The Order of the Stick: Utterly Dwarfed
The Order of the Stick: Utterly Dwarfed - Coming in December and available for pre-order now
Page 2 of 16 FirstFirst 123456789101112 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 60 of 478
  1. - Top - End - #31
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    unseenmage's Avatar

    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Middle of nowhere USA.
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Fallout IX: Nuclear Cash Cows Go MMOoooooo!

    Quote Originally Posted by Erloas View Post
    https://youtu.be/7hRljZhtGdo
    Not that I give him any more weight than anyone else on the net, but there it is.

    ...
    As someone who's already concious of where my money goes (read as poor, I call myself a bargain bin gamer) nothing in the video was really news to me.

    I've had a friend or two recommend 76 to me but they are young'ins with disposable incomes who tend to hop on hype trains a bit much for my taste so I'd taken their recommendation with a big fat grain of salt.

    Doom saying aside, I do wonder whether any software will ever be preplaytested and 'finished' to any real standard ever again in this age of constant updates and content additions.

    I suspect that even the idea of DLC will blur with that of functional updates given time. That every game will be an 'app game' eventually. But that's just my own doom and gloom speaking.

  2. - Top - End - #32
    Troll in the Playground
     
    GnomeWizardGuy

    Join Date
    Nov 2013

    Default Re: Fallout IX: Nuclear Cash Cows Go MMOoooooo!

    I've seen some stuff about the engine from elsewhere, and it all seems pretty damning. The engine was fine back in 2002 - in fact, it was impressive. The problem is that it is no longer fit for purpose because the technology has advanced. All Bethesda games have loading screens all over the place because the games weren't designed to handle worlds of the size that has become standard. The cities have to be in their own loading zone because the number of NPCs has grown enough to make the game unstable if they aren't.

    The re-use of assets has been noticeable for some time. New Vegas pulled most of its assets from Fallout 3, which already made them look dated as there's a 2 year gap between the games. However, a lot of the clutter and textures dated all the way back to Oblivion. Pulling items from a 4 year old game in a different genre (Fantasy v Sci-Fi) was downright shameful, and they got a lot of scorn for it at the time. Fallout 76 just proves they haven't learned - for every screenshot that looks beautiful, there's a screenshot where I couldn't tell you if it was from 76 or from Fallout 4, because the assets used are the exact same ones. It would not surprise me to learn that some of the clutter is pulled straight from Fallout 3, with a new coat of paint at best.

    They need a new engine before going any further, but I see no evidence that they intend on doing so. Fallout 76 is a warning sign, but I suspect they're going to crash and burn sooner or later.

  3. - Top - End - #33
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    Balmas's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Middle-o'-Nowhere, Idaho
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Fallout IX: Nuclear Cash Cows Go MMOoooooo!

    Quote Originally Posted by Rodin View Post
    I've seen some stuff about the engine from elsewhere, and it all seems pretty damning. The engine was fine back in 2002 - in fact, it was impressive. The problem is that it is no longer fit for purpose because the technology has advanced. All Bethesda games have loading screens all over the place because the games weren't designed to handle worlds of the size that has become standard. The cities have to be in their own loading zone because the number of NPCs has grown enough to make the game unstable if they aren't.

    The re-use of assets has been noticeable for some time. New Vegas pulled most of its assets from Fallout 3, which already made them look dated as there's a 2 year gap between the games. However, a lot of the clutter and textures dated all the way back to Oblivion. Pulling items from a 4 year old game in a different genre (Fantasy v Sci-Fi) was downright shameful, and they got a lot of scorn for it at the time. Fallout 76 just proves they haven't learned - for every screenshot that looks beautiful, there's a screenshot where I couldn't tell you if it was from 76 or from Fallout 4, because the assets used are the exact same ones. It would not surprise me to learn that some of the clutter is pulled straight from Fallout 3, with a new coat of paint at best.

    They need a new engine before going any further, but I see no evidence that they intend on doing so. Fallout 76 is a warning sign, but I suspect they're going to crash and burn sooner or later.
    I disagree. The engine isn't the problem. It's with management that bows to marketing, an apathetic dev team, rushed game releases, and a willingness to ship games with the attitude that they can patch it later.

