Why are battles so small?

It's VERY mod friendly, they have modded it to hell and back to fit their needs, they know it like the back of their hands (and yet they use it like shit), buyers don't seem to care.

At this point changing it would cause a big delay for their next game, because they first would have to learn it, then they should modify it to suit their needs, then their first game using it would probably be more buggy and running worse than usual (!), the mod scene (one of the reasons their games sell so good on PC) would be slower to grow and mods that fix their shitty work would take longer to appear. They have nothing to gain from chaning it at this point.

But the real issue isn't the engine itself. Plenty of engines are, at their core, super old. It's just that Bethesda doesn't have good programmers AND they don't design their games properly around the limitations of their engine.

I wonder if the junk now being so valuable for modding isn't a design choice done so that the game won't have to remember as much pointless stuff as before.

 

But certain engines seem to be more popular than others. Like Unity, Unreal and maybe a few more. How comes almost no one is using Gamebyro anymore, except for this korean MMO MapleStory 2. That must have some reason. I mean this genuely. Maybe it is the best engine for ... what ever? No clue! I am just curious, if it is so good as some say, why is Beth the only one using it today? Since 2012 it seems no one has made really anything with it. Maybe it's just not popular enough. Who knows.

Yeah! Imagine that. Bethesda doing the work of real game development

 

Seeing as how the guys from ID were already involved in Fallout 4 there is no reason they couldn't have used the ID Tech engine.

 

It probably wasn't in Bethesda's vision.

 

Considering they turned the game into a First Person Shooter more than anything else that might have been a good idea. I doubt you could create the large Bethesda worlds with that engine but Fallout 4 plays more like Wolfenstein New Order than an RPG.

Am I the only one that found Wolfenstein: The New Order to have better writing and a more compelling story than Fallout 4? I really liked that game.

 

I found the New Order was alright and it did have good shooting mechanics.

 

Not at all I had a lot fun with the game and the story, imo, was really good for an FPS; even the romance felt organic.

 

Unity is popular NOW (it's free), but early in the PS360 life what were the alternatives for middleware engines? Renderware was awesome but was bought by EA in 2007 IIRC and couldn't be bought anymore. Gamebryo is good and, from what I've heard, very malleable but not excellent as a whole. ID Tech 4 (Doom 3) and Source (Half Life) can't do open world games and the former is kinda resource heavy.

Unreal Engine kinda won by default and then it was a snowball effect of everyone using it because everyone was using it.
Ironically, despite its fame and widespread use, UE3 isn't a particularly good engine.

Someone says it's particularly good? Who?

Eh.

ID Tech 4 (Doom 3) and Id Tech 5 (Rage) both suck for open world games.

 

A LOT more organic considering you romance Piper by picking random locks lol. Wow now that I am reminded of Wolfenstein: The New Order I realize how much better that game was overall. The story, pacing, writing, and characters were far better developed. I don't think anyone expected it to be that good.

 

I was beeing generic, but when I made the suggestion that Beth should (finally!) change to a new and more modern engine, a couple of NMAers crawled out of somewhere explaining how awesome Gamebryo is and how awesome it is for modders. So maybe it's awesome for modding. Not that I know anything about it. But I doubt that's really a big concern for Bethesda anyway. Seems not all modders are super happy with Gamebyro either though from what I can read in google and some forums. No clue really. I was just curious.

 

I think there is a limited number of times they can put out games on Gamebryo before a "critical mass" of consumers simply stop caring about Bethesda games, and Fallout 4 is definitely approaching that critical mass. Even Angry Joe, who I've personally never seen give a bad score to a video game even after tearing it apart (he pointed out all the terrible things about Mass Effect 3 and Fallout 4 and still gave both games an 8/10), is calling for a new engine entirely for the next Bethesda game.

I mean, how many times can you play that same type of Gamebryo open-world game before it gets old? it seems to be about 5 times. 5 games including Morrowind and now a majority of people seem to be in agreement that a new engine is needed.

 

Watching NPCs disappear through doors, waiting for NPCs to go through said door and wait for the animation to stop to be able to go through the door is annoying as hell.

 

That's why I pick locks naked, more immersive.

 

They see how you treat that lock with your fingers while verbally abusing it and then they want you to do that to them since it looks hot.

 

Atlus used Gamebryo to make a pretty interesting and unique game in the form of Catherine.

 

Catherine wasn't an openworld game. It was a puzzle plataformer so obviously they weren't forcing an old engine to make something it's not meant to be doing. And even Catherine has that fun 0fps bug when you cause enough blocks to drop in succession.

 

Maybe, but that's not the assertion I was rebutting.

 

Atlus made it work by using it for a smaller game that wasn't so resource intensive, they also did the proper optimizing. Then Atlus switched to their own in-house engine for Persona 5 which has freeroam but not a massive map. I think that says it all, they switched engines when they wanted to do something bigger than Catherine.

 

Something Bethesda has trouble doing for some reason.