Now all I expect is very poor animations and combat, generally dated everything, an only slightly improved and polished Fallout 3 that I definitely won't be buying full price. I don't care if it's "updated/ upgraded". It's still obviously the Gamebro Engine with the same glaring weaknesses. You can see the awkwardness in the trailer, it's the same awkwardness we saw in the previous Fallout and TES games. This engine belongs in a museum at this point. Nobody should still be making games with it.

I think they take modding into account they probably havent found one that fits there criteria.

Learn a bit about game engines then maybe you will learn about the gamebryo myth that some people are hard at work to keep alive (Unreal 4 is really terrible, is it basically the same as the old crappy Unreal, correct?)

The argument for continueing use of BGS's own engine is easy. Keep the already established workflow (or do you want the next game in 10 or more years?), the engine gets improved (Skyrim was pretty much the first with clothing physics in a open world game) and yes as soon as the basic engine changes modding it will change big time too. But yes who cares for that stuff that these mod devs do.

There where so many changes and updates in Skyrims engine that yes it deserved the word "new" imo. (not that I like them all )

Nice flame bait bro. How can you be so sure it's the same engine?

It sure seems like they used it again, I honestly hope the demo at E3 next weeks shows us otherwise.

It is good for modding and thus for PC players, but it is also bad due to graphics, physics and animations will not improve that much from their previous game - Skyrim.

Why they gone with this engine again? Probably their release schedule for the next game was around 4 years since Skyrim, and with another engine they could not achieve it.

People shouldn't shy away from posts like this; it is a necessary discourse to have concerning what is acceptable of a AAA company these days.

Fallout 3 was released 7 years ago, and New Vegas was developed by Obsidian Entertainment, so Bethesda Softworks has had 7 years, 4 from Skyrim, to draft a new game and obtain the rights to a better engine, make a new one, or overhaul the DX9-utilizing dinosaur they've been using since Morrowind— since 2002.

This isn't about shiny graphics, because people generally understand that graphics aren't everything *cough*Bloodborne*cough*, this is about determining if it is acceptable for a large development team to create new products with dated material. This isn't about how the game looks, exactly, or Bethesda alone, but the laziness of the industry/studio(s). What nodding your head in approval or defending their actions does is tell Bethesda, and by extent other game developers, 'yeah, we'll except outdated engines and mechanics inelastically,' not pushing the industry to improve and bring up-to-date, better content. The answer is simply no, it is inexcusable to make a new game with the same engine and framework that was designed for Windows XP in the year 2015/16.

And you can't say that 'modders can just fill the gaps' because that's enabling them to be lazy. People shouldn't rely on someone else not connected to a company to provide the ultimate service that the company states it does. I'd love to start a project and then have other people finish it for me for free and then I get the money from sales because they made it what it should have been. If they aren't going to put full effort into it then they shouldn't be allowed to charge full price.

Even if we can't force Fallout 4 to receive the upgrade(s) it needs, we can still let it be known that this kind of below-the-bar work isn't welcomed for future games.

Don't worry about it. The creation engine is only being used for cut scenes. As for in game graphic... Well there are none, Fallout 4 is a text adventure game.

It's good for modding. It's good for having many items in game that can be moved around. I think they can do better improving upon and updating what they already have, know and understand than they could starting with an entirely new engine which could not do much of what has made BGS games what they are. And thus far, what they are has pleased many fans.

I do wish animations like walking and such could be a bit more smooth than in past but it's something I can live with to have all the things that I believe make me enjoy BGS games.

The small "cities" in the trailer also confirm Gamebryo is used again. It's pretty sad, expect bugs, texture popin (trailer looks like it's using ugrids), crashes to desktop, infinite loading screens, script overload. Everything we're used to from Oblivion, Skyrim, Fallout 3 and New Vegas. The only upside is the ease of modding.

Yea, Gamebryo/Creation is one of the few engines that can handle all of that and it's familiar to the Beth team.


Most of that was attributed to how much memory they could use, don't blame the engine blame the limitation they had to impose to get it working on consoles.

Not true. They use Havok, a third party physics engine which is regularly updated (and is what GTA V uses), which also released Havok Animation Studio after Skyrim launched. Provided they've updated to the latest versions, you could get an improvement in both physics and animations. None of it is tied to Gamebryo, and it hasn't been in a long time.

