Outdated in just about every facet you can think of.

I think the issue may have been because it was only a rendering system and file format. It couldn't do everything the developers wanted. But I don't know anything about the subject.

I'm going to side with Freddo.

Q: What was wrong with Gamebyro?
A: A lot.

How enlightening.

Need elaboration? Outdated physics, outdated graphics, glitchy, corrupts many saves. Need I write a 7 sentence paragraph elaborating further?

Did Gamebryo have anything do with my game locking up every 15 minutes? If so, I hate Gamebryo. If not, then I guess it was ok, but certainly not the best.

Unless it was a disc fault, yes.

honestly, game byro is my scapegoat for when there is something in TES that i dont like, and have no where else to put blame.
sad i spose, but true.

Its simple.. they could only go so far with gamebryo. So they dropped it and went farther with something they cooked up.

From what they are saying the new engine handles changes in detail of far away thingies MUCH better and allows for alot more detail far out.

It also and this is a big freaking deal.. it allowed them to change the lighting.

Back early ob they had this kind of lighting and it made things look a hell of alot better... but it ran too slow on the consoles.

Also I wouldnt be shocked if the new engine takes up less memory space or cpu power and thus leaves more room for more npcs on screen or more effects running.

That is because one thing most everyone was sure of was gamebryo was nboth a memory hog and just plain slow. It is quite likely even given the adding of begtter lighthing and more details that this engine might be running the game faster and smoother on any given system then the old one could,

I think there's some pretty good marketability in the Creation Engine. All the better for Bethesda to have two engines under their belt, idTech and Creation. They each have their own benefits, their studios will use them as they see fit, and they will be licensed out to other interested parties. Because they are under the same banner, I can see some collaboration between the two, such as when they got advice on the shadows, for mutual benefit of both of them. But I don't think they'll ever be merged together.

As others have pointed out, Gamebryo wasn't responsible for those aspects of the game - it's just a renderer. For instance, physics were handled by Havok.

I've put 1m polys worth of meshes in OB and walked around it at 50+ fps no prob (on a P4 no less). Add 3 NPCs and the fps drops to 15 fps. I don't think thats a render engine problem. More of an AI/scripting problem but there's no convincing folks: GameBryo didn't cause save game corruption, level design bugs (ex: Salmo the Baker), gridpath errors (NPCs walking into walls), strange physics (all Havok), 2D trees (Speedtree), etc. I'm sure BGS has created a killer engine but any flaws in Skyrim will somehow be blamed on the 'spirit' of GameBryo at least.

Hel borne you cant argue with the very simple fact the new game with its new engine is doing things they couldnt do on the old engine on a console.

And that is what matters. Its doing more.

This is basically the summation of this thread. Gamebryo had it's faults, most of the things it got blamed for were not it's fault and the people who blame it are less than competent. RIP Gamebryo, and we shall welcome the new engine with open arms.

Yeah, and FO3 did a lot more than OB and that was still the Gambryo renderer. Again it has nothing to do with Gambryo and everything to do with how Bethesda pieces together the portions of middle ware to create an engine.

I don't have time to explain, but I will just start with that it's over 10 years old, and has a simply HORRID lighting system.

i almost **** my self when i saw this well done my friend, i personally am hoping for a bubble sorted inventory.... because while were at it lets take advantage of all CPUs by making this as inefficient as possible

Like idtech 5...o wait yeah mega textures lawl.

Yeah, he did. But I think he was mainly talking about id tech 5 then. But if (and that's a big if) Carmack tailored id tech 6 for TES-like games, it would be ideal

Having in mind that Carmack said something about playing with some way of ray-tracing for id tech 6, I doubt it'll be appropiate for a TES game...

You never know maybe TES 6 will have iDTech 6.5 or even BethTech 1 seeing as how iD is now part of Zenimax, the owners of Bethesda (and Bethesda is their main company so BethTech would be more appropriate than ZenTech, though that does sound cool)

Why is it called Game Engine, not rendering engine?

Crap lighting, crap shadows, crap optimization, crap LOD handling, crap memory management. These are but a few reasons Gamebryo svcks the big svck. Carpeting over them with more layers of complexity to mask all this really wasn't going to help.

Bethesda made the right move in ditching it and going with something they wrote and know inside and out. They won't have to play dancing with lawyers to sort out licensing and legal BS to get things into a working state.

I saw no fault with it. The only thing that should have been better were the animations but they use Havok Behavior now so they should be good.