Stop kidding yourselves Bethsda and make a new engine FROM SCRATCH

Just completed the main quest, which took ages and got me nothing in return. When I went to see my follower it turns out she somehow lost the ebony mail armour. You know that unique one you do a quest for which is irreplacable...

These bugs ruin the game and have been present in every game ive played by them so far (oblivion, both fallout games). Its rediculous and there really is no excuse. Many rpgs last a long time and contain large worlds and yet its just bethsda who have all these game breaking bugs. You may have added a layer of polish and called the engine for this game new, but we all know its just the **** gamebryo engine covered in a few layers of polish, it looks nice, but it doesnt work as basic levels.

And the fact is with other rpg devs looking at you (dragon age) and taking on board what makes your games popular, soon you'll have no excuse for the pile of **** you dump on gamers every single time you release a half made game.

They decided to make dark brotherhood initiates invincible too so I cant even get revenge for her clumsiness ;(

I believe you can summon it using the appropriate console command, you just have to search for the code relating to the item.

I believe you can summon it using the appropriate console command, you just have to search for the code relating to the item.

Masculus

Skyrim looks and plays like a heavily modded Oblivion. And it even bugs/glitches like Oblivion too. Bethesda is and always was garbage and now people are giving Bugthesda a pat on the back for it.

Consoles cant handle anything new

PC modders will be pissed off

no one wins, leave it be, new engine wont fix anything

I read somewhere that Skyrim was based on a new engine. They actually felt that they shouldn't use the same engine as Oblivion

I read somewhere that Skyrim was based on a new engine. They actually felt that they shouldn't use the same engine as Oblivion

jhcho2

The older an engine it is usually the more optimized it is.

Creating a new engine would deploy a plethora of new bugs and glitches :?

The older an engine it is usually the more optimized it is.

Creating a new engine would deploy a plethora of new bugs and glitches :?

commonfate

I just called Todd Howard, he said for you to STFU.SaltyMeatballs

Well done, you just summed up Bethesda's QA team and tech support.

Yes they still win countless goty awards. In other words, they won't change crap until people stop being their slaves... and they say Activision is the devil.

The older an engine it is usually the more optimized it is.

Creating a new engine would deploy a plethora of new bugs and glitches :?

commonfate

Did you just imply Gamebryo is a well optimised engine? Sorry, but Skyrim's visuals don't justify dips in the 30 fps threshold on a oc'ed 580 and a 2500k at 4,5.

[QUOTE="SaltyMeatballs"]I just called Todd Howard, he said for you to STFU.Vesica_Prime

Well done, you just summed up Bethesda's QA team and tech support.

LMAO, sounds like it.

It's not the engine's fault if they can't optimize and polish the game.

But that costs money :(

But that costs money :(

waltefmoney

So do live action trailers and mass market hype advertisments and yet...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w1AenlOEXao

[QUOTE="waltefmoney"]

But that costs money :(

casharmy

So do live action trailers and mass market hype advertisments and yet...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w1AenlOEXao

The older an engine it is usually the more optimized it is.

Creating a new engine would deploy a plethora of new bugs and glitches :?

commonfate

OR they could just hire a better QA team.

Taking a look atwhat Gamebryo actually does, the only part that sounds relevant to me is scripting. I'm not exactly sure what scripting is (I'm not a developer. Sounds like what it is to me.) but if a script says "Your companion will lose that really f***ing awesome piece of armor", then I don't think it's the engine's fault. :?

The older an engine it is usually the more optimized it is.commonfate

Well this is just plain wrong.

Or maybe Sony should make a new console already. That 512MB ram is one of the main reasons for the poor performance on the console. I'd prefer for the devs to work on content rather than wasting time in finding ways how to make a complex game run in an aged piece of hardware.

[QUOTE="commonfate"]The older an engine it is usually the more optimized it is.GiantAssPanda

Well this is just plain wrong.

Educate me then, this is what I've always been led to believe.

[QUOTE="GiantAssPanda"]

[QUOTE="commonfate"]The older an engine it is usually the more optimized it is.commonfate

Well this is just plain wrong.

Educate me then, this is what I've always been led to believe.

