Just to point out - i didnt read the whole thread as it got WAY to big.
But the point is:
This is and yet is not a memory leak. Its more a "deliberate" memory leak. They are loading things into memory and leaving them there on purpose because that is how they programmed it in. There is ways around alot of the reasons the dev there mentioned, they just didnt do them as it would require rewriting the whole game from scratch, which lets face it, they didnt do, they just took the same architecture of the previous uses and changed its theme.
My point is, Obsidian were given the gamebryo custom engine by Beth for NV. FO3 however, is probably the most recent configuration of this architecture, since that was the last time the gamebryo engine was radically changed by its creator emergent.
Now the overall thing i wanted to point out, and il bold for those who dont read paragraphs:
This problem does not make it a game deliberately designed for the Xbox Thats the key point i want to get across, the reasons:
1. Gamebryo was always designed soley for the PC. Ive been using gamebryo's engine for nearly 5 years now, ive ported it over to the PS3's "enforced" Variation of C, as well as used it on C# of the Xbox. It runs better on the xbox purely because the xbox runs the closest you can get to a microsoft based PC running DirectX, whereas the PS3 requires alot more changes to even get it to run at all. Emergent have helped on this front, or at least tried, but even they willingly admit that it was never designed to be used in the way is required by PS3 usage.
2. Perhaps the most important reason: Both the PC and the Xbox Will eventually run into this issue. Look at it this way, on systems with finite memory this is always an inevitability. Two things will happen, either the game will run out of items to commit to memory, or youl run out of memory for the game to commit to. Most high end PC's will be hit by the former, having far more memory then is needed. The Xbox however will hit the same problem the PS3 hits, as i truly believe the size of skyrim (as in resource requirement) is larger than the Xbox's limits. The only difference is the Xbox will hit it far later than the PS3 (due to the reasons explained in the first post).
Overall, its a fundamental flaw of the engine, known from the outset that eventually this method would hit this problem, its how most of the recent TES and FO have all been programmed. They had the choice of changing this but that would take considerably more time, Far more time than the budget probably would have lasted. Lets face it, bethesda may have considerable power behind this brand, but their open world games have reached their limit on this engine, they had on oblivion. So instead of waiting 2-4 years longer than we have already to program a new engine, source a new architecture and program the game essentially from scatch, they spent considerably shorter, programming atop of the FO3 architecture and re-writing the render.
Its commendable that they managed to pull what they have from this dieing beast of an engine, an engine whom Emergent have recently decided to cease development and begin again on a newer more powerful approach,however at its core the same flaws exist. The new render is there to cover up its aging graphics capability, the somewhat archaic systems at work in skyrim work to keep it going, hiding most of the flaws quite well. However theres no covering up a limitation imposed by the programming itself.
Bottom Line:
This isnt a problem that cant be fixed as its a feature of the engine itself. Patches can only minimise the load and hope to "put off " this problem as long as possible into the game, however ultimately the issue will happen. As said in the first post, the addition of DLC will 99% eventually involve the removal of content from the original game, as part of the story sure, but the fact is there wont be enough room to handle any large DLC (as promised) on the current format.
oh and to all those who chime in with " i have xxxxx time.. level xxxx... ive got no problems!!!!!111one"... You will, the deciding factor is not your ps3's model, your consoles age, it is purely down to the size and speed of your HDD. Alot of you without issues will find you have copious amounts of space left on your HDD< slowly being eaten by the PS3's VRAM. Dont forget, your HDD size onscreen is calculated based off of whats stored there, not whats taken by other processes, those with 10GB wont have that 10GB free during the game.
In reference to the above and anyone who thinks like the guy above. No one has ever said it was a new engine, they claimed it was a new renderer, they re-wrote a small part of Emergents Gamebryo engine for skyrim as it was getting quite old. As it is, the core engine remains the same one used in the others.
So, speaking from your experience do you think they will do whatever they have to fix the problem permanently or is it something that takes far too much money and effort to do?