Gamebryo doesn't exist anymore. They went out of business, and Zenimax/Beth bought the rights to the engine. They OWN it outright. They can do whatever they want with it.

I don't see any Zenimax logo here: http://www.gamebryo.com/index.php. I assume more that BGS bought a full license back then (Morrowind and or Oblivion time) and taylor the stuff that they need from that base. Btw. I recommend everyone who is spreading the Gamebryo myth for Beth games to get a trial license and look for real how much Gamebryo is in Beth's engine. It isn't much anymore.

Correct. Seems the assets of the company were bought by a Korean company, which then opened a US office..... I suspect that Beth simply bought rights to the engine....

I need to see it before I believe it. It does look better then Skyrim though.

Yes and that was an obvious booked implementation, allowing random greedy moders to demand payment for their mods ignoring that they probably used others resources too, had no capability to offer support if the mod had bugs or more common crashed with other mods and taking 75% of the money.

That they should do would be to enable 3rd past DLC, and here I talk DLC not mod and not Oblivion DLC but Fallout and Skyrim sized.

This would be open for companies and experienced moders only, they might be require to have an company for this.

They would show up under DLC and not in workshop.

yes this would put the bar far higher, but would enable stuff up to the level of FO:NV.it would also be far better received.

I think they used an adaptive-cycle jet engine. Fallout 4 is going to be fuel efficient.

I'm... not entirely sure why you'd call all of these reasons for them using the Void engine. Half of reason 1, and reason 3 and down really don't make much sense in this argument.

Addressing Zenimax forcing the use of Void Engine (ID 5), it actually can actually cost more money to build a game engine than to buy one for a large game company. The licenses might seem utterly ridiculous to an individual, but it's chump change to a company.

In Zenimax's case, if they use Void 5 (I don't see a reason why. ID 4's use of mega-textures pretty much made the game massive in file size, and short in content.) they do have something that's already built. But you wouldn't do this just to save money. It's because they know the engine better than anyone else, and it's probably well documented. Though I doubt that... Ubisoft's documentation is apparently utterly garbage, and not worth the trees that were slaughtered to print it.

Annnnd... apparently you see a conspiracy theory when Fallout 3, New Vegas, Fallout 1, 2 and tactics are all located on steam for a LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONG time.

==============


The best merit you have in this argument, is really the use of Big Endian and Gamebryo going mobile. But I'd imagine that Bethesda owns the source code for what ever Gamebryo version they have. They can just edit the code themselves, rather than jump to a whole new fricken engine. If they do that, then I am with them in that department as a junior software engineer in the working. Why the HECK would you want to swap engines, when the engine that you've worked with has been SPECIALLY TAILORED by YOU to work with your game? Gamebryo doesn't natively do MOST of what the previous elder scroll games does. Plus it used LUA for about 6-8 years.

For the creation kit... I'm not sure if that's their in house tool... because you CAN use it to do everything they did. Or if it's an editor that they rushed out, because they don't have licenses to push out the Gamebryo's editor.

Buuut... yeah, probably some goofball made it... and gave it the worlds crappiest interphase and hadn't been bothered to fix it. That's what I hear a lot of inhouse tools actually are. Just buggy POSes

I think they said the megatexture system was pretty unsuitable for Fallout / TES games because all the content it had and that lots of the content could appear everywhere.

Think of all the models you find in an vault, now you might find parts of this like lamps or lockers in other places too.

Now you would either have to replicate the texture to the town texture or load both. Now you also have all the movable items, many who are unique.

My points, in my particular order. . .

1) you don't need and most people will never use Steam for mods, Nexus has mods and they have a lot of them. they also have a longer working indirect relationship with Bethesda given that Bethesda has hired molders whose content is on Nexus.

2) Bethesda has used Gamebro for so long its ridiculous. they have shown little inclination (apart from re-writing Gamebro into the Creation engine) of dumping it now, that it would be a bit of a shock if they actualy did ditch it for anything else.

2a) any new engine would have to support the insane number of objects that they tend to put into there games. Its almost like an arms race between them and us as to how much they put into each cell that can be looted. Honestly I would not be surprised to find out we can loot individual PAGES off of clipboards next.

3) The Upgrade texture pack to me seemed to be more of a case of them starting to develop the game to work on Both (then) current and (then) next gen systems at a point when no one was sure when the next gen systems would actually launch. (never mind that the decision to not include Backward compatibility would have forced them to do extra work to get them to run) since neither system would launch untill long after Skyrim went live it ended up being a nice bonus for PC users....

3a) that said given that they decided to jump fully into the next Gen hardware like a hot thirsty man in the desert going into a Air conditioned mall for free water. and given the the type of changes that the new consoles bring to the table.... backporting is not going to happen (seriously it would be like trying to cram a 170l* EMD 16-645E4 V-16 truck engine into a strictly stock Volkswagen beetle)

*(Yes I also round pi to 3.14159.)