    To paraphrase a video that Gopher put out a few days ago: imagine if Bethesda licensed the engine to Obsidian, and they made a perfect new Fallout game. Imagine a New Vegas sequel with roleplaying, with hours of quests that affect both others' disposition and the world around you, with new factions that are interesting and varied instead of the same rehashed factions shoehorned in to make marketing happy. Would the engine be a problem in that game?
    I run a Let's Play channel! Check it out!
    Currently, we're playing through New Vegas as Gabriel de la Cruz, merchant and mercenary extraordinaire!

  4. - Top - End - #34
    Titan in the Playground
     
    BlackDragon

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Manchester, UK
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Fallout IX: Nuclear Cash Cows Go MMOoooooo!

    Quote Originally Posted by Rodin View Post
    All Bethesda games have loading screens all over the place because the games weren't designed to handle worlds of the size that has become standard. The cities have to be in their own loading zone because the number of NPCs has grown enough to make the game unstable if they aren't.
    That doesn't make sense. Oblivion in 2006 had instanced cities, but it certainly didn't have as many NPCs in, say, the Imperial City as Vivec in Morrowind did--and Vivec was entirely non-instanced, you could walk anywhere in it without a loading transition. Whatever reason they chose to introduce instanced cities was, it wasn't because of the number of NPCs.

  5. - Top - End - #35
    Barbarian in the Playground
    Join Date
    May 2016

    Default Re: Fallout IX: Nuclear Cash Cows Go MMOoooooo!

    Quote Originally Posted by factotum View Post
    That doesn't make sense. Oblivion in 2006 had instanced cities, but it certainly didn't have as many NPCs in, say, the Imperial City as Vivec in Morrowind did--and Vivec was entirely non-instanced, you could walk anywhere in it without a loading transition. Whatever reason they chose to introduce instanced cities was, it wasn't because of the number of NPCs.
    Not that I disagree with you, but the overwhelming majority of the NPCs in Vivec are in interior cells (along with pretty much everything else), and unless you're using a mod that changes things they're also more or less just there - at most patrolling back and forth over some short distance inside the cell. Vivec might not be an instanced city in the way that any of the major cities of Oblivion is, but it's also not that far off from it.
    Last edited by Aeson; 2018-12-13 at 03:05 AM.

  6. - Top - End - #36
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    Flumph

    Join Date
    Apr 2018

    Default Re: Fallout IX: Nuclear Cash Cows Go MMOoooooo!

    Quote Originally Posted by Balmas View Post
    I disagree. The engine isn't the problem. It's with management that bows to marketing, an apathetic dev team, rushed game releases, and a willingness to ship games with the attitude that they can patch it later.

    To paraphrase a video that Gopher put out a few days ago: imagine if Bethesda licensed the engine to Obsidian, and they made a perfect new Fallout game. Imagine a New Vegas sequel with roleplaying, with hours of quests that affect both others' disposition and the world around you, with new factions that are interesting and varied instead of the same rehashed factions shoehorned in to make marketing happy. Would the engine be a problem in that game?
    I'll agree with that. The engine being incredibly outdated is a symptom, but the corporate culture in Bethesda itself seems to be the issue. It's just sad that they have the Fallout license.

  7. - Top - End - #37
    Ettin in the Playground
    Join Date
    May 2007

    Default Re: Fallout IX: Nuclear Cash Cows Go MMOoooooo!

    Quote Originally Posted by Balmas View Post
    I disagree. The engine isn't the problem. It's with management that bows to marketing, an apathetic dev team, rushed game releases, and a willingness to ship games with the attitude that they can patch it later.

    To paraphrase a video that Gopher put out a few days ago: imagine if Bethesda licensed the engine to Obsidian, and they made a perfect new Fallout game. Imagine a New Vegas sequel with roleplaying, with hours of quests that affect both others' disposition and the world around you, with new factions that are interesting and varied instead of the same rehashed factions shoehorned in to make marketing happy. Would the engine be a problem in that game?
    Yes, the engine would still be a problem. It would be a huge lodestone around the neck of an otherwise excellent game. The game you're describing sounds good, but it would be even better with an engine that isn't garbage.

