• Cethin@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      I agree, and the same logic applies to the creation engine. However, so many people still, when complaining, say it’s GameBryo, which is just stupid. It shows their lack of understanding of how game development functions.

      • CaptainEffort@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        11 months ago

        The problem is that the Creation Engine 2 is, in a lot of ways, still the Gamebryo engine. It has all the same advantages, as well as all the same issues. Hell, there are literally bugs shared between Morrowind, Skyrim, Fallout 4, and even Starfield.

        You can’t compared CE to something like, let’s say, the Unreal Engine. The Unreal Engine has actually had absurd amounts of resources poured into it, effectively making it a new thing. But the Creation Engine simply hasn’t been - it desperately needs more time and money put into it.

        • Cethin@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          11 months ago

          I’m confident there isn’t much, if any, GameBryo left in the creation engine. Sure, they may share some bugs, but that doesn’t mean much. They could be caused by things Bethesda introduced.

          I do agree that UE has had a lot more development, and that’s the issue with the Creation Engine, like I said. They haven’t invested in it like they needed to. They’ve done the bare minimum to keep the renderer looking modern (though I’d argue Starfield totally failed, specifically with faces), but not updating the core engine. UE is a commercial product on its own though, and it’s designed to be a lot more versatile than CE. CE is meant to make Bethesda games and that’s it. CE shouldn’t ever be expected to compare to UE on everything.