Elder Scrolls VI - No New Graphics Engine

Originally Posted by Drithius
The problem with Gamebryo is that it is incredibly temperamental, prone to bugging out, and highly single-threaded, lacking the code infrastructure for modern multicore computers. Bethesda can put all the bandaids on it that they want (and they surely have), but it's simply putting lipstick on a pig these days.

How this thread is going:

- "The engine is old and buggy"

* "Those issue have nothing to do with the core engine code base"

- "Ya but the engine is ancient and problematic"

* "You just said the same thing. Those issue have nothing to do with the core engine code base"

- "Ya but the engine is not new, and is bloated with issues"

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Originally Posted by henriquejr
2 + 2 = 4. There, I said it!

Is that a fact or your opinion?

There was a time when RPGWatch news editors made corrections to their news when it was wrong and they got a hint of it. It's sad, when wrong statements like "THQ Nordic - Acquires Logic Artists" can still be found on the site when even the quote within the newsbit says otherwise. Also it is sad, that there is no news that clarifies this news statement was a misinterpretation of something that meant something totally different.

https://www.gamestar.de/artikel/engi…t,3337156.html (german)

https://kotaku.com/the-controversy-o…ded-1830435351

Originally Posted by Avantenor
https://kotaku.com/the-controversy-o…ded-1830435351

I have a counter to that biased Kokatu article once again.


Really hate that site especially it's writers.

Anyway I love click bait articles they get the most replies.

I don't give a damn about distracting media production and clickbait. It all started with someone claiming Bethesda said. They did not, someone interpreted something.

Originally Posted by Avantenor
I don't give a damn about distracting media production and clickbait. It all started with someone claiming Bethesda said. They did not, someone interpreted something.

Welcome to gaming journalism 101 nowadays.

That's not journalism, that's simple entertainment. You can choose which one you want to pursue.

Originally Posted by Avantenor
That's not journalism, that's simple entertainment. You can choose which one you want to pursue.

I'll pick entertainment thank you.

Though to be blunt I hate most major gaming sites and the current crop of journalists.

Many games journalists hold the same exact perspectives. They share the same political and social views almost to a tee, and it paints their outlook on virtually everything else. I just want to hear something different, too. God forbid.

Love that quote as it's true.

Then go tell a different story, but not based on willingly misinterpreted quotes and with respect towards all parties involved.

Kotaku and anything that comes from Gizmodo Media Group is usually a load of shite. But in this case they happen to be right. Even a broken clock can be correct twice a day.

That counter-argument from Yong is basically a really fancy, almost 20 minutes, of saying that it might, or might not, be the engine.

It still comes down to this:

The things people are complaining about are not a Gamebryo issue, but a Bethesda issue (and in some cases neither).

TBH, I don't find the two cents-worth of a Kotaku writer makes the situation much clearer. I think some of the confusion comes from using the word "engine" as if it always means the same thing. I've argued several times that Unity-bashing is often unjustified, because, to a large extent, a commercial engine like that provides only the bare bones needed to make a game, and the quality and performance of games made with it is very much down to the developers using it.

But there are also engines like, for example, RPGMaker. That's very different to something like Unity, in that it is essentially a fully pre-coded RPG game, which you then customise and fill with content. I'd say it's more like a game-making kit than the basics provided by commercial engine. When you see a game is made with it, you know roughly what it's going to deliver - the way it does things, the constraints, the pros and cons. Every time it receives an update with some fixes and new features, you could say it is no longer the same engine, but it is still very much RPGmaker.

I think the Bethesda engine is more comparable to RPGmaker in that regard, though of course much more advanced. I think when people hear that essentially the same engine is being used again, people look back on the pattern of fairly incremental change, which has left it behind technically and tended to retain many of the same problems and limitations, and they're disappointed to see that continue. The idea of a brand new modern engine would seem much more promising. It's not impossible that the existing engine could be evolved into something much more cutting edge, but their history (and latest effort) suggests that we're not going to see a huge leap forward, and I think it is worth reporting.

Mark my words, this rusty heap of engine will outlive humanity.