  8. - Top - End - #38
    Orc in the Playground
     
    DwarfClericGuy

    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    USA
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Fallout IX: Nuclear Cash Cows Go MMOoooooo!

    Quote Originally Posted by OutOfThyme View Post
    I'll agree with that. The engine being incredibly outdated is a symptom, but the corporate culture in Bethesda itself seems to be the issue. It's just sad that they have the Fallout license.
    A poor craftsman blames his tools sure; but a good craftsman buys the best tools he can get. I worked at a company where management basically refused to spend money on fundamental equipment. We were trying to do scientific research with the equivalent of two rocks and a stick. If Bethseda is going to make games it needs to the tools to do it; part of that is updating the engine.

  9. - Top - End - #39
    Troll in the Playground
     
    druid91's Avatar

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Lemuria
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Fallout IX: Nuclear Cash Cows Go MMOoooooo!

    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas Cardew View Post
    A poor craftsman blames his tools sure; but a good craftsman buys the best tools he can get. I worked at a company where management basically refused to spend money on fundamental equipment. We were trying to do scientific research with the equivalent of two rocks and a stick. If Bethseda is going to make games it needs to the tools to do it; part of that is updating the engine.
    I mean.... to be entirely honest. I think a lot of the complaints about the engine are nonsensical.

    Is Tetris a bad game just because it's old? Is Oblivion? Is the fact that it's been used before make it bad?

    Bethesda's issue isn't the engine.
    Spoiler
    Show
    Quote Originally Posted by AvatarZero View Post
    I like the "hobo" in there.
    "Hey, you just got 10000gp! You going to buy a fully staffed mansion or something?"
    "Nah, I'll upgrade my +2 sword to a +3 sword and sleep in my cloak."

    Non est salvatori salvator, neque defensori dominus, nec pater nec mater, nihil supernum.

    Torumekian knight Avatar by Licoot.

    Note to self: Never get involved in an ethics thread again...Especially if I'm defending the empire.

  10. - Top - End - #40
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Lizardfolk

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Up there past them trees!

    Default Re: Fallout IX: Nuclear Cash Cows Go MMOoooooo!

    Quote Originally Posted by druid91 View Post
    I mean.... to be entirely honest. I think a lot of the complaints about the engine are nonsensical.

    Is Tetris a bad game just because it's old? Is Oblivion? Is the fact that it's been used before make it bad?

    Bethesda's issue isn't the engine.
    Eh. I'm solidly in the middle of this. The problems with the Creation Engine are not make-believe. Changing to a better engine, like IdTech 6, would likely help a great deal. What no one outside of Bethesda knows is how much work and money that would entail, and what trade-offs would be necessary to accomplish it. Doing such a thing tends to go solidly against the grain of what most business leadership people would be inclined to support. Business stakeholders tend to have a laser-like focus on features, so fundamental design changes and underlying platform innovation tends to suffer in most operations. Would going to IdTech 6 make loading screens go away? Probably. Does that matter for showing a good demo in front of the E3 audience? Not so much.

  11. - Top - End - #41
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    unseenmage's Avatar

    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Middle of nowhere USA.
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Fallout IX: Nuclear Cash Cows Go MMOoooooo!

    Quote Originally Posted by The_Jackal View Post
    Eh. I'm solidly in the middle of this. The problems with the Creation Engine are not make-believe. Changing to a better engine, like IdTech 6, would likely help a great deal. What no one outside of Bethesda knows is how much work and money that would entail, and what trade-offs would be necessary to accomplish it. Doing such a thing tends to go solidly against the grain of what most business leadership people would be inclined to support. Business stakeholders tend to have a laser-like focus on features, so fundamental design changes and underlying platform innovation tends to suffer in most operations. Would going to IdTech 6 make loading screens go away? Probably. Does that matter for showing a good demo in front of the E3 audience? Not so much.
    Tetris does not compare. Might as well compare Monopoly to Fallout while you're at it.

