So what was wrong with GameBryo?

Post » Sat Feb 19, 2011 3:22 am

Why is it called Game Engine, not rendering engine?


because bethesda licensed only part of it, plus game engines arnt one stop shops for all your game developing needs alot of other stuff including a large amount of hard coding and modifications go into it, i dont know a single company other than EPIC who takes an engine out of the box and only uses the tools inherent in it. Devs code new tools, and tech as well as license bits and pieces from all over the place.

Engines are collections of tools thats all, so the tools from Gamebyro that where used include only the rendering software
User avatar
nath
 
Posts: 3463
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2007 5:34 am

Post » Fri Feb 18, 2011 9:42 pm

Do people even read the posts of other users? Freddo posted many times that GameBryo is the RENDERER, not the engine itself. It means that it's just what draws the pixels on screen. The cell system, AI, physics and save mechanics has nothing to do with GameBryo.
User avatar
victoria johnstone
 
Posts: 3424
Joined: Sat Oct 14, 2006 9:56 am

Post » Sat Feb 19, 2011 3:50 am

Crap lighting, crap shadows, crap optimization, crap LOD handling, crap memory management.

Which has nothing to do with GameBryo as Freddo stated.
User avatar
Taylah Illies
 
Posts: 3369
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2007 7:13 am

Post » Sat Feb 19, 2011 2:32 am

Which has nothing to do with GameBryo as Freddo stated.

Actually, lightning and shadows are valid concerns as they deal with the graphical side. At least for older versions of Gamebryo, don't know how the newer Gamebryo Lightspeed improved upon that (which it most likely have).
User avatar
Jade Barnes-Mackey
 
Posts: 3418
Joined: Thu Jul 13, 2006 7:29 am

Post » Fri Feb 18, 2011 11:29 pm

Surely an in house engine built for a specific game is the best option. That's the case here isn't it?
User avatar
Anthony Diaz
 
Posts: 3474
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2007 11:24 pm

Post » Sat Feb 19, 2011 8:47 am

"GameBryo" is the renderer, yes, but when people talk about the "GameBryo engine" they are (incorrectly) referring to the whole thing. So while they're wrong, the point stands.

The old engine wasn't particularly terrible. It had issues, a lot of issues. It was also very old. They could have updated the old one for skyrim, but trying to shoehorn modern technology into what is effectively a heavily modified 10 year old engine is hard, and starting again gives you, effectively, a chance to plan the entire thing for the future. Don't think of them abandoning their old engine because it svcked, think of them trying to make somehing better.
User avatar
Vivien
 
Posts: 3530
Joined: Fri Apr 13, 2007 2:47 pm

Post » Sat Feb 19, 2011 2:49 am

Surely an in house engine built for a specific game is the best option. That's the case here isn't it?


That was always the case. It's just now the parts used to tailor that engine belong largely to Bethesda.
User avatar
Blessed DIVA
 
Posts: 3408
Joined: Thu Jul 13, 2006 12:09 am

Post » Fri Feb 18, 2011 7:39 pm

That and the fact that the company behind Gamebryo went belly-up :mellow:
User avatar
Angelina Mayo
 
Posts: 3427
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2007 4:58 am

Post » Sat Feb 19, 2011 9:40 am

ITT: Form an opinion! Any opinion will do! That's right folks, anything you can imagine! Now pretend it's a fact! Spread the word! :celebration:

Honestly, Gamebryo isn't as much of a limitation or as terrible as people make it out to be. Issues consistently berated in Oblivion had less to do Gamebryo and more to do with design choices. Bad face and animation quality for instance, aren't features of Gamebryo. Those were shortcomings of Bethesda.

I'm thrilled with the prospect of real animators working on Skyrim. Screw Havok super extreme technology. Give me awesome animators any day.
User avatar
Vahpie
 
Posts: 3447
Joined: Sat Aug 26, 2006 5:07 pm

Post » Sat Feb 19, 2011 8:57 am

On the Gamebryo homepage stands, I quote:
"Gamebryo provides all the rendering, animation and special effects features you need to create any genre of game."