But seriously anyone who did any work on their engines, knows it's incredibly unstable. The damn thing crashes so often, often without any "pattern" or reason.
How they have the patience all these years working on it.
When you look at how something like Horizon/Decima/PS4 runs and looks next to Fallout 4/76..inot even a pro vs amateur comparison.

As I said before, visually, it's pretty obvious the engine is not keeping up with the times. It is being held together by some duct tape and rubber bands at this point. Take one look at CD Project Red's Cyberpunk's graphics in terms of any aspect and then look at Fallout 76 or any of the other recent Bethesda games, and it's no contest.

I can't wait to see the next two anticipated games, Star Field and the next Elder Scrolls game and see what the graphics look like in those. I would bet heavily that it will look like a slight upgrade to what they have now, and will still be ages behind what the Cyberpunk game will look like. Then we will get to hear the fanboys tell us that its not the engine, just that we aren't looking at the game properly, either with both eyes closed or nearly closed or at an angle, and that we just don't understand technology…
Uh huh. surrrrrrreeeeeee…

Cyberpunk is still in development so I have to point out some of the released games in this year: Kingdom Come D, Softhe Tomb Raider and Assassins Creed Odyssey.
Compared with these FO76 looks horrible, and I have no reason to believe Skyrim2 will look better.

All those reasonings it's not Gambryo engine any more because there are some parts added and some changed is IMO nonsense. Coke removed sugar and is using corn syrup instead but it's still - coke. Just as Beth uses same shit in new wrapping.

Too expensive to develop a new engine while keeping old modding systems in it? Gimme a break. Beth is not a small studio like PB who also uses the same engine for years due to development costs. Beth can and should make a new engine from scratch. Sadly, the money was spent on developing Fallout Shelter and random MMO garbage.

Originally Posted by joxer
Cyberpunk is still in development so I have to point out some of the released games in this year: Kingdom Come D, Softhe Tomb Raider and Assassins Creed Odyssey.
Compared with these FO76 looks horrible, and I have no reason to believe Skyrim2 will look better.

FO76 looking horrible isn’t an engine limitation though.

For example my fully modded skyrim looks significantly better than AC odyssey.

I didn't play Fallout 4 or 76, but I did play Skyrim Special Edition which runs on the updated engine. The problems it has:
- Awful AI
- Low draw distance for stuff like grass (and becomes unstable if you raise it through config files)
- Shallow combat system with no location based damage (mods have tried to add that but it is, in my experience, script heavy and slows down the game)
- problems with dynamic lighting (sometimes some lights will simply turn off if you have more than few in your field of vision)
- physics based on framerate (lightly touch a pot and it flies all over the room)
- popping and low draw distance for shadows and such (this can be raised, but again, it becomes unstable and/or tanks the fps)
- problems with spawning/despawning npcs (go to an inn at 10PM, see a lot of people there, go to sleep for 8 hours, and when you wake u all of the people are still there, all of them leaving the same moment)
- countless bugs and instabilities (flying horses, t-pose npcs, swimming through the air, scripting errors, etc.)
- it still looks only marginally better than the regular Skyrim (and that also applies to the new Fallouts since I saw what they look like)
Again, I didn't play the new Fallouts so I don't know if any of this has been fixed or not, but if it was not fixed they have to change a lot in the engine to impress me personally. And I feel a lot of people share my experience.

Originally Posted by sakichop
For example my fully modded skyrim looks significantly better than AC odyssey.

Well my Skyrim with only two mods (SkyUI and norespawn) looks like Chrono Trigger.

Then again, is this thread about mods and modding effectivness? If yes, we can also discuss GTA 5 mods fixing $34785637845678367856 worth PC port visuals too.
But I don't think the title contains the word "reshade".

- Shallow combat system with no location based damage (mods have tried to add that but it is, in my experience, script heavy and slows down the game)

You have an SKSE plugin for it. Tested it a bit, didn't find any issues.

Well, the Unreal Engine is based on the same engine we saw in 1998.

The Creation Engine is based on Gamebryo - which has been around for many years as well.

The engine is not the problem, really.