  12. - Top - End - #42
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Rynjin's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2016

    Default Re: Fallout IX: Nuclear Cash Cows Go MMOoooooo!

    Quote Originally Posted by druid91 View Post
    I mean.... to be entirely honest. I think a lot of the complaints about the engine are nonsensical.

    Is Tetris a bad game just because it's old? Is Oblivion? Is the fact that it's been used before make it bad?

    Bethesda's issue isn't the engine.
    Are you willing to pay full price $60 plus a season pass for OG Tetris? If the guy that made Tetris spawned 7 other games using the same "engine" as Tetris, each more constantly strained, less stable, and prone to bugs and crashing than the last due to the limitations of the engine having been reached long since, would you consider the smart action to be never to upgrade?

    Should we judge new games not based on the market standard of today but by how they compare to Tetris?

    Quote Originally Posted by The_Jackal View Post
    Eh. I'm solidly in the middle of this. The problems with the Creation Engine are not make-believe. Changing to a better engine, like IdTech 6, would likely help a great deal. What no one outside of Bethesda knows is how much work and money that would entail, and what trade-offs would be necessary to accomplish it. Doing such a thing tends to go solidly against the grain of what most business leadership people would be inclined to support. Business stakeholders tend to have a laser-like focus on features, so fundamental design changes and underlying platform innovation tends to suffer in most operations. Would going to IdTech 6 make loading screens go away? Probably. Does that matter for showing a good demo in front of the E3 audience? Not so much.

    Absolutely incorrect to the reality of the industry. For a long time, and still ongoing in some circles, the problem with the ever increasing budget of games that "justified" the increased monetization was that a lot of publishers/developers insisted on reinventing the wheel with every new release; every new game needed its own unique engine. It was a big selling point.

    Not making a new engine and abandoning the Creation Engine was NOT a decision of the higher-ups at Zenimax. For most of the Creation Engine's lifespan, the execs WANTED people to waste time making a new engine for no real reason. It was a badge of honor and prestige to create a new engine for every game.

    It is clearly a choice by the Bethesda dev and design teams, not Zenimax. For a good while, it was a good move; there was no real reason to change engines between Oblivion and Fallout 3, or arguably even New Vegas.

    By the time Skyrim came around though, its limits had been reached. By Fallout 4, the continued use was laughable.
    Last edited by Rynjin; 2018-12-13 at 07:35 PM.

  13. - Top - End - #43
    Firbolg in the Playground
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Fallout IX: Nuclear Cash Cows Go MMOoooooo!

    I don't know I'd say that, considering F4's so stupidly stable. But that might be the 64-bit jump. I mean... in all the 553 hours I played I had two crashes that weren't the mods fault.
    I am trying out LPing. Check out my channel here: Triaxx2

  14. - Top - End - #44
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Rynjin's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2016

    Default Re: Fallout IX: Nuclear Cash Cows Go MMOoooooo!

    Quote Originally Posted by Triaxx View Post
    I don't know I'd say that, considering F4's so stupidly stable. But that might be the 64-bit jump. I mean... in all the 553 hours I played I had two crashes that weren't the mods fault.
    It's the 64 bit jump; Special Edition Skyrim is very stable as well.

    The problem is Fallout 4's assets all look and feel wildly outdated. Faces are still atrocious (made all the more noticeable by the better lighting and more expressions they tried to give them), and the number of meaningful features and choices is very low, likely because so much dev time was taken up by the stupid settlement system (whose clunkiness also shows the engine's age. As simple as the system is it should not be as hard to build your settlement neatly and nicely as it was to decorate a room back in Oblivion).

    Physics are still wonky, and still lead to the frustrating issues of key items sometimes falling under the map or being shoved under random **** due to an explosion going off in the general vicinity of the room.

    Even little things, like the short period of blackness initiated when aiming into a scope, which mods like this fix, add up after a while, and most are symptoms of not using a newer, sleeker engine that doesn't have to use the weird workarounds and jury rigged solutions to common problems that Bethesda games have.