Hardware as well as software technology advances all the time. Even tho you have the same hardware on consoles for years, fresher engines provide much more features to take advantage of.

The Witcher 1 vs The Witcher 2 is a good example. The Witcher 1 had a heavily modified version of Bioware's old Aurora engine (From Neverwinter Nights) while The Witcher 2 had a brand new robust engine created from sctratch and is probably one of the best looking games to date.

Guess which one performs better on my PC even today?

[QUOTE="commonfate"]

[QUOTE="GiantAssPanda"]

Well this is just plain wrong.

GiantAssPanda

Educate me then, this is what I've always been led to believe.

Hardware as well as software technology advances all the time. Even tho you have the same hardware on consoles for years, fresher engines provide much more features to take advantage of.

The Witcher 1 vs The Witcher 2 is a good example. The Witcher 1 had a heavily modified version of Bioware's old Aurora engine (From Neverwinter Nights) while The Witcher 2 had a brand new robust engine created from sctratch and is probably one of the best looking games to date.

Guess which one performs better on my PC even today?

Well that makes sense, ha TIL today. Thanks for not being an ass about it lol.

Yeah this engine is just running ancient, ancient technology.

They still use old-school shadow maps! Hello, welcome to 2007!

They didn't even bother optimizing code for PC CPU technologies that have been aorund for decades like SSE. Modders had to go and compile for these instruction sets that EVERY mdern processor has.

It can give you up to a 40% boost in performance.

The problem here are the current gen consoles.

Developers spend HUGE amounts of time trying to optimize their game for ancient hardware, instead of innovating their code base technologically and producing modern game engines.

Other games used the Gamebryo engine without bugs, it's just Bethesda, they're horrible devs. PC Modders found a way to increase CPU usage by 40% lol

I just called Todd Howard, he said for you to STFU.SaltyMeatballs

Developers spend HUGE amounts of time trying to optimize their game for ancient hardware, instead of innovating their code base technologically and producing modern game engines.

Kinthalis

I reckon you haven't yet seen what the updated Unreal Engine 3 can do? It's not necessary that a completely new engine will yield better results than a proven, but modernized engine will.

Well the PC and 360 versions are fine. Maybe they should just sign and exclisive deal with Microsoft so cows will not have to worry about their platform not being able to handle the Skyrim engine.

[QUOTE="Masculus"]

I believe you can summon it using the appropriate console command, you just have to search for the code relating to the item.

NinjaMunkey01

Yeah this engine is just running ancient, ancient technology.

They still use old-school shadow maps! Hello, welcome to 2007!

They didn't even bother optimizing code for PC CPU technologies that have been aorund for decades like SSE. Modders had to go and compile for these instruction sets that EVERY mdern processor has.

It can give you up to a 40% boost in performance.

The problem here are the current gen consoles.

Developers spend HUGE amounts of time trying to optimize their game for ancient hardware, instead of innovating their code base technologically and producing modern game engines.

Kinthalis

[QUOTE="Kinthalis"]

Developers spend HUGE amounts of time trying to optimize their game for ancient hardware, instead of innovating their code base technologically and producing modern game engines.

nameless12345

I reckon you haven't yet seen what the updated Unreal Engine 3 can do? It's not necessary that a completely new engine will yield better results than a proven, but modernized engine will.

But this is the issue. Essentially you need a large third party to do the optimizing, because most devs can't handle the huge expense of trying to make 7 yar old hardware look "ok".

The artists say: Hey, let's have a ton of dynamic lighting for this explosion effect, and lots of dust particles! IT will look amazing!

The programmers say: Uhm, guys, these are consoles, not PC's. We can't do that. I'll give 1 dynamic light and 50 dust particles, ok?

The artists: F that! ok... at least give us a 100 particles and 2 dynamic lights?! Please???

The programmers: God damn it! Fine! We'll gather up the entire progrmaming department and for the next couple fo months try our best to figure out how to make these crappy consoles spit out another dynamic light and 50 more particles!

Artists: Cool beans.

*** 2 months later ***

Programmers: Ok, we got you 2 dynamic lights and 75 particles. It's all we could do.

Artists, I guess that's ok. We'll just overaly a few of these explosion effects together!

