Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim - iMac or PS3?

[DeusInvictus7]

Hey guys,

I'm about to preorder Skyrim, and I was wondering what would give me a better experience, Skyrim on my iMac (see sig), or on my PS3.

Basically, I'm asking how capable the 6970M 2GB card really is, since I do like using a mouse and keyboard for RPG style games, so if the iMac (running Windows of course) is the better option, I'll go the computer way. If the PS3 is going to be a better experience, then I'll do that.

What do you guys think?

 

[alust2013]

I can't vouch for the iMac, but the PS3 will play any game made for it with plenty of FPS. I don't know how heavy of a game it is, so I can't say what it would be like on the iMac, I would imagine it would be at least decent though.

 

[DeusInvictus7]

I can't vouch for the iMac, but the PS3 will play any game made for it with plenty of FPS. I don't know how heavy of a game it is, so I can't say what it would be like on the iMac, I would imagine it would be at least decent though.

Yeah that's exactly what I'm wondering. I know the PS3 will play it just fine. It's just if the iMac will be either just as good or better, then I'll go for it on the iMac.

 

[CubeHacker]

Definitely the PC version. It will look better, run at higher resolutions, have better controls thanks to mouse/keyboard, and most of all, MOD support for the PC version!

 

[DeusInvictus7]

Definitely the PC version. It will look better, run at higher resolutions, have better controls thanks to mouse/keyboard, and most of all, MOD support for the PC version!

Lol That's what I was leaning towards. The MODs will be great, and the controls for RPGs are so much better with mouse and keyboard.

I remember reading something about Bethesda wanting to make Skyrim look really good on mid-high range PCs, which the iMac (with the 6970M) is in my opinion.

So the PC version is what I'll go for, and just hope it turns out not to be a mistake.

 

[RealSkyDiver]

I played Oblivion on the PC with mods that completely overhauled the graphics which much higher resolution textures, better UI and effects. The console version looked like an early alpha version in comparison.
If you can play Crysis 2 then this game should be no problem.

 

[elithrar]

There's no way for anyone to say for sure, but I'd certainly say that it will at least look better than the PS3 version. Run it at native and tweak/adjust a few settings down to maximise frame-rate.

In other words, if The Witcher 2 runs at 30-40fps natively on my 27" iMac, Skyrim should manage the same, if not better (TW2 is a hog).

 

[Maverick513]

The texture on PS3 is not high as on PC. And 2GB memory is enough for this game. You will get better graphic and resolution on PC. I play this game on pc.

 

[DeusInvictus7]

The texture on PS3 is not high as on PC. And 2GB memory is enough for this game. You will get better graphic and resolution on PC. I play this game on pc.

Yeah I ended up getting the game on the PC. And in the end, my iMac totally exceeded my expectations, especially after some of the visual mods that are around. The game looks so much better than it does on a console.

 

[TMRaven]

The hilarious thing is that skyrim is like the first elder scrolls that was made with a console in mind and then ported over to the pc. You can tell because the textures aren't really updated and as high a resolution as they could be. The main tell-tell factor is the way menu navigation works with the mouse though. You can tell things aren't as accurate as they could be, and often times your mouse won't highlight options and instead you have to use the wasd like it was a D-Pad.

But when Bethesda releases patches that will update it for PC (which presumably will include higher res textures) and release their Creation Kit, the PC version will blow up tenfold.

As it stands though I already am liking the PC version over the console version by the simple fact of resolution alone. With something as engrossing and massive as Skyrim, I'd personally want the resolution to help me become captured by the game. Playing on the iMac's 2560x1440 vs a console's resolution (which is usually sup720p) is a huge upgrade in itself. (Oh and the combination of very low resolution with very low AA makes the game look really pixelated on consoles. 2560x1440 even without AA looks spectacular)

 

[leman]

The iMac with the 6970M will happily run Skyrim at max settings (AA off) and native resolution at 40+ fps (this is absolute minimum, average is more like 50 fps). Beats PS3 any day.

 

[Nightarchaon]

The iMac with the 6970M will happily run Skyrim at max settings (AA off) and native resolution at 40+ fps (this is absolute minimum, average is more like 50 fps). Beats PS3 any day.

I can concur that is true, and unlike the ps3 version that is awaiting an effective engine re-write or patch badge to make it playable past 50 hours my skyrim is still going fine at double that .

I would say, I had to go buy an Xbox pad for the PC to play it, mouse/keyboard support and the menus are a joke !

 

[0098386]

The general concensus is to avoid the Ps3 version. It's a buggy mess that continues to get worse. Xbox or Mac? Still go for the PC/mac version. It looks amazing maxed out on my iMac (under win7).

Plus you can still use controllers, better graphics, faster loading, mod support, etc.

 

[derbothaus]

Yes. Thankfully Skyrim is not very demanding. Unless new engines are developed not entirely sure why year after year so much more power is needed to play the latest ported game using the Unreal 3 engine or something similar. Call of Duty anyone? Nice to see developers keep thing under control. Even though at the same time the PC gamer community wants at least a few games to brutalize their systems. Even if their is no visible benefit from chewing on the higher res files or physics.

 

[NMF]

Avoid the PS3 version at all costs. Even if you didn't have the 6970, avoid! The PS3 version of Skyrim is absolutely broken. It was shameful for Bethesda to even release it. Google it to see what I'm talking about.