    The fact that animals still doofily jump at people to attack, even, would likely not be a thing in a newer engine, because newer engines can handle newer and better animations more easily. as modders can attest, animating **** in the Creation Engine is a big pain in the ass.

  15. - Top - End - #45
    Spamalot in the Playground
     
    DigoDragon's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Orlando, FL
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Fallout IX: Nuclear Cash Cows Go MMOoooooo!

    Quote Originally Posted by unseenmage View Post
    Tetris does not compare. Might as well compare Monopoly to Fallout while you're at it.
    Well, Monopoly often ends in a wasteland of useless paper money and broken friendships, so that's something in common.


    I'd agree that upgrading to a more modern engine would be a good move.
    Digo Dragon - Artist
    D&D 5e Homebrew: My Little Pony Races
    Avatar by me - Doc Wagon

  16. - Top - End - #46
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jul 2015

    Default Re: Fallout IX: Nuclear Cash Cows Go MMOoooooo!

    I think Fallout 4 was an acceptable use of the Creation engine, back when that game went into development the decision to squeeze out one more game while also working on a new engine that would presumably be deployed in the next Elder Scrolls title made sense. Instead they created Fallout 76, which only functions by eliminating things that strain the engine (like moving NPCs), often in ways that cripple the gameplay (the game has limits on how many objects it can track without crashing, which is largely responsible for the game's inventory horrors).

    One would hope that Bethesda is already working on a new engine to handle any future games, but it's hard to be hopeful at this point.
    Resvier: a P6 homebrew setting

  17. - Top - End - #47
    Firbolg in the Playground
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Fallout IX: Nuclear Cash Cows Go MMOoooooo!

    I honestly think that's one of the reasons TES6 is so far off, so they have time for an engine revamp. Or new engine.

    Then again, as has been pointed out, it'd be hard on mod support going to a totally new engine. Then again if they did as before where they give us their tools, it shouldn't be too bad.
    I am trying out LPing. Check out my channel here: Triaxx2

  18. - Top - End - #48
    Titan in the Playground
     
    BlackDragon

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Manchester, UK
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Fallout IX: Nuclear Cash Cows Go MMOoooooo!

    Quote Originally Posted by druid91 View Post
    Bethesda's issue isn't the engine.
    No, it's not: it's their complete lack of any quality control. Things like accidentally releasing the details of many of their users to other users isn't because their game engine is bad, it's because they don't seem to care about testing anything properly before doing it.

  19. - Top - End - #49
    Titan in the Playground
     
    ShneekeyTheLost's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    I wish I knew...
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Fallout IX: Nuclear Cash Cows Go MMOoooooo!

    In other words: Fixing the engine couldn't hurt, but ultimately isn't the underlying problem.
    Quote Originally Posted by The Underlord View Post
    All hail great Shneekeythulhu! Ia Ia Shneeky fthagn
    Spoiler
    Show
    Quite possibly, the best rebuttal I have ever witnessed.
    Joker Bard - the DM's solution to the Batman Wizard.
    Takahashi no Onisan - The scariest Samurai alive
    Incarnum and YOU: a reference guide
    Soulmelds, by class and slot: Another Incarnum reference
    Multiclassing for Newbies: A reference guide for the rest of us

    My homebrew world in progress: Falcora

  20. - Top - End - #50
    Ettin in the Playground
    Join Date
    May 2007

    Default Re: Fallout IX: Nuclear Cash Cows Go MMOoooooo!

    Quote Originally Posted by ShneekeyTheLost View Post
    In other words: Fixing the engine couldn't hurt, but ultimately isn't the underlying problem.
    At least not the largest problem. There's no denying that their engine is garbage though. If some new franchise was putting out games in this engine without 20+ years of nostalgia and a huge gaming company name attached to them they'd go bankrupt after one release.

  21. - Top - End - #51
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Caelestion's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Baator (aka Britain)
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Fallout IX: Nuclear Cash Cows Go MMOoooooo!

