Its funny how bethesda got mad at obsidian becuase new vegas got a rating of 84

[Goose]

But if you go look at fallout 4 it also got a rating of 84

the difference between the 2 games- new vegas is actually good, & it has some of the best DLC ever made in gaming history

[{FU}TheForgeryTTV]

Escrito originalmente por Chief of Kamchatka:

Escrito originalmente por =H$=TheForgery:

Funny enough, I was going to point out that Bethesda, for some reason, doesn't want to use another better engine but I forgot to. They could easily acquire one but they haven't as of yet.

Because there aren't many engines that can handle the amount of baggage that NetImmerse/Gamebryo/The "Creation Engine" can handle. The only problem is that CE doesn't handle it particularly well. Even then, moving on to a new engine isn't simple; it means learning a lot of new tricks and working with a different set of rules, especially if the engine wasn't developed in-house as CE was. Bethesda's been using the engine for over a decade when Fallout 4 came out, they're obviously not the type of developer who's comfortable with switching tech around.

Escrito originalmente por =H$=TheForgery:

Owyn Lyons was all about doing good as the Brotherhood of Steel whereas Father Elijah had a very twisted personality as he still cared about the BoS to some degree and wanted to save them from the NCR. However, he did a lot of unethical things to achieve them and it makes you wonder if he truly was better than the NCR.

I've never seen anyone justify or defend Elijah. All I've seen is people agreeing that he is a crazy old bastard.

So then, how come there are other games that have an open-world and use different engines? If what you said is true, then other games not even by Bethesda would be using the Gamebryo and/or the Creation Engine. It is true though, I can't blame Bethesda for being hesistant in switching to another engine.


I've seen and had some people sympathize with Elijah, though you do have a point that a lot of people tend to agree he went mad.

https://youtu.be/jKxpZsLzyvo

[Incunabulum]

Escrito originalmente por =H$=TheForgery:

Escrito originalmente por Chief of Kamchatka:

The "new engine" stuff doesn't go as far as you'd think. It's still a very similar engine. It's nothing really new, just Gamebryo running at 64-bit with better graphics, some tweaks, and stability improvements. The engine still struggles to keep up with other engines and to manage a game as big as Fallout 4.


Bethesda games were never about the characters or the writing (though Morrowind had some pretty good writing, probably becuase the game depended so much on it). They know how to make characters that the meme crowd would get a kick out of, but that's pretty much it.

Funny enough, I was going to point out that Bethesda, for some reason, doesn't want to use another better engine but I forgot to. They could easily acquire one but they haven't as of yet.

Because, for what they've been trying to do, there is no better engine.

These games - whatever their other faults - have a massive amount of scene interactivity. Something no other game engine is built to handle.

I really don't want a gameworld like TW3, GTAV, Uncharted, etc where you're limited to interacting only with specific 'clickies' and nothing else.

None of those other engines have the *mod* support that Creation does either. Modding these other games is a pain in the ass. And I'm not talking about creating mods, I'm just talking about installing them and sorting out conflicts between them. Install two mods into TW3 and the later mod simply overwrites everything from the first.

But you'll get your wish. BS has certainly heard the console market. Next set of games will likely be on some brand new shiny engine where everything in the world is a static and NPCs are non-persistent. And you can only install minor mods like skins and only from the approved and controlled Bethesda modding application.

[Incunabulum]

Escrito originalmente por =H$=TheForgery:

Escrito originalmente por Chief of Kamchatka:

Because there aren't many engines that can handle the amount of baggage that NetImmerse/Gamebryo/The "Creation Engine" can handle. The only problem is that CE doesn't handle it particularly well. Even then, moving on to a new engine isn't simple; it means learning a lot of new tricks and working with a different set of rules, especially if the engine wasn't developed in-house as CE was. Bethesda's been using the engine for over a decade when Fallout 4 came out, they're obviously not the type of developer who's comfortable with switching tech around.


I've never seen anyone justify or defend Elijah. All I've seen is people agreeing that he is a crazy old bastard.

