a New Engine for Fallout 4? : Fallout Series Discussion

» Tue May 17, 2011 6:25 am

Beth would not be the one forced to come up with it. if they are doing what I have heard rumors about(that they are bascialy thinking of making a "Fallout" division) it would be a completly new division

Lets face it, currently the current "Family" of companies that are under Bethesda/Zenimax you have them useing

Games currently in development

Licenced

Unreal 3
Gamebryo

Developed in house
ID 3 and 4(plus at least three distict custom versions of thoes engins being developed for brouser based games)
ID-5
Creation
XGenisis(Zenimax onlines currently Vaporware MMO engine, the name may have been a rumor though )

they probably would not even notice if they developed /licenced yet another engine and would find it strange if they did not do so.

» Tue May 17, 2011 2:19 pm

The Destruction Engine for Fallout 4!

:tongue:

» Tue May 17, 2011 9:34 am

Sorry accidently posted twice. Dang Computer! :brokencomputer:

» Tue May 17, 2011 2:32 pm

I have heard rumors about(that they are bascialy thinking of making a "Fallout" division) it would be a completly new division

:o, really? Why not just buy Obsidian and give them the power and resources of a new division, and getting the old Interplay guys from inXile (I love the name a lot, seeing as they abandoned interplay), including Brian Fargo, they are using them to make Hunted: The Demons Forge, so maybe they could invite inXile and Obsidian to merge into a new division, or make them partner-developers in the new division?

» Tue May 17, 2011 9:58 am

that was more or less what I had heard that Bethesda had tried to do with it, the problem being that the team at InX and Obsidian were basicaly commited to other projects.

» Tue May 17, 2011 1:35 am

InXile and Obsidian are what is left of Black Isle and the good parts of Interplay, they must be reunited, i would love Bethesda if they could bring them together, it is destiny, Bethesda has to make this reunification happen!

» Tue May 17, 2011 3:28 am

Whatever engine that allows for map node system, optional FPP/3rdPP/Isometric/TB and can work with complex RPG mechanics.

you just do not stop beating that horse man. leave it alone. you derail every damn thread you read into the same pointless discussion.

» Tue May 17, 2011 4:40 am

You just cant stand that some people actually like some of the things in Fallout, on the Fallout forums, where Fallout fans post.

» Tue May 17, 2011 2:34 am

I believe the old map node system could work in a modern Fallout game. There could be several Point-Lookout sized locations across the map. There could be the overhead view of travel from the Pip-Boy from one location to another. When a location is reached, you can fast travel to one of local areas to visit, or just walk there yourself in the small sandbox location.

Fallout 3 could have been like this by taking all the known east coast locations and putting them in a single large map. D.C, Ronto, The Pitt, Commonwealth; all could be visited and they'd all be unique from each other. They could even have new locations for more increased area, like New York City and Philadelphia.

The six vaults in Fallout 3 could be spread around the various states of the east, reducing the "Six vaults near one city" plothole of Fallout 3.

The local areas that D.C. could be divided up into are: Rivet City, The Mall, The Citadel, and Jefferson Memorial.

It would be a good mix of classic style and modern style, and there wouldn't be the "Oblivion with guns" complaints, because it would be very different from Oblivion.

point lookout area is pretty small, 3 CW or NV size areas would work

» Tue May 17, 2011 2:55 am

I'd personally like 15-20 PL sized map nodes

» Tue May 17, 2011 3:06 am

point lookout area is pretty small, 3 CW or NV size areas would work

That would be fun and more exploration but I don't think they could fit it in a single xbox dvd memory. I don't know how much it holds but it is somewhere between 7 and 9 Gigabytes. And would take long to develop if it had the exploration of Fallout 3 and Quests of New Vegas. Overall. I would love it but it seems like we won't be getting that 'till next gen consoles. Yeah, I know....Consoles hold back the PC.

» Tue May 17, 2011 8:51 am

I'd personally like 15-20 PL sized map nodes

that would work too 15 or 20 PL size areas, that would be very cool. i would like each area diverse and different.

» Tue May 17, 2011 12:54 am

that would work too 15 or 20 PL size areas, that would be very cool. i would like each area diverse and different.

Map Nodes with Sandbox Nodes

, it is a compromise that most everyone will like.

» Tue May 17, 2011 1:38 am

Hell, even the design artists would be more happy with it, they could work with a swamp area and a desert area and a rocky area and a suburban area and a forest area and a ruins area et cetera.
Would be way better than just secluding everything to one area, it's setting, geography and cultural design.