    Quote Originally Posted by Anteros View Post
    There's no denying that their engine is garbage though.
    Clearly, this discussion shows that there is.

  22. - Top - End - #52
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Brookshw's Avatar

    Join Date
    Apr 2013

    Default Re: Fallout IX: Nuclear Cash Cows Go MMOoooooo!

    Quote Originally Posted by Anteros View Post
    At least not the largest problem. There's no denying that their engine is garbage though. If some new franchise was putting out games in this engine without 20+ years of nostalgia and a huge gaming company name attached to them they'd go bankrupt after one release.
    Personally I'm completely unconcerned with the engine. Maybe its just me, but I'm not as impressed or concerned with cutting edge graphics etc, compared to good story and game play which I'm getting.
    Quote Originally Posted by Vedhin View Post
    As always, the planes prove to be awesomer than I expected.
    Quote Originally Posted by jedipotter View Post
    Logic just does not fit in with the real world. And only the guilty throw fallacy's around.
    Avatar courtesy of Linklele

  23. - Top - End - #53
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Erloas's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Fallout IX: Nuclear Cash Cows Go MMOoooooo!

    Quote Originally Posted by Brookshw View Post
    Personally I'm completely unconcerned with the engine. Maybe its just me, but I'm not as impressed or concerned with cutting edge graphics etc, compared to good story and game play which I'm getting.
    The main point made about the engine isn't graphics, it is all the bugs and limitations that the engine brings to the game and design. They aren't using the engine because it is great for storytelling or offers unique gameplay options, they're using it so they can reuse as much as possible from the previous games. It would at least be something if using an older, and well known to the developers, engine meant they could release a highly optimized and very well polished game.

  24. - Top - End - #54
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Lizardfolk

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Up there past them trees!

    Default Re: Fallout IX: Nuclear Cash Cows Go MMOoooooo!

    Quote Originally Posted by Rynjin View Post
    Are you willing to pay full price $60 plus a season pass for OG Tetris? If the guy that made Tetris spawned 7 other games using the same "engine" as Tetris, each more constantly strained, less stable, and prone to bugs and crashing than the last due to the limitations of the engine having been reached long since, would you consider the smart action to be never to upgrade?

    Should we judge new games not based on the market standard of today but by how they compare to Tetris?
    Well said.

    Absolutely incorrect to the reality of the industry. For a long time, and still ongoing in some circles, the problem with the ever increasing budget of games that "justified" the increased monetization was that a lot of publishers/developers insisted on reinventing the wheel with every new release; every new game needed its own unique engine. It was a big selling point.
    First of all, ascribing motivations to technology decisions is opinion and conjecture, and not fact, unless you're the party making the actual decision. But in any case, the phenomenon you refer to of "new" engines is just marketing-speak. "New" engines aren't new, they're just a different version number, with some added features. But not all 3D engines are created equally, and some have fallen by the wayside, while others have continued to scale well with new technologies. Others still are the benchmarks against which other 3D engines are compared.

    Not making a new engine and abandoning the Creation Engine was NOT a decision of the higher-ups at Zenimax. For most of the Creation Engine's lifespan, the execs WANTED people to waste time making a new engine for no real reason. It was a badge of honor and prestige to create a new engine for every game.
    This is true and false; by which I mean that technology decisions are made or not made by product and technology teams. They specify the features they want, and work together to make technology decisions to deliver the product they want to make and sell. Leadership gets pitched a number of ideas, but very rarely makes granular decisions as to how features are implemented. What they do often do is shoot down ideas that are time-consuming and expensive, for reasons which are obvious. The marketing fluff that is fobbed off on the captive video-game press can be told any line of BS with regards to the newness of a game engine. Increment the version number, implement a new feature which was put into the pipeline graphics card manufacturers years ago, and bang, "New" engine.

    It is clearly a choice by the Bethesda dev and design teams, not Zenimax. For a good while, it was a good move; there was no real reason to change engines between Oblivion and Fallout 3, or arguably even New Vegas.