Besides, your card will max it out just fine in bootcamp.

 

[dh2005]

Avoid the PS3 version at all costs. Even if you didn't have the 6970, avoid! The PS3 version of Skyrim is absolutely broken.

A friend of mine's work colleague lost a 60-hour game save last week. Apparently it's a known problem with the PS3 version that, when your save file gets too large, it borks. Nice feature in an open-world RPG...

 

[NMF]

A friend of mine's work colleague lost a 60-hour game save last week. Apparently it's a known problem with the PS3 version that, when your save file gets too large, it borks. Nice feature in an open-world RPG...

Every single one of Bethesda's games have been like that on the PS3; their crappy engine has a problem with the way Sony split the memory. It's not a bug that can be fixed. DO NOT BUY!

 

[prism]

Yes. Thankfully Skyrim is not very demanding. Unless new engines are developed not entirely sure why year after year so much more power is needed to play the latest ported game using the Unreal 3 engine or something similar. Call of Duty anyone? Nice to see developers keep thing under control. Even though at the same time the PC gamer community wants at least a few games to brutalize their systems. Even if their is no visible benefit from chewing on the higher res files or physics.

Not very demanding? Maybe if you have the highest end iMac with a maxed out GPU but I can tell you that with my 6770m equipped 21.5" I'm at the limit with mid level settings! If I could use a keyboard and mouse on my PS3, it would be a no brainer for me at least!

 

[derbothaus]

Not very demanding? Maybe if you have the highest end iMac with a maxed out GPU but I can tell you that with my 6770m equipped 21.5" I'm at the limit with mid level settings! If I could use a keyboard and mouse on my PS3, it would be a no brainer for me at least!

I meant not very demanding in a general sense for all video cards available. Not just the Mac lineup.
This may help:
A 6770m = 6670 Desktop = HD4850 = GTX260 (2008 version)
A 6970m = 6850 Desktop = HD4870 = GTX460
Apples Best HD5870 = HD6950 = GTX560 or GTX480
This tells me that the majority of cards available today can play Skyrim just fine. A 6770m is not a very fast card at all and there are 50+ cards faster. In 2008 the same video power was available in the mid-range offerings.

 

[prism]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A334 Safari/7534.48.3)

So it's repackaged trash? I guess I fell for apple's marketing hype.

 

[derbothaus]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A334 Safari/7534.48.3)

So it's repackaged trash? I guess I fell for apple's marketing hype.

No. It is a new card but runs very cool and efficient and is not meant to be a "gamer" card. It'll run on low and medium and run older titles. I don't ever remember Apple marketing the base iMac as a game playing computer. Also AMD repackaged it Apple just decided to use it.

 

[prism]

No. It is a new card but runs very cool and efficient and is not meant to be a "gamer" card. It'll run on low and medium and run older titles. I don't ever remember Apple marketing the base iMac as a game playing computer. Also AMD repackaged it Apple just decided to use it.

I don't know about you, but when I see this:
http://www.apple.com/imac/performance.html
It gives me the impression that
1. Its really much better than the GPU in the former iMac
2. That it is built to play games

Also, I actually purchased an iMac with the 6770m GPU, I just thought that, combined with a 21.5" screen I would be able to play more recent games with at least medium settings. Like I said, i'm struggling with Skyrim.

Finally, if you look at notebook check:
http://www.notebookcheck.net/AMD-Radeon-HD-6770M.43955.0.html
They place this GPU in the mid-range so I am wondering if it is not the 512mb RAM that is the limiting factor here!

 

[derbothaus]

I don't know about you, but when I see this:
http://www.apple.com/imac/performance.html
It gives me the impression that
1. Its really much better than the GPU in the former iMac
2. That it is built to play games

Also, I actually purchased an iMac with the 6770m GPU, I just thought that, combined with a 21.5" screen I would be able to play more recent games with at least medium settings. Like I said, i'm struggling with Skyrim.

Finally, if you look at notebook check:
http://www.notebookcheck.net/AMD-Radeon-HD-6770M.43955.0.html
They place this GPU in the mid-range so I am wondering if it is not the 512mb RAM that is the limiting factor here!

Yeah. It is a bit misleading. It is just OS X ports referenced (in OpenGL NOT DX10, DX11) and against previous models. So really it means little to Windows gamers (pretty much everyone).
A 6770m is a 6770m whether Apple uses it or Dell. You can check benchmarks and I am sure you will not be surprised to see that it performs as a 6770m is expected to perform. I agree that the 512MB could really be the main reason for the slowness. Skyrim maps are really huge. I would cut down res to 1440x900 and really creep back the draw distances. Hopefully something can help eek out a few more frames. But Skyrim is kind of all over the place. My 5870 can hit over 100+FPS indoors and average 40-50 outdoors with dips sometimes into 15FPS. This is a game issue and hopefully they are working on a patch or something. What drivers are you using? My Skyrim plays best so far on 11.11a Catalyst. 11.11b and c introduced glitches and artifacts and the a's suck for crossfire but I care not, only one card. They have been great.

 

[prism]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A334 Safari/7534.48.3)

I just installed display driver 8.92. I still need to test.

 

[Reevsaj]

My iMac 27 with the 6970m 2GB card is running the game better than either of the consoles could ever dream of, and as always, Elder Scrolls games get better with age because of the mods.