» Tue May 17, 2011 8:28 am

Can't they already create various environments if the map is big enough?

Anyway, someone up thread asked for a summary of what the various engines do, so here's some links to their wiki pages:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Source_(game_engine)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Id_Tech_4
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Id_Tech_5
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CryEngine_3
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unreal_Engine_3
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maya_8.5
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X-Ray_Engine
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bethesda_Game_Studios
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_game_engines

But to save time, although reading about game engines is fascinating, it's going to use the Creation engine. http://www.vg247.com/2011/01/25/future-bethesda-titles-to-take-advantage-of-skyrim-engine-says-hines/.

Can you imagine how powerful a computer would be needed to run a game world as big and complex as Fallout 3/NV on Cryengine 3? I doubt Deep Blue could do it with AA turned on.

» Tue May 17, 2011 10:26 am

Map Nodes with Sandbox Nodes

, it is a compromise that most everyone will like.

Haha funny and true when you said "most everyone will like." It'll probably be a good game either way. Both ways are great and I don't seem to see a problem with either. Bwilderbeast, I don't know much about computers but what kind of specs do you think a computer would need to run Fallout with cryengine 3?

» Tue May 17, 2011 4:58 am

Most would be happy with one or the other, but more would be happier with both.

» Tue May 17, 2011 2:25 pm

Why must everything be in 3D, Fallout and Fallout 2 had great sprites and animations, and i think Fallout 2 had some 3D as well.

Too keep up with consumer demands. Everyone wants movies in 3D even though the svck and make watching a movie a pain in the ass. Same with games. If they did it like Fallout and Fallout 2, the only people that would buy would be loyal fallout fans and collectors. Everyone else would look at the box, and move on to CoD.

» Tue May 17, 2011 2:53 am

:/ What happened to gamers? we used to be a legitimate group of people, to quote Vulpes Inculta on the current situation of modern gamers "It was a town of [censored]s."

» Tue May 17, 2011 9:25 am

Too keep up with consumer demands. Everyone wants movies in 3D even though the svck and make watching a movie a pain in the ass. Same with games. If they did it like Fallout and Fallout 2, the only people that would buy would be loyal fallout fans and collectors. Everyone else would look at the box, and move on to CoD.

Why COD

they deserve better shooters

Like the ones who Valve and Epic create

» Tue May 17, 2011 2:45 pm

:/ What happened to gamers? we used to be a legitimate group of people, to quote Vulpes Inculta on the current situation of modern gamers "It was a town of [censored]s."

I guess gaming became cool and wasn't something for just nerds anymore...
Now it's for fratboys and girlfriends and your parents and your dog.
And now they've taken over the larger audience and decides what is a good game and what isn't.
Oh the joy...

» Tue May 17, 2011 7:56 am

Can you imagine how powerful a computer would be needed to run a game world as big and complex as Fallout 3/NV on Cryengine 3? I doubt Deep Blue could do it with AA turned on.

The maps in past -Cry- games weren't so little either and they didn't need that much of a monster as most people claims.
It won't run on a dinosaur either but gotta keep up with times. :smile:

» Tue May 17, 2011 3:03 am

I guess gaming became cool and wasn't something for just nerds anymore...
Now it's for fratboys and girlfriends and your parents and your dog.
And now they've taken over the larger audience and decides what is a good game and what isn't.
Oh the joy...

Add. mindless and generic shooters devoted fans on that list

» Tue May 17, 2011 5:48 am

Haha funny and true when you said "most everyone will like." It'll probably be a good game either way. Both ways are great and I don't seem to see a problem with either. Bwilderbeast, I don't know much about computers but what kind of specs do you think a computer would need to run Fallout with cryengine 3?

Having done a bit of checking, according to http://www.geforce.com/#/Optimize/Guides/crysis-2-benchmarks, it seems that Cryengine 3 will run on lower speced systems as well as being to much at top settings for most systems. And it's designed to run on all major game platforms which is clever.

I still think it isn't the engine for a huge open world though.

The maps in past -Cry- games weren't so little either and they didn't need that much of a monster as most people claims.
It won't run on a dinosaur either but gotta keep up with times.

I think they did a great job giving the impression of size but none of the levels were that big, the largest is probably no bigger than the Point Lookout but I agree that it could run on mid-spec systems, looked terrible in comparison to a high end one though.

» Tue May 17, 2011 1:36 pm

Of course it'll be the Skyrim one - if bethesda were only going to use the damn engine once, then they wouldn't have made it/be making it.