Problem is not the creation engine, the problem is that both Skyrim and FO:NV tried to do to push the hardware to far.

One obvious effect is framerate dropping, an secondary is instability, this is well know among pc gamers if you run an game close to minimum system requirements it will be way more unstable than on an pc who runs it smoothly.

This is not an creation engine issue, GTA 5 has the same issues on previously generation. DA:I does not release dlc on previous generation.

Now Fallout 4 should not have much issues, full hd on One is not common among graphically intensive games for PS4/One/PC.

Now all engines are under constant development, creation engine has been developed since the start of Morrowind for open world games with lots of details.

Zenimax owns multiple engines who Bethesda could have used, they did not want to use them as they was not optimized for fallout 4 as they wanted it to be.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_first-person_shooter_engines

Note that open world is the new buzz world in the game development world. Skyrim and GTA caused this, now gta series focus on far larger worlds because cars are central in the game, this reduces details.

No they could not used Id-tech engine, its not designed for an game like Fallout or TES, technical issues in that everything is in one giant texture map.

Relevant here is that anybody who talk in Fallout 4 is an human or loudspeaker on computer or robot. They could avoid super mutants and others if they wanted. They need no human animations for TES.

And yes the open world combined with loads of details is much of the charm. This was the real shock of Morrowind.

Now its even more fun that one of the main complain about ESO was the lack of clutter, no it would not work in an MMO with jerks using fireballs all over.

Yeah... been playing games since playing Zork on mainframes and yeah.... I've seen that pushing the game close to the hardware limits and then rushing it out the door is a tick box list for a VERY unstable build.

I think NV suffered because they nailed too much stuff onto it... good stuff, yeah, but too much of it. The way the framerate drops when you have a bunch of Legion running at you and throwing spears turned it into a slideshow at times. Funny though to see a spear doing a Ray Harryhausen as it gets nearer and nearer to you. I am glad that Fallout 3 has retained certain NV features though (like the faction system).

You mentioned GTA V on last gen... I personally NEVER had a single crash on 360 (well, other than plowing my car into other cars that is heh). That game was solid as a rock for me. Skyrim too. New Vegas on the other hand was total crap at launch and then got fixed and then broken again when the DLC came out. Granted Fallout 3 had the same problem with DLC breaking the main game but not to the extent that NV did.

But at the end of the day an RPG is basically a game where it tells you a story that you participate in. It could be made of animated stick figures and have a kickass story and be great. On the other hand it could look like real life and be dismal if the story is poor. ResolutionGate is ruining the whole perception of video games lately. I want deep involving stories, not "OOOH, LOOK AT DA PWETTY TWEEES" games.

Oh and stability... Look at SimCity 2013 and how they damaged their rep for putting out a poor game... then look at Cities: Skylines. SimCity 2013 looks a lot nicer than Cities: Skylines yet we all know which is better. And yet we still get "Ooooh, our game is better than your game because we can fit X more pixels on our screen than yours".

Always remember... GAMEPLAY/STORY WILL ALWAYS TRUMP GRAPHICS.

This.

FO:NV suffered from lack of time and lack of experience with the engine and wanting to push it past FO3. PS3 had more problem in open world games than 360 because of less memory.

Morrowind was my bugged game because of poor hardware.

And yes Fallout 4 looks like been less demanding than this, looks like they aimed a bit low with graphic to ensure stability and growth.

Unity and Witcher 3 both had the same problem on PS4: NPCs, objects and textures would spawn mere feet in front of the player when running through a city. At times it looked nice, at times it was porridge, at times not even porrige. Stability > Potentially Beautiful Screenshots. Any day of the week.

Not always, there needs to be a balance. There are lots of games that I cannot go back and play just because of the graphics quality. The older GTA games come to mind right off the top of my head. And no matter how much I love obilvion, I can't stand its potato people.

As I've explained in response to various complaints/claims about BGS' engine to people who post such complaints/claims, there is no other engine that can do what BGS needs their engine to do. That is why they have not adopted another engine. Pete Hines even explained this in one recent interview when asked if they considered using idTech5 for FO4. They cannot use any other engine because other engines cannot do what they need.

You'll notice that people posting such complaints/claims either never both to suggest another engine that can do what BGS games do, particularly handling hundreds or even thousands of interactive objects throughout a huge open world space, or such people suggest crappy engines like Unreal which is infamous for having many issues with loading pop-ins and having almost everything in any environment be "painted on" rather than interactive (regardless of being the most-used engine in the industry... and people wonder why so many games have issues... there's one big reason).

People making such complaints/claims obviously have no idea what they are talking about. Heck, many of them even claim "it's the same old Gamebryo engine" without understanding that BGS has completely rewritten the source code they purchased when Emergent went bankrupt. They did not change the name for cosmetic purposes, they changed it because they have completely rewritten the engine source code and it is a totally different engine now, albeit one that can still do the fundamental tasks that they need an engine to do for one of their games.

