I suspect most people don't play Fallout 3 for cutting edge graphics, they played it so they could conceal carry tactical nukes and then shoot super mutants in the face with them.

Thanks, did not knew that.

If the animations and graphics improvements will be equal to Fallout 3 - > Skyrim i will be satisfied.

It's only ever been tweaked a bit from game to game, but not overhauled to match newer tech, unlike Unreal, which sees stable releases constantly for tweaks, with each 1.0 increase upgrading to accept the newest software. 4.0 latest release was 3 years ago, while UE4.7 which was released 3 months ago. As for the tall talk of not being able to perform on PS3/XBOX360, I cynically claim it could, they just don't want to code for the CEL processor of PS3 (and I can't blame them), and by extent they can't be unfair to the 360 (Microsoft). I can only hope the E3 reveal proves their claims as fully true.

I'm more than willing to wait some extra time, say a year, for an optimal engine to emerge that makes the game the next 11/10 Action-RPG. And it's not software to progress— it's already moving— it's for the engine to catch up to current software. I only hope I'm jumping the gun on this reveal-trailer-based assumption.

The Creation Engine is in-house; how do you know they haven't been updating it to be in line with modern tech? And what even are the specific problems with the Creation Engine itself that they couldn't fix? I've always heard people trashing the engine, but not as always do they come off as knowing what they're talking about.

If they knew what they are talking about they would recognize the lighting in the trailer, the rain, the open houses. Which are all big improvements in game. But they are to busy to complain and cry gamebryo.

Didn't Bethesda say at some point years ago that they were going to use the Creation engine for Skyrim and one other game if I remember correctly? Fallout 4 must be that other game. There is no reason to be upset now about something which had already been decided and known about publicly long ago.

I actually removed a sentence or two about the Havok shading that was present in the reveal, but I figured nobody would actually use shading as a point to pick at.

The sun glares, the distance blurs, cool. But are the animations choppy and sometimes cause clipping from knockdowns? Does the game suffer from CTDs and Memory leaks? I don't want to install FOF4GB and hope it helps, or a Mission Whatever to make things more stable.

Yeah they showed several blue screens in the trailer, isn't it terrible how gamebryo always crashes windows?

Oh they didn't here is someone guessing with no knowledge. So a bit knowledge for the guesser.

About animation quality that has nothing todo with the engine its about the animation file itself. Skyrim got a very modern system which replaced the old one, which doesn't mean the animation itself have to be better. But we are talking about the engine here.

But why even talking about this, its about crying gamebryo here.

Gr8 b8. I mean Straw man.

Recorded BSODs on a YT vid would be hilarious, and reminiscent of the Windows BS.

It wouldn't bother me too much. The primary thing I like about Fallout is the atmosphere.

Hopefully that means the console commands are the same!

It is more than just a longer wait you will be paying. You will wait longer, to pay more, to get less.

You seem to be under the impression that a new engine is just a matter of buying the developers a new coloring book and a new box of crayons and telling them to have fun. Instead what you are really doing is taking away the books and crayons and replacing them with canvas and oils. Suddenly their crayon expertise is useless. Hell, it will take them about 5 minutes to learn that "brick red" is no longer the best tasting color, but three months of constant sampling to find out that Ivory Black tastes best. Then and only then can they start trying to figure out the whole "fat over lean" painting technique.

That engine is just a part of Beth RPGs at this point. Every release is a "new" engine that for some reason has all the same problems as the last one. It's definitely definitely totally "new" though.

All of Skyrims actor animations were done using Havok and many of the animated objects were also done using it, but Gamebryo is still present and you can find some assets with it.

That... is a well-put anology, but Obsidian is a prime example of just that when they toiled with NV, and if that is the ability of a team to "get it," I'd say they did well enough to be painfully average at it. I'm sure they could do with a new update of the same engine, at least, as earlier I mentioned that it was last fixed at 4.0 three years ago. Now if that is enough for this game, we'll see soon, and as quoted by you I am hoping this is just a case of gun-jumping, though Fallout can only improve this way. Atmosphere, story, progression, world design... these things are down, so the only thing that really can effect the game is the utility of the engine. Not lighting and shading, but how expansive the game can be (while remaining stable). Open homes is definitely a sign to show for this, as it wasn't viable in the previous games. I wish to see this in action soon in E3, and (a bit) more.