So then, how come there are other games that have an open-world and use different engines? If what you said is true, then other games not even by Bethesda would be using the Gamebryo and/or the Creation Engine. It is true though, I can't blame Bethesda for being hesistant in switching to another engine.

Because those other games don't try to do the same things BGS games do.

Look at GTAV - solid blocks of buildings. Very few polygons. Nothing exists outside a short radius around the PC.

Get into a car and suddenly the city is filled with them. Step out and instantly they're all gone. No persistance.

Same thing with Watchdogs. Same thing with Uncharted. Pick your open-world game and they're all built the same way - except for BGS'.

[{FU}TheForgeryTTV]

Escrito originalmente por Incunabulum:

Escrito originalmente por =H$=TheForgery:

Funny enough, I was going to point out that Bethesda, for some reason, doesn't want to use another better engine but I forgot to. They could easily acquire one but they haven't as of yet.

Because, for what they've been trying to do, there is no better engine.

These games - whatever their other faults - have a massive amount of scene interactivity. Something no other game engine is built to handle.

I really don't want a gameworld like TW3, GTAV, Uncharted, etc where you're limited to interacting only with specific 'clickies' and nothing else.

None of those other engines have the *mod* support that Creation does either. Modding these other games is a pain in the ass. And I'm not talking about creating mods, I'm just talking about installing them and sorting out conflicts between them. Install two mods into TW3 and the later mod simply overwrites everything from the first.

But you'll get your wish. BS has certainly heard the console market. Next set of games will likely be on some brand new shiny engine where everything in the world is a static and NPCs are non-persistent. And you can only install minor mods like skins and only from the approved and controlled Bethesda modding application.

Perhaps not now nor in the near future, but what makes you think there won't be more updated engines being developed and released at a later time? If Bethesda was able to switch from the Gamebryo engine to the Creation engine after so many years later, then they will do it again when the time comes.

While not from a Bethesda game, STALKER is an open world game released around 2007 to 2009 or so (Shadow of Chernobyl, Clear Sky, and Call of Pripyat which is the last official game) and it uses a very unstable and pretty old engine but that didn't stop some a free-lance modding team (or individual) from making "Call of Chernobyl". Point is, if there is a will, then there can be a way, and said modding team is providing content more than a lot of the newer games with updated engines.

[{FU}TheForgeryTTV]

Escrito originalmente por Incunabulum:

Escrito originalmente por =H$=TheForgery:

So then, how come there are other games that have an open-world and use different engines? If what you said is true, then other games not even by Bethesda would be using the Gamebryo and/or the Creation Engine. It is true though, I can't blame Bethesda for being hesistant in switching to another engine.

Because those other games don't try to do the same things BGS games do.

Look at GTAV - solid blocks of buildings. Very few polygons. Nothing exists outside a short radius around the PC.

Get into a car and suddenly the city is filled with them. Step out and instantly they're all gone. No persistance.

Same thing with Watchdogs. Same thing with Uncharted. Pick your open-world game and they're all built the same way - except for BGS'.

If you're going to complain and nitpick about the limitations of open world games, then there's no point in playing them right? That's what I'm going to get from you. Sure, no open world game nor engine is perfect nor likely ever will be but here's the thing. You don't need to rely on the Creation Engine to make an open world game and no engine will be satisfactory. However, each engine has something different from the other otherwise, we would be using the same one for all games.

Point is, the Creation Engine is flawed all right but that doesn't mean you get to bash all the other engines and make it look like there's no point in playing games on them.

[NeticCyber]

Escrito originalmente por =H$=TheForgery:

Escrito originalmente por sjrekis:

Obsidrone review bombing and CC mess keeps F4 overall reviews down. But the more sensible recent reviews are quite positive.

What about the sensible negative reviews then? Bethesda favored voice acting over gameplay elements. Even if your character has a low intelligence, it almost doesn't change the dialogue. Speaking of the dialogue, you only have 4 basic choices like that of the Mass Effect series and the dialogue selection and cutscenes are even derived from it. Bethesda tried too hard to mimic Mass Effect given the inclusion of romance, to which their terrible writing didn't make it all that interesting.