Also, Creation Engine uses an in-house renderer that is completely separate from the Gamebryo/NetImmerse engine. In fact one of the biggest causes of bugginess and crap performance, that I can tell, is actually Bethesda's own in-house scripting.

The truth is, Gamebryo doesn't have much to do with how Bethesda games look or animate anymore - it's a bit of a myth, frankly.

By your logic unreal engine must be [censored] because it came out in 1998 (17 years ago). But wait, it has been developed over time and supports current tech.

What Bethesda is doing with Fallout 4 cannot be done with the older generation of consoles. Make of that what you will.

"People shouldn't shy away from posts like this; it is a necessary discourse to have concerning what is acceptable of a AAA company these days."? This subject does NOT exist in a vacuum. The ONLY way this "necessary discouse" can have any validity is if it is done in conjunction with the equally necessary discourse on what are acceptable expectations of the user community.

One question of many (as in not the only question) that you have to be willing to answer is, if you want software to progress at a faster pace, just how much are you willing to pay for the increase?

I think their main reason is for Modding purposes. I can just imagine the backlash if it turned out the game was unmoddable.
Tons of people have been Modding Bethesda games for the last almost 15 years.

I would assume for the same reason Ferrari keeps only making super cars, why not use what your very, very experienced with using? *shrugs*

Any engine can be moddable. Besides, you have to remember that about 85% of their customers are console users, and it's unlikely that more than a third of PC users make much use of mods - certainly not to the point where they're willing to forgo a better engine.

I love modding, but the fact is that if that were the only thing stopping them, they'd just upgrade to engine X and create a better modding interface for it, assuming it didn't already have one.

Well it's obviously much easier to mod than most other game engines. Otherwise how come dishonoured, doom, dragon age, etc don't have an insane amount of mods that any given Bethesda game has?

plus it's common practice for Bethesda to let their modders fix their games, and use ideas of popular mods for the next game.

I'm not defending their decision, just coming up with a reason.

Yeah sure is any engine modable in one way or other. But do you really want something like ID5 where you can't mod in any textures, meshes and animations anymore.

Good Lord make TES 6 at least on a modern engine.

Modders use the same tools that Beth does to develop the game..... One would think that could apply to most any game engine they chose to use..... And yes, it does look a LOT like the same engine used for skyrim, with some modification to account for firearms no doubt....

Also, ya gotta remember, this game has been in development for seven years...... How much fun do you think it would be to get halfway thru development, and then corporate springs new game engine on you? I don't think that would go over well.

The day Bethesda drops Gamebryo goats will be sacrificed all over the world.

It happened to Duke Nukem Forever. Several times. I don't see what could possibly be wrong with that approach.

Although I'm not too sure that game has really been in development for seven years. The game probably wasn't being worked on much before Skyrim and all it's DLCs were released. At least not in any stage other than pre-production.

idTech is among the few major engines I've not tried. Still, I highly doubt it's completely umoddable, and hell - Bethesda owns id. They could make whatever they wanted, really. Anyway, I have a bold theory. We've known this game would be using Creation Engine, because back in the days of Skyrim they repeatedly stated they'd use it for at least 2 games including Skyrim.

BUT

I think the 'Void Engine' we heard about back in 2013 is their next big engine. I suspect it might even be a company-wide engine, that they'll no doubt prioritize to work well with BGS-style open worlds (competitors such as Unreal have made huge strides in the past 2 years in that area, and CryEngine is catching up). My guess is it'll be 100% new, proprietary in-house tech that'll be used to power TES 6, which at this point must be in pre-production.

It makes a lot of sense. Bethesda doesn't create many engines outside of idTech, so it must be pretty important if they're licensing a brand new one. All of their other titles can run perfectly well on idTech or other third party engines, so the only reason they'd make a new one is for something that isn't catered to properly. Plus it aligns nicely with when TES 6 would've gone into pre-production, and they always said Creation was mostly for Skyrim and 1 other game (now known to be Fallout). Not to mention TES games always seem to get the 'new' engine.

Cryengine for open world would be great. From the trailers animations it looks more like Half-Life 2 though.