this post was submitted on 15 Jun 2023
29 points (100.0% liked)

Gaming

30557 readers
477 users here now

From video gaming to card games and stuff in between, if it's gaming you can probably discuss it here!

Please Note: Gaming memes are permitted to be posted on Meme Mondays, but will otherwise be removed in an effort to allow other discussions to take place.

See also Gaming's sister community Tabletop Gaming.


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Plume@beehaw.org 9 points 1 year ago (6 children)

“Game dev here,” Carlone writes, adding that they are a “big fan” of Dreamcast Guy. “Wanted to clarify: it’s not a sign of an unfinished game. It’s a choice. 60fps on this scale would be a large hit to the visual fidelity. My guess is they want to go for a seamless look and less ‘pop in.’ And of course, [it’s] your right to dislike the choice.”

Sure. Maybe. It could be this. Or...

Arm-chair babbling idiot who plays too much video games here, I am one hundred percent convinced that it has nothing to do with visual fidelity and everything to do with that asthmatic engine they've been dragging since Morrowind. Can't prove it but... you know. Just a hunch I get from playing their games.

[–] lemillionsocks@beehaw.org 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

People constantly complain about the engine that they use but no other game engine is as flexible when it comes to modding and no other game engine has the same level of complexity when it comes to being able to pick stuff up and move it around. You can take items off a shelf or desk in skyrim and fallout and stack them somewhere else. You can if you want decide to hoard a bunch of garbage you stole and stack them into a pyramid in your home base area.

Are their quirks? Sure the physics tied to framerate in skyrim was a problem, the games are always buggy, and they arent usually the prettiest games out there(though skyrim looked decent when it first came out and the graphical fidelity mods can work magic).

As for the premise does it have to do with fidelity? Of course it does. Setting a framecap on consoles means theyre able to use higher resolution assets, better lighting effects, and more complex models. I understand the preference of giving up fidelity for some smoothness and frames but 30fps isnt totally uncommon in console spaces and this is a bethesda game not a twitch shooter or a 2d fighter.

Outside the PC space gamers hardly ever talk about or think about framer rate. Graphical effects and details and fisual fidelity are a higher priority and more important in a game where generally you mostly just walk around and explore.

It would be nice if they had an option for a lower res mode or less detailed mode and 60fps target, but I get why they made the choice they did and ideally Im sure it'll run at a normal framerate on pc.

Now if it runs poorly on PC then we can riot.

[–] LimitedBrain@beehaw.org 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's also a personal choice of Bethesda not to rename their engine. Many other studios do this same thing and reuse engines, but they often rename them after significant rewrites. Bethesda just doesn't do that.

Also they aren't worried about how the game will be released. Their games have legs. So a 60fps version will eventually come out. Then they'll release it 5 more times.

[–] AndrasKrigare@beehaw.org 6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

But they did? For Oblivion it was Gamebryo, for Skyrim it was the Creation Engine

[–] shrippen@feddit.de 1 points 1 year ago

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creation_Engine

The Creation Engine is a 3D video game engine created by Bethesda Game Studios based on the Gamebryo engine.

[–] LimitedBrain@beehaw.org 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I mean that they haven't changed it from the Creation engine. Which has been used since Skyrim despite some big rewrites for Fallout and I'm sure more big rewrites or additions for Starfield

[–] AndrasKrigare@beehaw.org 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

But it's only been 2 games since Skyrim, right? And for Starfield it's being renamed Creation Engine 2. Either way that statement "Bethesda just doesn’t do that." Doesn't seem accurate when they have done that multiple times.

[–] LimitedBrain@beehaw.org 3 points 1 year ago

Huh okay yeah that's fair. I guess I'm thinking more about the time span since that game engine is now well over a decade old whereas the previous examples are separated by a handful of years. And I didn't know about them putting a '2' in front of it for Starfield.

[–] Plume@beehaw.org 1 points 1 year ago

I also agree with that. I love the modding aspect of it and I fear it'll go away with a new engine.

[–] Goronmon@beehaw.org 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Arm-chair babbling idiot who plays too much video games here, I am one hundred percent convinced that it has nothing to do with visual fidelity and everything to do with that asthmatic engine they've been dragging since Morrowind.

Code doesn't go bad with time, that's not really how it works. And game engines tend to be a Ship of Theseus situation, where just because it's still the same "engine" in theory, doesn't mean that large parts (or all of it), haven't eventually been replaced or refactored over the years.

Unreal Engine has been around for 30 years at this point, would you also consider that an "asthmatic engine"?

[–] Plume@beehaw.org 3 points 1 year ago

No, what I mean is that this engine always had a cobbled up together with duct tape feels to it. It's also the beauty of it.

[–] corm@sopuli.xyz 2 points 1 year ago

Some engines get better and some just get more and more spaghetti duct tape.

[–] buckykat@lemmy.fmhy.ml 4 points 1 year ago

If only players could make that choice themselves, perhaps through some sort of graphics settings menu. No, that's crazy and unprecedented, it could never work.

[–] AndrasKrigare@beehaw.org 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

that asthmatic engine they’ve been dragging since Morrowind

I don't believe that's true at all, though. At least by Wikipedia, Morrowind was NetImmerse, Oblivion was Gamebryo (modified Havok), and Skyrim was Creation. And I remember in the announcements for Skyrim that they remade the engine for the game. And Starfield is an updated engine, Creation 2

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creation_Engine for more

[–] shrippen@feddit.de 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Gamebryo was called netimmerse until 2003. Creation is a modified gamebryo. So Creation 2 will also be based on it. So yes they use kinda the same engine since morrowind. Beteshda will not change away from it because gamebryo is a large reason why the modding community is as strong as it is for skyrim etc. And the modding community sells a lot of copies!

[–] ascagnel@beehaw.org 6 points 1 year ago

The engine also started as an engine for MMOs, which allowed them rich scripting for every NPC, as well as an inventory for every NPC.

The world fidelity that Bethesda builds, on a technical and simulation level, is unmatched — yeah, something like The Witcher 3 might look better, but it also doesn’t let you interact with basically every item in the world or pickpocket every NPC’s weapon as a way to neutralize them in combat.

[–] ampersandrew@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

No, it's most definitely a choice. You can make any engine run at 60 FPS if you sacrifice something else for it. The RE engine runs beautiful games at 60 FPS, but they had to make all sorts of sacrifices to fidelity to get World Tour in Street Fighter 6 to run at all, let alone at 60 FPS on current gen consoles.

[–] Plume@beehaw.org 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I mean sure but give us the choice, damn it! :(

[–] Mummelpuffin@beehaw.org 1 points 1 year ago

Call of Duty still runs on the Quake 3 engine, if we go off of the logic people uncharitably use for Bethesda's games specifically.