Programmers: **faints**

[QUOTE="nameless12345"]

[QUOTE="Kinthalis"]

Developers spend HUGE amounts of time trying to optimize their game for ancient hardware, instead of innovating their code base technologically and producing modern game engines.

Kinthalis

I reckon you haven't yet seen what the updated Unreal Engine 3 can do? It's not necessary that a completely new engine will yield better results than a proven, but modernized engine will.

But this is the issue. Essentially you need a large third party to do the optimizing, because most devs can't handle the huge expense of trying to make 7 yar old hardware look "ok".

The artists say: Hey, let's have a ton of dynamic lighting for this explosion effect, and lots of dust particles! IT will look amazing!

The programmers say: Uhm, guys, these are consoles, not PC's. We can't do that. I'll give 1 dynamic light and 50 dust particles, ok?

The artists: F that! ok... at least give us a 100 particles and 2 dynamic lights?! Please???

The programmers: God damn it! Fine! We'll gather up the entire progrmaming department and for the next couple fo months try our best to figure out how to make these crappy consoles spit out another dynamic light and 50 more particles!

Artists: Cool beans.

*** 2 months later ***

Programmers: Ok, we got you 2 dynamic lights and 75 particles. It's all we could do.

Artists, I guess that's ok. We'll just overaly a few of these explosion effects together!

Programmers: **faints**

[QUOTE="Kinthalis"]

Yeah this engine is just running ancient, ancient technology.

They still use old-school shadow maps! Hello, welcome to 2007!

They didn't even bother optimizing code for PC CPU technologies that have been aorund for decades like SSE. Modders had to go and compile for these instruction sets that EVERY mdern processor has.

It can give you up to a 40% boost in performance.

The problem here are the current gen consoles.

Developers spend HUGE amounts of time trying to optimize their game for ancient hardware, instead of innovating their code base technologically and producing modern game engines.

savagetwinkie

Theya re not compiling original code, but ARE compiling new function call replacements that target CPU optimizations.

[QUOTE="NinjaMunkey01"][QUOTE="Masculus"]

I believe you can summon it using the appropriate console command, you just have to search for the code relating to the item.

CanYouDiglt

The guy at game did laugh at me when I bought it for the ps3... ¬_¬ Wish Id listened

[QUOTE="Kinthalis"]

[QUOTE="nameless12345"]

I reckon you haven't yet seen what the updated Unreal Engine 3 can do? It's not necessary that a completely new engine will yield better results than a proven, but modernized engine will.

WarTornRuston

But this is the issue. Essentially you need a large third party to do the optimizing, because most devs can't handle the huge expense of trying to make 7 yar old hardware look "ok".

The artists say: Hey, let's have a ton of dynamic lighting for this explosion effect, and lots of dust particles! IT will look amazing!

The programmers say: Uhm, guys, these are consoles, not PC's. We can't do that. I'll give 1 dynamic light and 50 dust particles, ok?

The artists: F that! ok... at least give us a 100 particles and 2 dynamic lights?! Please???

The programmers: God damn it! Fine! We'll gather up the entire progrmaming department and for the next couple fo months try our best to figure out how to make these crappy consoles spit out another dynamic light and 50 more particles!

Artists: Cool beans.

*** 2 months later ***

Programmers: Ok, we got you 2 dynamic lights and 75 particles. It's all we could do.

Artists, I guess that's ok. We'll just overaly a few of these explosion effects together!

Programmers: **faints**

Nothing constructive to add?

Not surprising coming from you.

It's well documented that these issues exists in development teams.

The most recent example I can think of is RAGE. Where artists where complaining that the texture resolution on consoles sucked, and they couldn't bring their artistic vision to light.

Check out Gamasutra for details.

[QUOTE="WarTornRuston"][QUOTE="Kinthalis"]

But this is the issue. Essentially you need a large third party to do the optimizing, because most devs can't handle the huge expense of trying to make 7 yar old hardware look "ok".

The artists say: Hey, let's have a ton of dynamic lighting for this explosion effect, and lots of dust particles! IT will look amazing!

The programmers say: Uhm, guys, these are consoles, not PC's. We can't do that. I'll give 1 dynamic light and 50 dust particles, ok?