Finally, people who claim that FO4 looks "meh" for "next gen" don't know what they are talking about, either. The lighting and shading cannot be done on last gen and most games today do not look anywhere near as good as FO4 as far as lighting and shading. Whether or not BGS actually used these capabilities to (finally!) do proper dimness/darkness indoors is something we have to wait to see, but the engine itself can obviously do amazing atmospheric elements with no problem. As far as specific art details, FO4 uses a very specific art STYLE that requires simple, "cartoonish" appearance. This actually mirrors mid-America 1950s culture quite well due to that era's focus on mass production for everything, even entire neighborhood housing developments being mass produced with identical houses, yards, etc. Complaining about "lack of details" or "coloring" for FO4 is like complaining about all cars in a 1930s era movie being black, or like complaining that Pac-Man doesn't have more detail. It's silly, at best.

The one thing I really hope they have changed regarding handling all those interactive objects is response... response in the fact that NPC's respond more realistically.

For example let me tell you something that happened to me. I dug into a garbage bin (yeah, labelled red for some reason) and hit a wrong button and withdrew an empty bottle... and then the entire NCR camp opened up on me with grenades and flamethrowers and miniguns.... ALL FOR A STUPID EMPTY BOTTLE THAT I PICKED UP BY MISTAKE.

Same thing with the vending machines... why the hell label vending machines has "TAKE FROM ME AND EVERYONE AND THEIR SON WILL DECLARE WAR ON YOU"? - It's like the first offence with a vending machine is worse than murder... hell, murder is cheered if you kill anyone the faction doesn't like... but take their soda and you must die, die, die!!!!

This is the AI behavior who is something else, and yes in Skyrim they react much better, they don't start to fight you for picking up junk.

Skyrim was pretty cool since, for the most part, NPCs just ask wtf you're doing and take the item back from you unless it's of significant value. Can't see Bethesda going back on that.

The most triumphant example? Deus Ex.

My mere mention will now induce at least one nostalgia playthrough... Though I recommend waiting just a liiiittle bit longer because Deus Ex Revision is on the verge of release.

Flashy graphics are a superficial beauty, and always ages poorly. A memorable story or gameplay experience lasts so much longer. Deus Ex is on a freakin' Unreal 1 engine setup, and its gameplay and story design still withstand the test of time.

Well, it's working on me. I'm tempted to re-install.

Was people not really paying attention during the reveal at E3? All those details they worked on, and the character creation menu... I think some people are just plain blind. The game looks amazing. Shut up, and learn to love it. I for one am really looking forward to it, and have already reserved my copy.

Are you sure you're not the one that's blind? Maybe wearing the wrong pair of glasses? Compared to past Bethesda games, sure, it looks pretty good. Compared to other games available on the market? No, there are definitely much better looking games on the market. That being said, the games people like to compare it to do not do the things that Bethesda games do. Nor do they even try. Peter Hines himself said that to get the game to do what they wanted it to do, sacrifices had to be made. Those sacrifices were made in the graphical fidelity department.

So while the game make look good, it certainly isn't amazing when compared to other games. That's ok, though. The game will still be a lot of fun to play because Bethesda chose gameplay over graphics.

If you look over in the Elder Scrolls forums it hardly goes a month without some kid demanding that Skyrim gets redone with better graphics(!)

God... I have 5 rules/requirements when deciding if I like a game...

• Is it enjoyable to play.
• it immersive (I'm not talking graphics here)?
• Is it a subject I enjoy
• Does it have a good story
• Does it have decent/fast support to suppress bugs (that are inevitable these days)

... and guess what... graphics are not in there one bit. They ARE in my second list though.

• Does it look nice?
• Does it make me forget my joint pain (gaming is part of diversion therapy that I use to help me with my disability)?
• Does it have good DLC support?
• Is moddable (on PC that is... until now. Fallout 4 is going to hopefully be a start of it spreading to the consoles)?
• Does it have good replayability?

Gameplay beats graphics because it endures... whereas pretty looking graphics without good gameplay will always end up in the bargain bin. MadCat221 mentioned Deus Ex and that rocked... One of my all-time favourite games. But even before that there was one game that sticks in my mind... I still remember enjoying it to this day and it wasn't even an FPS. And that game was... Beneath A Steel Sky (google it if you haven't heard of it). It wasn't the best looking game and was linear as hell... but the game drew you in with such a great SciFi story. It was the king of the point and click adventures imho.

So when I hear "The graphics svck!" I just turn off. What gamers should be asking is "Why do the graphics not look as good as other current gen games?" and the answer is in the E3 demo... it's because it is such an open-world/do-anything-you-want system that they HAD to take from somewhere. Plus it looks more like a 50's era quaintness version of a Fallout game to me. It looks... QUITE APT!

EDIT: OMG... I just found Beneath A Steel Sky on Good Old Gamers... AND IT'S FREAKIN' FREE.... I know what I'm going to be playing later on lol.

Witcher 3 doesn't look better on consoles.