Yeah Unreal 4 is a terrible bad engine like Beths engine because both are based on these old crap.

Skyrim's pounds Oblivion into the dirt on the same hardware so they've shown that they can bolt new tech to their old creaky engine quite successfully. Honestly though, ID's engine kinda svcks, it's not efficient and doesn't look as good as it should, given the hardware reqs.

The amount of people that insist on pairing Creation Kit and Gamebryo is simply boggling. I feel like these same individuals should be consistent and carry this habit to other engines they feel like discussing. Like, Frostbite 3 is now known as "Frostbite 3, formerly Frostbite 1.5," or some other variation.

it does, mostly because it has an lot more attention to details also because its very optimized.

Optimization is not free it require crazy amounts of work, made worse that you optimized on memory use, where going over the limit result in crash like seeing how low you can fly an plane. On PS3 attitude became negative far to often as it has perhaps 30 MB less system memory than 360.

I think the issue with the PS3 was that it divided its RAM into two "banks". Like, the 360 has 512 MB of RAM and the PS3 has two sets of 256MB RAM. They were radically different in architecture. And since Bethesda's games demand a lot of memory at once to stream the game world, they had to do it in a completely different way for the PS3. I don't remember the details, but this was talked about a lot on gamefaqs when I was there for Skyrim.

Now, the PS4 and the XB1 both have like 8GB of unified RAM, and apparently the PS4 actually has more of it available for games than the XB1. That's really promising, and it gives them a lot more reason to put out a 64-bit executable for PC so that PCs can take advantage of more than 4GB RAM too.

The graphics might get tweaked a bit before launch still, but the trailer definitely appears to be the Gamebryo engine

You have no idea about game engines. Beth's engine != Gamebryo or you are maybe also convinced that Unreal 4 == Unreal which is the same nonsense.

http://i.imgur.com/ED8gCw9.png Sorry but that looks like Skyrims engine.

This is basically correct, PS3 had 256 MB main memory and 256 MB video ram for GPU, this give better performance than 360, however the 360 who only had normal ram had the ability to use more main memory at the cost of giving less to the GPU. In practice it was able to use perhaps 30-50 MB more for the game. This generated problems on PS3 then players had played some or if DLC was installed as 360 was the platform they developed for. (yes they should run an game on three shifts for some weeks messing around)

As for current gen, available memory can be modified by offloading active programs who are not needed. This will only be needed for games who require 64 bit on pc.

PS4 has an benefit in that all its memory is vram, this gives some reduced cpu performance but that can mostly be negotiated by cache.

Look, people are slightly over-reaching when they call the Creation Engine "Gamebryo" - most new engines have residual traces of previous architecture in them after all - but viewing the whole NetImmerse/Gamebryo/Creation as a single legacy is perfectly logical. So when people use the name "Gamebryo" to refer to that chain of iterative technology, they're certainly barking up the right tree: there is a significant overlap in the technology, and the result is visibly similar.

So it's running on Creation, which is a derivation of Gamebryo tech that has been altered but not entirely replaced.

This is also the only screenshot I reacted negative on, then I set up graphic, pretty much first priority is native resolution, second is draw distances to max, rest of the [censored] is secondary.

I do not care if my bowstring shows a bit irregular if I have trees growing up then I walk.

Antialiasing does anyway not make much point if you are not running on native as the image is scaled afterward.

For me that looked worse than my Skyrim.

I don't care much about the dogs fur, Khajiit is not in FO4 so who cares about fur

yes if it was the only dog they could do some fun but if you get attacked by packs? Current gen allows far more enemies on map, hairworks is expensive, way more so on AMD GPU,

An ini edit should help mitigate the LOD and if the game is 64bit it shouldn't introduce any memory problems. Personally I'm happy for it to be on Skyrims engine, it will make porting existing mods far easier, there are a lot of weapons and armour already made for NV/FO3 that are detailed enough not to look out of place in a newer game.

No it isn't a slight over-reaching. It is a term that is used to imply that Bethesda uses the same engine since Morrowind. Which is such terrible nonsense that it hurts. Also it changes the focus to the wrong points.

You hate Beths crappy animations? Then it is the animation department that should get the flag. It isn't a engine problem (Skyrim got one of the most modern animation components at the market at these time).

You hate glitchy NPCs that run into furniture? Then blame the level designers who weren't able to lay out the navmesh correctly.

....

Thats why I am allergic on that gamebryo nonsense. These cybabies have no idea what they are talking about and don't improve anything. In contrary expect a ton of more glitches when radical engine changes (and not continues updates) happen.

This is why I type Gambryo, Creation Engine. Some people should understand it better, but I guess some people don't.

The Creation Engine even allows for cloth physics, have you said this already?

I know and it was the first in a open world game as it was made (was a test that they made it and later used in the DLC). From gamebryo/netimmerse is pretty much only the file format basics left in Skyrim.

Perhaps. But all those iterations have a "look" that is immediately identifiable as Gamebryo/Creation based.