EDIT:

Disclaimer, really. Open Towns & Cities was a mod for Skyrim that worked with plenty of its own issues. Namely, fast traveling hanging load screens, and no longer treating the city as an instanced 'item safe-zone'.

Animations particularly combat animations are always going to be limited by 1st person/3rd person combat since you have to account for both. In terms of the engine being the same, I need to see it in action before I judge it.

Very well said, I agree.

Well, they did show a 24 hour loading screen at the beginning of the trailer. So a BSOD screen would also fit.

I especially liked Obsidian's special touch with marked locations. Wandering the wastes, seeing the empty triangle pop up on my compass. Going to a location I had never been. Staring at a pile of empty soda bottles and wondering what the content was that was cut from the game. Breaking my nose on something I couldn't see because Obsidian didn't know how to build a pile of rocks or an escarpment was also fun.

I think people sometimes attribute what they consider flaws in the game to the engine when that's not necessarily the case. Case in point, I've never fault that animations were particularly Bethesda's strongest suit in their games, but I'm not convinced that a different game engine would automatically net better results in that area.

Bethesda's going to use an engine that allows for an emphasis on modding, that can keep track of boggling amounts of individual items, allow travel across cells with negligible loading, etc. Because these tend to be the key focuses of their games - exploration, environmental design, and support for it's modding community. Other engines may be able to push resources in other areas better, but no game engine is going to be ideally suited for every possible use. You pick the right tool for the job, as with all things. And as has been said, you also need to keep in mind the cost of teaching your team a new toolset.

I'll wait and see some actual gameplay video before I start making sweeping declarations about the quality this game, myself.

And I am guessing a new engine could mean a lot of new bugs to work out. Not just during development, but seen on the consumer end.
I could see it. They release F4 with a brand new engine, and it's "WTF gamesas? This game is a buggy piece of garbage, I'm never buying a game from you again!!"
Can't win.
I am sure there will be bugs to work out as it is, but the fixes should be easier and less numerous for something they know well.

Which leads into this:
*queue super optimistic tunes*
This may be their last game with this engine. So, it should be the optimal game built using this engine, right? They have had a lot of time working with it to dial it in and can also open it up far more than they previously could, with the new console generation well into "present Gen" status.

Who says they're using Gamebryo again?

Maybe a lot of new bugs, maybe not.

For all intents and purposes the Creation Engine is Gamebryo source code that has been heavily modified to do what Bethesda wants it to do. SInce it is almost constantly in a state of modification there probably is very little of the original code left. All of the development tools they have (and by extension modding tools) are set up for the Creation Engine.

Now if they get a new engine, it won't work exactly like they want, so they will almost immediately start modifying it. Additionally, they will either need to convert their existing tools to use the new engine (if they can), OR modify the tools that come with the new engine to work with their modifications. Either way there will be a learning curve, it will be longer if they don't modify their old tools. If nothing else, the scripting language is guaranteed to be different.

This brings us to the assets used to make the game. It is entirely possible that a lot of assets will work just fine in the new engine. It is also a certainty that some of them will not. This makes for an interesting possibility.

Fallout 4 seems to have been in development a little longer than normal. I personally believe that Fallout 4 is using yet another update of the Creation Engine... But there is a possibility that they are using a new engine and in order to make up the time expended in converting to the new engine, they are reusing as many assets from the Creation Engine as they can in order to have a reasonable development cycle. If this kind of thing is done, we would wind up with a mix of old and new. As an example: static object graphics quality being better than the graphic quality of moving objects. Basically, only new monsters would have updated graphics.

Mind you. I am not saying that BGS would choose this approach to transitioning to a new engine. I am not saying it is possible (it would largely depend on the nature of the new engine). I am not even saying that they ARE transitioning now. I still believe they are using a modified Creation Engine.

This is a fair, if not optimistic, view on what should be going on.

I share your optimism, and can't wait to see the next set of reveals.

Well, the thing about it is a new engine costs caps. Caps to purchase it and caps to adapt it. More caps than it takes to update a current engine. So when you buy an engine, you pretty much have to justify the purchase by keeping it a certain amount of time before you go to the accounting trolls to ask for more caps to buy another new one, otherwise they will say bad things about you. Caps make the world go around, sad, but true.