The artists: F that! ok... at least give us a 100 particles and 2 dynamic lights?! Please???

The programmers: God damn it! Fine! We'll gather up the entire progrmaming department and for the next couple fo months try our best to figure out how to make these crappy consoles spit out another dynamic light and 50 more particles!

Artists: Cool beans.

*** 2 months later ***

Programmers: Ok, we got you 2 dynamic lights and 75 particles. It's all we could do.

Artists, I guess that's ok. We'll just overaly a few of these explosion effects together!

Programmers: **faints**

Kinthalis

Nothing contructive to add?

Not surprising coming from you.

It's well documented that these issues exists in development teams.

The most recent example is RAGE. Where artists where complaining that the texture resolution on consoles sucked, and they couldn't bring their artistic vision to light.

Chekc out Gamasutra for details.

[QUOTE="Kinthalis"]

[QUOTE="WarTornRuston"] Hermit babble. That is all this is.WomanDog

Nothing contructive to add?

Not surprising coming from you.

It's well documented that these issues exists in development teams.

The most recent example is RAGE. Where artists where complaining that the texture resolution on consoles sucked, and they couldn't bring their artistic vision to light.

Chekc out Gamasutra for details.

Another consolite raging at the truth of the matter.

Keep those tears coming!

[QUOTE="Kinthalis"]

Yeah this engine is just running ancient, ancient technology.

They still use old-school shadow maps! Hello, welcome to 2007!

They didn't even bother optimizing code for PC CPU technologies that have been aorund for decades like SSE. Modders had to go and compile for these instruction sets that EVERY mdern processor has.

It can give you up to a 40% boost in performance.

The problem here are the current gen consoles.

Developers spend HUGE amounts of time trying to optimize their game for ancient hardware, instead of innovating their code base technologically and producing modern game engines.

savagetwinkie

[QUOTE="nameless12345"]

[QUOTE="Kinthalis"]

Developers spend HUGE amounts of time trying to optimize their game for ancient hardware, instead of innovating their code base technologically and producing modern game engines.

Kinthalis

I reckon you haven't yet seen what the updated Unreal Engine 3 can do? It's not necessary that a completely new engine will yield better results than a proven, but modernized engine will.

But this is the issue. Essentially you need a large third party to do the optimizing, because most devs can't handle the huge expense of trying to make 7 yar old hardware look "ok".

The artists say: Hey, let's have a ton of dynamic lighting for this explosion effect, and lots of dust particles! IT will look amazing!

The programmers say: Uhm, guys, these are consoles, not PC's. We can't do that. I'll give 1 dynamic light and 50 dust particles, ok?

The artists: F that! ok... at least give us a 100 particles and 2 dynamic lights?! Please???

The programmers: God damn it! Fine! We'll gather up the entire progrmaming department and for the next couple fo months try our best to figure out how to make these crappy consoles spit out another dynamic light and 50 more particles!

Artists: Cool beans.

*** 2 months later ***

Programmers: Ok, we got you 2 dynamic lights and 75 particles. It's all we could do.

Artists, I guess that's ok. We'll just overaly a few of these explosion effects together!

Programmers: **faints**

Well, I think there's no denying that coding for high-end PCs is easier due to less limitation. But then they aren't only writing games for the top PCs but for a variety of different hardware out there, ranging from bellow console levels to extremely powerful machines. And that's basically the main problem with PC development - you can never get the best result. On the other hand, development for consoles is a lot different because they're optimizing games just for one set of hardware and don't need to bother with graphics APIs (instead can use "direct to metal"), drivers and the like.

So while PC devs are optimizing their games for a plethora of different hardware console devs optimize just for a specific set of hardware and try to squeeze the best out of it. Of course once most of the potential is squeezed out it's time for a new gen (altho the best-looking console games actually come by the ends of their life-cycles when the devs fully master the hardware).

[QUOTE="WarTornRuston"][QUOTE="Kinthalis"]

But this is the issue. Essentially you need a large third party to do the optimizing, because most devs can't handle the huge expense of trying to make 7 yar old hardware look "ok".

The artists say: Hey, let's have a ton of dynamic lighting for this explosion effect, and lots of dust particles! IT will look amazing!