    By the time Skyrim came around though, its limits had been reached. By Fallout 4, the continued use was laughable.
    I don't know that you actually know this. To be fair, I don't know this either. Without access to the source code, and expert knowledge and research, we don't know whether some of the more offensive bugs in Creation can be fixed without abandoning the entire underlying foundation of the CAD program it's based on. What I do know, and you do too, is that there are other 3D engines on the market which don't suffer such problems as crazy physics glitches when you uncap frame-rate. But we don't know what other trade-offs one needs to make in terms of how Bethesda games are created, in order to adopt such an engine. Would Blizzard's unnamed proprietary engine they use for Overwatch cleanly handle a room full of hundreds of interactive objects, in the way that Creation can? Would IdTech 6? Unreal? Lithtech?

    Quote Originally Posted by Triaxx View Post
    I don't know I'd say that, considering F4's so stupidly stable. But that might be the 64-bit jump. I mean... in all the 553 hours I played I had two crashes that weren't the mods fault.
    We clearly have different experiences of the game. My Fallout 4 playthrough, completely vanilla, not one single mod, has had quite a sprinkling of CTD problems.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rynjin View Post
    The problem is Fallout 4's assets all look and feel wildly outdated. Faces are still atrocious (made all the more noticeable by the better lighting and more expressions they tried to give them), and the number of meaningful features and choices is very low, likely because so much dev time was taken up by the stupid settlement system (whose clunkiness also shows the engine's age. As simple as the system is it should not be as hard to build your settlement neatly and nicely as it was to decorate a room back in Oblivion).
    That's mostly art direction and game design decisions, rather than engine, I fear.

    Physics are still wonky, and still lead to the frustrating issues of key items sometimes falling under the map or being shoved under random **** due to an explosion going off in the general vicinity of the room.
    Clipping and map design problems, mostly. The inability to run at any framerate other than 60 FPS is an engine problem, however.

    Even little things, like the short period of blackness initiated when aiming into a scope, which mods like this fix, add up after a while, and most are symptoms of not using a newer, sleeker engine that doesn't have to use the weird workarounds and jury rigged solutions to common problems that Bethesda games have.
    If you can fix it with a mod, it is by definition not an engine problem, just an bad implementation. Problems with the engine can only be fixed by replacing the engine.

    The fact that animals still doofily jump at people to attack, even, would likely not be a thing in a newer engine, because newer engines can handle newer and better animations more easily. as modders can attest, animating **** in the Creation Engine is a big pain in the ass.
    I assume that what modders don't often get access to is motion capture tools that the pros use, but in any case, animations are also not tightly coupled with the 3d Engine, unless you're using some kind of ragdoll system which interacts with the world via physics, which I doubt Fallout's combat animations do. Rather, I suspect the lunge attacks on dogs is more of an aesthetic decision to account for the unpredictable angles against which a dog might attack a target. After all, they need that bite animation to work against a regular sized person and a twenty foot tall supermutant behemoth. Now you either have a choice of making a unique animation for every creature combat matchup possible, or you just make one kind of generic looking one that is reasonably convincing against all enemies. Guess which one they settle on?

    Quote Originally Posted by factotum View Post
    No, it's not: it's their complete lack of any quality control. Things like accidentally releasing the details of many of their users to other users isn't because their game engine is bad, it's because they don't seem to care about testing anything properly before doing it.
    Exactly. Bethesda, I feel, has gotten away with lots of buggy games with the understanding that they were playing in a niche no one else occupied, and they supplied the tools for the community to patch their games for them. Viewed cynically, it's a pretty clever notion. However, that approach fell to pieces when they decided to get into a game with other competitors, and in a niche where community mods weren't feasible. Result: Fallout 76 == Dumpster Fire.