Maybe Bethesda wanted to add the animation engine from Havok and that wasn't compatible with Gamebryo or difficult to implement?
User avatar
Tikarma Vodicka-McPherson
 
Posts: 3426
Joined: Fri Feb 02, 2007 9:15 am

Post » Fri Feb 18, 2011 11:12 pm

Actually Gamebroyo Lightspeed not only updated the rendering engine but it contained a tool-kit for developers to make adaptation easier - it looked pretty good.

The fact that Gamebroyo was liquidated was interesting to me - I figured Bethesda wouldn't want to continue working with an engine that was no longer supported - but this may in fact have turned out good for Bethesda as they may have been able to purchase rights to the code itself when the company wen't down. In any respect, they continued using it despite the parent company condition means they must be in a very good position with it or they would not have continued. Given Gamebroyo went down in 2009, they certainly had plenty of time if they needed to make a critical switch.

I don't frankly think Anywhere here can accurately speak to how good or bad the Gamebroyo Lightspeed engine coupled with the new Skyrim middleware will really be - we have no clue. Lots of opinions about how it's bad, and yet none of us have seen it in the flesh (so to speak) - so its all just whining and speculation until actual gameplay footage is revealed and we get an chance to play it at the shows.
User avatar
brenden casey
 
Posts: 3400
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 9:58 pm

Post » Sat Feb 19, 2011 11:10 am

It was great at the time, but using it again wouldn't bring as much new things and opportunities as the new engine. Mainly the way NPCs are suicidal. Even Fo3 had suicidal enemies, but atleast they started to run away when their HP reach something like 15% of their max, not sure.
User avatar
Kayla Keizer
 
Posts: 3357
Joined: Tue Dec 12, 2006 4:31 pm

Post » Sat Feb 19, 2011 12:35 am

It was great at the time, but using it again wouldn't bring as much new things and opportunities as the new engine. Mainly the way NPCs are suicidal. Even Fo3 had suicidal enemies, but atleast they started to run away when their HP reach something like 15% of their max, not sure.

Radiant AI is Bethesda's creation and has nothing to do with Gamebryo.
User avatar
Rob
 
Posts: 3448
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 12:26 am

Post » Fri Feb 18, 2011 10:10 pm

It just seems really unoptimized although a lot of that could be placed on BGS's programmers. Namely a lot of stuff is rendered whether you can see it or not. This is most noticeable in cities where you step out of a building and your framerate hits the floor even though you're only staring at a wall. It's still rendering everything behind that wall. Or in a dungeon where your framerate is all over the place even though you're just looking around empty hallways. It's still rendering the entire dungeon. There was some slight improvement here with Oblivion rendering only the stuff in the direction you're facing but it's still not enough. With some form of occlusion implemented we could have a lot more detailed areas with an actual improvement in framerate.

Only rendering visible elements should make it easier to make far larger dungeons as long as you were careful with the design. Yes you still has to handle AI and physic for everything but the graphic card should have an easier time.
User avatar
Shelby Huffman
 
Posts: 3454
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2007 11:06 am

Post » Sat Feb 19, 2011 9:38 am

Radiant AI is Bethesda's creation and has nothing to do with Gamebryo.

Well that's when we talk about graphics.. And yes, I stand corrected: Gamerbryo is only about the 3D computer graphics.

But any how, the engine bethesda used in OB has also been changed :) Yay
User avatar
matt
 
Posts: 3267
Joined: Wed May 30, 2007 10:17 am

Post » Fri Feb 18, 2011 11:05 pm

I just found it to be clunky. It was good for Morrowind and Oblivion's arcade style, but it really needed a shape up.
User avatar
Thomas LEON
 
Posts: 3420
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2007 8:01 am

Previous

Return to V - Skyrim