While this isn't in a lot of reviews if any, Preston Garvey is perhaps the most hated companion in the game. He was so annoying, it even became a meme since he always forced players to protect a settlement without you even turning it down. It took Nuka World just to allow players to make him shut up in the end (by making the raiders control your settlements). As for his character, he's bland. Preston has nothing to say if you take him to his imposter, which is a major letdown.

In mind of the DLCs, a lot of negative reviews that keep on popping up was about the DLCs, namely the Wasteland Workshop ones. Reviewers have stated the lack of content and how unpolished some of them were.

There's even a saying that goes, "Bethesda is good at making vast oceans of an open-world game, but all are shallow".

Considering the people who worked on Mass Effect also worked on this game it makes sense, they went with a dialuge tree that they are familiar with.

[{FU}TheForgeryTTV]

Escrito originalmente por Chief of Kamchatka:

Escrito originalmente por =H$=TheForgery:

So then, how come there are other games that have an open-world and use different engines? If what you said is true, then other games not even by Bethesda would be using the Gamebryo and/or the Creation Engine. It is true though, I can't blame Bethesda for being hesistant in switching to another engine.

That has nothing to do with anything. There are several engines that can run an open world. RAGE, X-Ray, Fox Engine, RenderWare, REDengine, Frostbite, hundreds of in-house engine, so on.

Do you know what the difference is between The Witcher 3 and Skyrim? You can interact with ♥♥♥♥. You can interact with any prop, open any container, talk to any person, kill almost any creature, and it's a massive world that's constantly developing and changing in some small ways. And that's not even factoring in how easy it is to mod and change the game yourself.

You completely misunderstood everything I wrote. Play any other open world game, then compare that to Bethesda's games.

The reason why other companies aren't switching to what Bethesda is doing is because they simply don't care. You couldn't interact with every object in The Witcher 3, yet the game still won GOTY awrads. You had almost no meaningful interactions with the world in GTA V, yet it's still one of the best selling games of all time.

No, you're the one who is misunderstanding what I'm typing. Bethesda could switch to another engine but they don't for whatever reason. That's the simple fact. No engine is perfect but the Creation Engine is merely an updated version of an even older engine. That's the problem. They need to use a much more modern engine that some of these other games are using. They clearly made a switch and Bethesda will have to sometime in the future if they want to make a new game.


You want proof? When Overkill's RAID: WWII was announced it was still using the horribly outdated Diesel engine, people immediately avoided it like the plague and the game flopped. What makes you think Bethesda can hold on to "merely upgraded" engines for their new games?

[{FU}TheForgeryTTV]

Escrito originalmente por NeticCyber:

Escrito originalmente por =H$=TheForgery:

What about the sensible negative reviews then? Bethesda favored voice acting over gameplay elements. Even if your character has a low intelligence, it almost doesn't change the dialogue. Speaking of the dialogue, you only have 4 basic choices like that of the Mass Effect series and the dialogue selection and cutscenes are even derived from it. Bethesda tried too hard to mimic Mass Effect given the inclusion of romance, to which their terrible writing didn't make it all that interesting.

While this isn't in a lot of reviews if any, Preston Garvey is perhaps the most hated companion in the game. He was so annoying, it even became a meme since he always forced players to protect a settlement without you even turning it down. It took Nuka World just to allow players to make him shut up in the end (by making the raiders control your settlements). As for his character, he's bland. Preston has nothing to say if you take him to his imposter, which is a major letdown.

In mind of the DLCs, a lot of negative reviews that keep on popping up was about the DLCs, namely the Wasteland Workshop ones. Reviewers have stated the lack of content and how unpolished some of them were.

There's even a saying that goes, "Bethesda is good at making vast oceans of an open-world game, but all are shallow".

Considering the people who worked on Mass Effect also worked on this game it makes sense, they went with a dialuge tree that they are familiar with.

Any proof of that?

[{FU}TheForgeryTTV]

Escrito originalmente por Chief of Kamchatka:

Escrito originalmente por =H$=TheForgery:

If Bethesda was able to switch from the Gamebryo engine to the Creation engine after so many years later, then they will do it again when the time comes.

They didn't switch the engine, they gradually developed it. You're sure are making a lot of assumptions about what Incunabulum and I are trying to say.

Escrito originalmente por =H$=TheForgery:

While not from a Bethesda game, STALKER is an open world game released around 2007 to 2009 or so (Shadow of Chernobyl, Clear Sky, and Call of Pripyat which is the last official game) and it uses a very unstable and pretty old engine but that didn't stop some a free-lance modding team (or individual) from making "Call of Chernobyl". Point is, if there is a will, then there can be a way, and said modding team is providing content more than a lot of the newer games with updated engines.

Gamebryo/Creation isn't the only moddable engine out there. We know that. But X-Ray doesn't handle mods or its own content nearly as well as Gamebryo. Even so, outside of the map size, there is very, very little content in Call of Chernobyl. It's mostly just pasting in maps from the previous games, nothing more.

GSC Game World was also more supportive of the modding community than Bethesda was, and in a different way. They even released old builds of SoC and the X-Ray engine on the internet. As you can see in a mod like Lost Alpha, it was much easier and more legal to modify the X-Ray engine than the Creation Engine.

Escrito originalmente por =H$=TheForgery:

No, you're the one who is misunderstanding what I'm typing. Bethesda could switch to another engine but they don't for whatever reason. That's the simple fact. No engine is perfect but the Creation Engine is merely an updated version of an even older engine. That's the problem. They need to use a much more modern engine that some of these other games are using. They clearly made a switch and Bethesda will have to sometime in the future if they want to make a new game.

Didn't I just tell you why they didn't switch the engine?

Other engines didn't do what they wanted to do. Simple. Please read fully next time. No-one is saying that any engine is perfect, just that other engines wouldn't be able to do Skyrim or Fallout 4 as well as CE.

Every game engine is an updated version of an older engine. The point is that the Creation Engine lags behind. That's all.

Escrito originalmente por =H$=TheForgery:

You want proof? When Overkill's RAID: WWII was announced it was still using the horribly outdated Diesel engine, people immediately avoided it like the plague and the game flopped. What makes you think Bethesda can hold on to "merely upgraded" engines for their new games?

What the hell does that have to do with anything? It's a different company using different tech and a different engine for a different game.

Escrito originalmente por =H$=TheForgery:

Any proof of that?

Nope. Whoever this guy is, he's just talking out his ass.

You're accusing me of saying they switched the engine? There's a reason why Gamebyro and Creation is named differently. Sure, Creation was only updated to handle 64 bit but otherwise, they could had just said "Gamebryo 64-bit" for all I give a rat's ass but that isn't appealing. And no, not *every* game uses an updated engine of an already existing one. But enough of this name issue and such.

What I am trying to say is, Bethesda will have to use a new engine, not just because of limitations but also because of marketing. You just told me that they did for Skyrim and Fallout 4, and they can do it again when they have to, like it or not. Will you be willing to buy a game that uses an old engine? I know a lot of people didn't for the game I mentioned. Overkill's game flopped because of one of those reasons. Bethesda has to eventually switch to a new engine like it or not. Simple and real as that as the keyboard you use to type.

Call of Chernobyl only has "expanded maps"? Are you kidding me? While the main quest nor side quests aren't engaging, the modders have been adding new things to make the game/mod more playable that so many other games lack. You can install a mod to make factions dynamic for instance, and the AI in STALKER is a lot more advanced than countless number of games right now. Funny how you said the X-ray engine doesn't handle mods when it can if done right though at the cost of stability but then again, F:NV and other games suffer the same issues.

Bethesda has also supported the modding community, but in a different perspective and with a radical approach.Bethesda now wants to monetize off of other modders' work and the quality isn't good.

EDIT: And yes, the guy claiming some people from the Mass Effect team working on Fallout 4 is ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥. Found no sources whatsoever.

[red255]

If you look at the reviews that derive the score, the score is 84 BECAUSE the game was released unfinished.

it was bethesda's decision to release the game unfinished.

it mainly shows why there is bad blood between this games people and bethesda. and why they won't make a new west coast game for Fallout series.

[{FU}TheForgeryTTV]

Escrito originalmente por Chief of Kamchatka:

Escrito originalmente por =H$=TheForgery:

You're accusing me of saying they switched the engine? There's a reason why Gamebyro and Creation is named differently. Sure, Creation was only updated to handle 64 bit but otherwise, they could had just said "Gamebryo 64-bit" for all I give a rat's ass but that isn't appealing. And no, not *every* game uses an updated engine of an already existing one. But enough of this name issue and such.

I'm not accusing you of anything. What are you on about? How am I even accusing you? You said "they switched the engine", and I said "no they didn't". And that's because they didn't. There was no "switch", there was a gradual development, and a rebranding to reflect how it has gradually developed further from the engine used in Oblivion and Fallout 3. Similarly to how engines like REDengine, Frostbite, or CryEngine change numbers to reflect that they've changed. They couldn't name it "Gamebryo 2" because Gamebryo was not their engine to name.

Escrito originalmente por =H$=TheForgery:

What I am trying to say is, Bethesda will have to use a new engine, not just because of limitations but also because of marketing. You just told me that they did for Skyrim and Fallout 4, and they can do it again when they have to, like it or not.

We'll see. But no-one is complaining about Doom 2016 using "an outdated engine". They can update the Creation Engine, slap a big 2 on it, and people won't pay attention. Most people who are complaining about the engine are in on it for the circlejerk, anyway.

Escrito originalmente por =H$=TheForgery:

Will you be willing to buy a game that uses an old engine?

Depends. "Old" is just a word, if the technical issues really get in the way of the game, then no. For all I care, they can use Unreal Engine 1, and if it doesn't get in the way of the game, I'll buy it.

The solution isn't just simply to "switch" engines. Old engines can be updated. Rockstar is making Red Dead Redemption 2 with RAGE, an engine unveiled in 2006. And that engine is based on technology from RenderWare, an engine was unveiled in 1993. Age means nothing. People still use Microsoft Word, a program released in 1983. People still store their cat images as JPEGs, a format released in 1992. Video games nowadays use shadow mapping, a technique introduced in 1978.

They can update the engine. It's not outlandish and it has been done before. But I do believe they're going to have to update it more than they did in Fallout 4. They need to try harder to keep up with the times.

Escrito originalmente por =H$=TheForgery:

I know a lot of people didn't for the game I mentioned. Overkill's game flopped because of one of those reasons.

It's not even Overkill's game. It took me like ten seconds of Google to find that out.

Escrito originalmente por =H$=TheForgery:

Bethesda has to eventually switch to a new engine like it or not. Simple and real as that as the keyboard you use to type.

I don't care what engine they use if they make good games. All I'm saying is that I don't believe they will, or will need to, switch to a new engine.

Escrito originalmente por =H$=TheForgery:

Call of Chernobyl only has "expanded maps"? Are you kidding me? While the main quest nor side quests aren't engaging, the modders have been adding new things to make the game/mod more playable that so many other games lack.

I've played it for about 30-40 hours. It's nothing special. Maps from the previous games with more AI interaction. It's more modern and stable than the base game of CoP, but aside from walking around the empty areas and watching (with limited interaction) with the well-created, yet dull and uninteresting A-Life system, there isn't much content.

Escrito originalmente por =H$=TheForgery:

You can install a mod to make factions dynamic for instance, and the AI in STALKER is a lot more advanced than countless number of games right now.

Exactly. You can install a mod. Because the base mod of CoC is only meant to be a modders' resource. Advanced AI also doesn't mean anything if it's boring and fails to create anything particularly interesting, other than some intense gunfights with ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ AI. But that's subjective.

Escrito originalmente por =H$=TheForgery:

Funny how you said the X-ray engine doesn't handle mods when it can if done right though at the cost of stability but then again, F:NV and other games suffer the same issues.