    Quote Originally Posted by Erloas View Post
    The main point made about the engine isn't graphics, it is all the bugs and limitations that the engine brings to the game and design. They aren't using the engine because it is great for storytelling or offers unique gameplay options, they're using it so they can reuse as much as possible from the previous games. It would at least be something if using an older, and well known to the developers, engine meant they could release a highly optimized and very well polished game.
    There has been some asset re-use between Skyrim and Fallout 4, but it was mostly pretty minimal. I won't deny Fallout 76 is rife with asset re-use, but given its alleged provenance as an aborted coop addon for Fallout 4, that shouldn't be surprising. In that vein, I make out Fallout 76 to have much more in common with Skyrim Special Edition, ie: A cynical attempt to get players to pay twice for the same game.

    There's a lot of talk in this thread which seems as though people think that an engine is like a part you can replace, like a new box-spring for your bed. It's really not like that. It's the underlying technological design foundation of your entire game. That's why "new" engines rarely are new. They're just modified over time, like any other piece of software. To illustrate by way of analogy, going from Windows XP to Windows 7 is a modification of the underlying design. Going from Mac OS9 to Mac OSX was a complete change of the fundamental design. When we talk about the change of the Bethesda 3D engine, we should be talking about a complete refactor of the underlying code supporting the game, otherwise the discussion is kind of meaningless.

  25. - Top - End - #55
    Firbolg in the Playground
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Fallout IX: Nuclear Cash Cows Go MMOoooooo!

    I'm compelled to ask what your specs are.

    Also only one was the classic: Ooh, your engine has slipped on a Banana peel and died. The other was a long countdown to 1 FPS then a hard freeze for 5 minutes then death. No idea what happened there.
    I am trying out LPing. Check out my channel here: Triaxx2

  26. - Top - End - #56
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Lizardfolk

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Up there past them trees!

    Default Re: Fallout IX: Nuclear Cash Cows Go MMOoooooo!

    Quote Originally Posted by Triaxx View Post
    I'm compelled to ask what your specs are.

    Also only one was the classic: Ooh, your engine has slipped on a Banana peel and died. The other was a long countdown to 1 FPS then a hard freeze for 5 minutes then death. No idea what happened there.
    Intel Core i5-6600k @3.5Ghz
    16 GB RAM (DDR4)
    GeForce GTX 980 Ti

    Nothing fabulous or fanciful. It's a few years old now, but I see no reason it can't last another 2-3 years before I refresh.

  27. - Top - End - #57
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    OldWizardGuy

    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Fallout IX: Nuclear Cash Cows Go MMOoooooo!

    If given the choice between buying Fallout 76, or getting kicked in the balls 76 times, which horror should I choose?

  28. - Top - End - #58
    Firbolg in the Playground
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Fallout IX: Nuclear Cash Cows Go MMOoooooo!

    I have an AMD FX-6300, 750Ti, and 16GB of Ram. So that's weird.
    I am trying out LPing. Check out my channel here: Triaxx2

  29. - Top - End - #59
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    PirateCaptain

    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    London, UK
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Fallout IX: Nuclear Cash Cows Go MMOoooooo!

    Quote Originally Posted by ArlEammon View Post
    If given the choice between buying Fallout 76, or getting kicked in the balls 76 times, which horror should I choose?
    Nobody would be forcing you to play it, so it's really just a case of whether you'd be willing to pay however much it costs to avoid testicular violence. I believe the term there is "mugging", and most people go for the payment option.
    NB: While I never mean to offend anybody, sometimes the unfortunate combination of Aspergersism and the inherent difficulty of reading a situation through uninflected text over the internet get in the way of that goal. Please feel free to point out any social faux pas, inappropriate joke timing, etc.

  30. - Top - End - #60
    Titan in the Playground
     
    PaladinGuy

    Join Date
    Dec 2007

    Default Re: Fallout IX: Nuclear Cash Cows Go MMOoooooo!

    Quote Originally Posted by Rynjin View Post
    The problem is Fallout 4's assets all look and feel wildly outdated. Faces are still atrocious (made all the more noticeable by the better lighting and more expressions they tried to give them),
    Bethesda's always had weird faces. Fallout 4 was their first game where I thought the presets were at least passable enough to just make minor tweaks and go... and the less we talk about Oblivion faces, the better.
    3DS Friend Code: 4742-9573-4652

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •