountain you goto if you want....ah finally next gen
this is one of the better titles....

yeah, i'm really excited about the AI......it is what really separates this game from others. in it, the AI will live out daily schedules, communicate to you, and do a variety of things.

greg756
09-05-2005, 08:03 PM
yeah i read in an interview with the devoloper that they react unlike anything ive ever dealt with in any game...in one situation he attack this guy who was unarmed and since he didnt have a weapon, he left, bought a dagger, came back and started to attack him with it...that is what im excited about....better ideas..not just technology....

greg756
09-05-2005, 08:05 PM
ive also heard some rumor about it not making it to the ps3...maybe...we need every killer app we can get...all we need now is make sure japan gets us more rpgs

Ford Mustang
09-05-2005, 08:36 PM
Took me about 9 or 10 hours to beat Fable. I never played Morrowind....How long did it take you guys to finish that?


162 hours. :)

George89
09-05-2005, 08:57 PM
ive also heard some rumor about it not making it to the ps3...maybe...we need every killer app we can get...all we need now is make sure japan gets us more rpgs


right now i don't think they're developing it for the PS3.....since on their site it only says it's coming to Xbox 360 and PC......but then again, they could always port it to the PS3 in a few years.

StudioAlex
09-05-2005, 09:24 PM
It's exclusive to the Xbox 360 as far as consoles are concerned.

swivel
09-07-2005, 05:33 PM
This is going to be the "Killer-App" for the 360. Might make people forget about Halo for a month or so. (Unless you are just into the online play)

I've been looking forward to this game since Daggerfall came out in 1996! Huge fan of the series.

Unfortunately, I'll probably be playing this one on my PC. As bad as Fable was, it was at least tolerable on the PC because of the Mouse and Keyboard. On the XBox I thought it was a stinker.

George89
09-07-2005, 05:39 PM
This is going to be the "Killer-App" for the 360. Might make people forget about Halo for a month or so. (Unless you are just into the online play)

I've been looking forward to this game since Daggerfall came out in 1996! Huge fan of the series.

Unfortunately, I'll probably be playing this one on my PC. As bad as Fable was, it was at least tolerable on the PC because of the Mouse and Keyboard. On the XBox I thought it was a stinker.

yeah, but if you want better graphics, according to Bethesda, the Xbox 360 version will have an edge graphically over the PC version.

laughs
09-07-2005, 06:51 PM
Is this gonna be anything like lord of the rings? IGOD I love that movie!

swivel
09-07-2005, 07:09 PM
Oblivion is going to be 16 square miles, which is BIG. But for some reason, i think Morrowind was bigger.....was it? and isn't GTA: San Andreas like 30 something square miles (they said it was about 6 times bigger than Vice City--which is 6 square miles.)

That's the way the Elder Scrolls universe has gone. Daggerfall was bigger than Morrowind, and Oblivion is even smaller. They are doing this on purpose. Daggerfall required a lot of randomly generated dungeons and towns. Morrowind had to repeat a lot of textures and NPC's. Oblivion is going to focus on every encounter and location being unique. They keep trading quantity for quality... and it has worked so far.

This is a game I have been looking forward to for 4 years, believe it or not. I think it is the Killer-App for the XBox 2, just like Halo was for the XBox.

swivel
09-07-2005, 07:15 PM
yeah, but if you want better graphics, according to Bethesda, the Xbox 360 version will have an edge graphically over the PC version.

I don't see how that is possible. I'll be playing it at 1200 x 1600 on the PC vs. 1080 x 768 on my HDTV. And my PC is much faster than the XBox 360 or the PS3. That's not to put down either system, I spend much more time gaming on my consoles than I do on my PC, but it is the nature of the beast. I have $1,200 invested in just the graphics cards on my PC.

I think consoles are more Fun in general, but there are some games that are more immersive for me on the PC. That's just me. RPG's and FPS's are two of those genres. But most of my time is spent playing sports games, which rule on the XBox and PS2.

Besides... this is the same argument that pops up every time a new generation of console comes out. And it always pans out the same way. When the specs are announced, there is nothing faster. By the time the consoles hit the shelves, PC's are already beyond them. That shouldn't come as a surprise, the tech for the consoles are made by the same people and the same industry that supplies them for the PC. The great thing about the consoles is that the manufacturer takes a LOSS on them. Don't you wish everyone was so generous? Especially the corner gas station?

Nato King
09-18-2005, 09:40 AM
Bethesda Softworks has released three new Oblivion screenshots. These are all from the Xbox 360 version of the game. Enjoy! Oblivion is a single-player game that takes place in Tamriel's capital province, Cyrodiil. You are given the task of finding the hidden heir to a throne that sits empty, the previous emperor having been killed by an unknown assassin. With no true Emperor, the gates to Oblivion (the equivalent of hell in the world of Tamriel) open, and demons begin to invade Cyrodiil and attack its people and towns. It's up to you to find the lost heir to the throne and unravel the sinister plot that threatens to destroy all of Tamriel.




More pictures for your enjoyment (http://www.elderscrolls.com/art/obliv_xbox360_screens_01.htm)

Max33
09-18-2005, 09:50 AM
Thats the one aspect of Oblivion that dissapoints me,the fact that its going to be smaller geographicly.I'm always sad when I run out of new areas to explore.

ShadedNine
09-18-2005, 12:49 PM
Thats the one aspect of Oblivion that dissapoints me,the fact that its going to be smaller geographicly.I'm always sad when I run out of new areas to explore.

I don't think it's really going to feel that way come release though. There may be less square footage to explore, but what there is looks like it's going to be far more rich and worthy of exploring. Morrowind had a lot of areas with nothing but large expanses of dead terrain filled with those stupid annoying birds.

TheCovenant
09-18-2005, 07:27 PM
I don't see how that is possible. I'll be playing it at 1200 x 1600 on the PC vs. 1080 x 768 on my HDTV. And my PC is much faster than the XBox 360 or the PS3. That's not to put down either system, I spend much more time gaming on my consoles than I do on my PC, but it is the nature of the beast. I have $1,200 invested in just the graphics cards on my PC.

I think consoles are more Fun in general, but there are some games that are more immersive for me on the PC. That's just me. RPG's and FPS's are two of those genres. But most of my time is spent playing sports games, which rule on the XBox and PS2.

Besides... this is the same argument that pops up every time a new generation of console comes out. And it always pans out the same way. When the specs are announced, there is nothing faster. By the time the consoles hit the shelves, PC's are already beyond them. That shouldn't come as a surprise, the tech for the consoles are made by the same people and the same industry that supplies them for the PC. The great thing about the consoles is that the manufacturer takes a LOSS on them. Don't you wish everyone was so generous? Especially the corner gas station?


Uhm, underestimate much...?


Thats the way it was, but ATI and Nvidia used future proofing this time around.unless your pc is a 3 core master/slave graphics card, with the 512 ram and the dram, i dont think your pc outdoes the 360. I know its possible, but you'd have to spend way more money on your pc than on the 360, which is an uber powerful machine, much more powerful than all the first wave of games are making it out to be.

As of right now, and probably will be true around launch, there is nothing short of a powerhouse of a computer out there that competes with the next gen consoles. You better be saving up to upgrade that pc if you want better graphics, not to mention that each 3.2 ghz core is entirely dedicated to gaming, no multiprocessing/multitasking on the system.... :whistle:

ShadedNine
09-18-2005, 09:07 PM
I would say there will quite likely be PCs more powerful for gaming, but I have to agree that any system you build today isn't going to outdo the 360.

That being said, your argument regarding resolution is certainly valid. Some might say that the extra detail the 360 might be capable of showing won't be properly appreciated at 1280x720 (1024x768 is for PCs). Others might say that even with a record breaking polygon count the higher resolution only draws out flaws.

As for me, I'll rent the 360 version, download a demo or borrow a PC copy, and see which system I want to own it for. Given the nature of the game and the likely expansions to come though, I'll probably end up with the PC version unless the 360 can really wow me over my PC.

Even on PC though, I'll be running it at 720p, since that's what my screen is. My 19" doesn't cut it for games anymore :)

swivel
09-19-2005, 06:39 AM
Uhm, underestimate much...?


Thats the way it was, but ATI and Nvidia used future proofing this time around.unless your pc is a 3 core master/slave graphics card, with the 512 ram and the dram, i dont think your pc outdoes the 360. I know its possible, but you'd have to spend way more money on your pc than on the 360, which is an uber powerful machine, much more powerful than all the first wave of games are making it out to be.

As of right now, and probably will be true around launch, there is nothing short of a powerhouse of a computer out there that competes with the next gen consoles. You better be saving up to upgrade that pc if you want better graphics, not to mention that each 3.2 ghz core is entirely dedicated to gaming, no multiprocessing/multitasking on the system.... :whistle:

Of course it costs more. It also does more. Don't get me wrong, I love my consoles, and I'll probably always own all of them, but I'm a huge PC geek.

I love the argument that consoles are better because they are cheaper. Pull up beside a Porsche in your Pinto and try that argument. Yes, PC's are expensive. And they will always be more powerful as a result.

I have two 7800GTX video cards in a Gigabyte GA-K8NXP (two 16x PCI-E slots) running in SLI. I know it is a tragedy for most of you, but these two cards together blow the 360 out of the water. It isn't even close. Of course, they cost over a grand, and the rest of my computer has another three grand in it, but this is a Porsche, not a Pinto.

Do you have a confirmation from Bethesda that they are going to hobble their game by putting a resolution limit in it? I find that very hard to believe. I expect the max res. to be 1600X1400. Either way, with AA, the game will look better on a PC monitor, not a TV.

In about two years the XBox2 should be hitting its stride, with the full potential of multiple threads being tapped, and faster PC's will cost a grand. To ignore history is to repeat the same mistakes over and over again.