The programmers say: Uhm, guys, these are consoles, not PC's. We can't do that. I'll give 1 dynamic light and 50 dust particles, ok?

The artists: F that! ok... at least give us a 100 particles and 2 dynamic lights?! Please???

The programmers: God damn it! Fine! We'll gather up the entire progrmaming department and for the next couple fo months try our best to figure out how to make these crappy consoles spit out another dynamic light and 50 more particles!

Artists: Cool beans.

*** 2 months later ***

Programmers: Ok, we got you 2 dynamic lights and 75 particles. It's all we could do.

Artists, I guess that's ok. We'll just overaly a few of these explosion effects together!

Programmers: **faints**

Kinthalis

Nothing constructive to add?

Not surprising coming from you.

It's well documented that these issues exists in development teams.

The most recent example I can think of is RAGE. Where artists where complaining that the texture resolution on consoles sucked, and they couldn't bring their artistic vision to light.

Check out Gamasutra for details.

And go ahead and keep posting your little retarded pics. I am about to go test out a new fish finder on my boat..........sitting in the driveway, at my house. What are you doing? Sitting in your mamas living room pretending you are special?

[QUOTE="Kinthalis"]

[QUOTE="nameless12345"]

I reckon you haven't yet seen what the updated Unreal Engine 3 can do? It's not necessary that a completely new engine will yield better results than a proven, but modernized engine will.

nameless12345

But this is the issue. Essentially you need a large third party to do the optimizing, because most devs can't handle the huge expense of trying to make 7 yar old hardware look "ok".

The artists say: Hey, let's have a ton of dynamic lighting for this explosion effect, and lots of dust particles! IT will look amazing!

The programmers say: Uhm, guys, these are consoles, not PC's. We can't do that. I'll give 1 dynamic light and 50 dust particles, ok?

The artists: F that! ok... at least give us a 100 particles and 2 dynamic lights?! Please???

The programmers: God damn it! Fine! We'll gather up the entire progrmaming department and for the next couple fo months try our best to figure out how to make these crappy consoles spit out another dynamic light and 50 more particles!

Artists: Cool beans.

*** 2 months later ***

Programmers: Ok, we got you 2 dynamic lights and 75 particles. It's all we could do.

Artists, I guess that's ok. We'll just overaly a few of these explosion effects together!

Programmers: **faints**

Well, I think there's no denying that coding for high-end PCs is easier due to less limitation. But then they aren't only writing games for the top PCs but for a variety of different hardware out there, ranging from bellow console levels to extremely powerful machines. And that's basically the main problem with PC development - you can never get the best result. On the other hand, development for consoles is a lot different because they're optimizing games just for one set of hardware and don't need to bother with graphics APIs (instead can use "direct to metal"), drivers and the like.

So while PC devs are optimizing their games for a plethora of different hardware console devs optimize just for a specific set of hardware and try to squeeze the best out of it. Of course once most of the potential is squeezed out it's time for a new gen (altho the best-looking console games actually come by the ends of their life-cycles when the devs fully master the hardware).

Your facts are about 10 years out of date.

Pc developers do not optimize for a "plethora" of different hardware. They code using API's that abstract that complexity. Pc game devs usually choose to target a mid range PC, and scale to a low end one, adding extras for high end ones.

Basically the same process as on consoles, excpet instead of just scaling and adding extras they have to contend with 2 or 3 (wii) COMPLETELY different sets of hardware WITHOUT the aid of API's.

You're crazy if you think developiong for the PC is harder than for the consoles. Why do you think indie devs usually START on the PC? Cause it's harder?

[QUOTE="Kinthalis"]

[QUOTE="WarTornRuston"] Hermit babble. That is all this is.WarTornRuston

Nothing constructive to add?

Not surprising coming from you.

It's well documented that these issues exists in development teams.

The most recent example I can think of is RAGE. Where artists where complaining that the texture resolution on consoles sucked, and they couldn't bring their artistic vision to light.

Check out Gamasutra for details.

No, you're the imbecile who spends their day lurking on game forums complainign about PC gamers enjoying their hobby.

Pathetic.

Their engine is fine and it's super easy to mod. I'm not seeing any reason for them to move to a new engine yet.Stevo_the_gamer