Now when did I say that it doesn't handle mods? Because I never said that. I only said that it doesn't handle them with as much ease as Gamebryo. I've never seen a game engine where it's that easy to make, install, and use mods, and then enable and disable them on a whim and sole a whole heap of issues with conflicts and such. The way Gamebryo/CE handle it isn't perfect, but it handles it much more smoothly than other engines.

Escrito originalmente por =H$=TheForgery:

Bethesda has also supported the modding community, but in a different perspective and with a radical approach.Bethesda now wants to monetize off of other modders' work and the quality isn't good.

Yes, they've done a lot to support the modding community. They don't let modders modify the engine, release fan-games out of it (ala Lost Alpha), or just release old builds of their games, but they have made creating and using mods much easier.

What they're doing with Creation Club is much more complex.


♥♥♥♥, I'm writing essays again. I'm done.

Finally, I'm ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ done too. Not just with this pointless argument but with the Fallout community. I just wanted to say how it's not just a trend to criticize Fallout 4 and where did it get me? I get myself into an area where it's raining ♥♥♥♥ because it had to.

I have seen other terrible communities like CS:GO, PD2, and such where people are hostile but the Fallout community is on a whole other level. I can't get on anyone's side AT ALL. You like either Bethesda or Obsidian Fallout game, you get ♥♥♥♥ on. Now, even talking about the engine had netted me trouble when it wasn't even the initial thing I meant to talk about. It's so ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ awful, I get people who hate mods because it's not to their liking and meanwhile, there are people who defend paid mods even if they have no effort or substance put into them. Just what the ♥♥♥♥?

I ran out of ♥♥♥♥♥ to give. Respond to this comment on whatever basis you like but it won't matter. I have unsubscribed from this ♥♥♥♥-fest that I was in knee-deep in. All I can say is, avoid any comment section regarding Fallout. It's just straight-out cancerous.

[NeticCyber]

Escrito originalmente por =H$=TheForgery:

Escrito originalmente por NeticCyber:

Considering the people who worked on Mass Effect also worked on this game it makes sense, they went with a dialuge tree that they are familiar with.

Any proof of that?

I went and looked it up to be sure but couldn't find anything. But I swore that I saw some where saying that Bioware had some sort of help in making Fallout 4's dialouge

[Washell]

Escrito originalmente por NeticCyber:

Escrito originalmente por =H$=TheForgery:

Any proof of that?

I went and looked it up to be sure but couldn't find anything. But I swore that I saw some where saying that Bioware had some sort of help in making Fallout 4's dialouge

I've seen plenty of reviewers compare FO4's dialogue system with Bioware's. I think you're remembering that. It's more an inspired by than an active hand.

[Keijo]

Problem with obsidian is that they just have never been that great company, I mean they have the issue they can't finish their games before running into financial issues.

Like baldurs gate 3 and van buren, they never happened, they couldnt finish the project before running out of money. And those were 2d games, they couldn't have even dreamed about something like oblivion or fallout 3.

Like people might complain that big companies make games like skyrim/fallout 4 but then only big companies have the skill and leadership to finish such projects. I just see it as the only way to develop such games, they suck in some rpg ways but atleast they get released with huge 3d worlds.

But what is great that obsidian is making games like pillars of eternity and wasteland now. I don't personally give a ♥♥♥♥ who owns fallout trademark, those things just come and go these days.

[Boneyard Bob]

Escrito originalmente por Keijo:

Like baldurs gate 3 and van buren, they never happened, they couldnt finish the project before running out of money.

That was IPLY/Black Isle, not Obsidian. In the case of Van Buren it wasn't an issue of running out of money, IPLY was dying and laid off the dev team, effectively cancelling the game. Many of those laid off went on to form Obsidian, but in their time at IPLY/BI they only collaborated on the BG games; Bioware was the main dev for those.

Escrito originalmente por Keijo:

But what is great that obsidian is making games like pillars of eternity and wasteland now.

Obsidian has PoE, Wasteland belongs to inXile.