Gamebryo has always worked for me... :shrug:

What aspects of gamebryo are not... "hip" these days?

not really........although it killed my old computer on max settings at certain parts, when i set them to high it ran just fine and it still looked way better than oblivion.

my old computer for ref was amd athlon 3.0 5400

8800gtx was the last card i had i dont remember if that computer had an nvidia or ati card prior to that

2 gbs memory

nothing special about it and i was able to run the game on high settings just fine and even max setting only cause me problems in certain areas like the fight on the aircraft carrier deck.....now that was a slideshow.

edit: i should specify max setting for windows xp i remembered that it had dx10 stuff that only worked on windows vomit.

Why can't open worlds look as good? If can cull polys and control LOD whats the difference?

That was my thought. In something with levels, the whole level is stored in memory, with something like oblivion, an area (cube) around the player is stored in memory and is constantly changing out when you move with new items, keeping that block radius loaded.

I just think that gamebryo isnt optimized hardly at all (look at oblivion <.<). Cause really there shouldnt be much of a difference between the two. A small radius is less than a whole level, but adding in LOD it would even out i would think.

No matter if any of that is accurate or not. There shouldnt be any excuses for TES:V to be less in graphics than other mainstream titles coming for consoles. I think it'll hold up fine personally, just needs lots of work which is what they are doing.

If I understand how Umbra's occlusion testing works you could recreate all of modern day Paris in a game in high detail and walk around it for days.

Oblivion only utilizes a single-core of a processor right? Or dual-core? Cause they should allow for utilization of 4 cores for ESV.

Then why are there long loading times between the levels in the first Crysis?


The difference is the huge amount of data that is moved around. If you load a level and have the whole level in RAM, then you have fast access to everything. In a game that barely keep anything in RAM and dynamically loads whatever that needs to be loaded in the background, move and remove textures from the video RAM and so on, there's a major data shuffle in the background, which can cause various I/O bottlenecks and some stuttering.

If you compare an open game like GTA: San Andreas and a game with tiny levels like Soul Calibur 3, you will see that SC3 look noticeably better even though they are both using the same PS2 hardware.

I agree. Idk how many cores oblivion utilizes, but i doubt its 4. In the ini file there are no settings for cores and only a few for multithreading on blood decals and trees, minor stuff.

Two areas right there that can use improvement. Quad cores are quickly becoming the standard, they really should make use of them imo.

its been awhile since ive played crisis but i remember being able to go along time with no loading screens........are you sure those werent just the mission points. and i know that i could cross the entire far cry 2 map with no problems and it looked beautiful..........in fact in many ways it looked nicer than crisis as far as rock and terrain textures are concerned.......only that weird grass seemed out of place.

i also rediscovered that project offest engine that is being built as well but that looks like its aways off.

I thought the grass in Farcrap 2 looked great. 10000000000x better than the grass in Oblivion. If TESV had grass like that I would die of.. ok I wouldnt die but I'd be very pleased.

Grass
[IMG]http://i115.photobucket.com/albums/n316/DaMuncha/yes2.jpg[/IMG]

Vegetation
[IMG]http://i115.photobucket.com/albums/n316/DaMuncha/yes3.jpg[/IMG]
[IMG]http://i115.photobucket.com/albums/n316/DaMuncha/yes16.jpg[/IMG]
[IMG]http://i115.photobucket.com/albums/n316/DaMuncha/yes13.jpg[/IMG]

am I the only one who thinks RDR's grass looks like crappy crap?

I seem to recall Todd saying in an interview that the the game made limited use of dual-core processors.

Good suggestion, this is a must-have for TES:V.

DId Fallout 3 run with multi-core cpu?

the vegetation was awesome..........and the grass is certainly better than oblivions. however when i was driving around the grass had this weird look to it that is hard to describe. its like you could see the outlines of the edges of the grass that just made it a little odd looking to me. its mostly noticable when your moving fast so i think its just a rendering thing. and dont get me started on how freaking awesome that water is.

i really wish they had released an SDK for that game instead of that lame map editor. that game had so much modding potential with its open world and lots of empty areas it just disgusts me. and how the hell do you make a game in africa with lots of rivers and dont bother to put any crocodiles in there for surprises.

@gecko.........what is RDR

I think it should use http://www.heroengine.com/.

The avalanche 2.0 engine in just cause 2 is really nice.

Features of the http://www.unrealtechnology.com/features.php?ref=rendering. Unreal is used in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Unreal_Engine_games and is the most popular off-the-shelf engine ever developed.

Personally i think unreal is the next best thing after crysis, but crysis i hear is so ridiculously expensive few games use it. Mainly no games. Okok, far cry, aion and crysis.

http://www.crytek.com/technology/cryengine-3/specifications/

No point in linking a gamebryo specs page since they are revamping it. I dont understand how this works though. gamesas licenses the engine, they change it up for their needs big time. Soooo does emergent own the new patched up version of gamebryo that gamesas made? Who owns the rights to that new engine and who has the rights to sell that version? gamesas surely doesnt pay emergent to lease their engine then do all the hard work for free do they?

Not if you had a high-end computer. Trying to argue that you would like to play a game that "isn't a slideshow" is not the engine's faults. If you don't care about graphics, that’s fine, use a mid-range computer. However, arguing engines and graphics, and not have the hardware to back it up.... well that's just silly.

the average user didnt have the computer to handle crysis on good settings - i would bet that most people *still* can't run it on high. what is the point of having great graphics if 90% of the population won't be able to see them?

Because they can, and they are pushing technology forward by putting to use these new technologies. If every game were made to run on average-low computers, it wouldnt push people to by new, better parts to run these games.

Also, they are making a name for themselves, they have the best graphics in gaming (not arguing just making a point) and they want to show it off. The game will look incredible at max settings whether you can set them that high or not. By putting the bar higher than the average user can run, you dont get games that look just ok on max. Games on max settings SHOULD look incredible and an average computer SHOULDNT be able to run a game well on max settings.

Games drive PC sales just like Windows and other software. Now games like Bioshock 2 (UE2.5) and Borderlands (UE3) look incredible @ max resolutuion with all effects enabled. Borderlands was also quite playable on my old single-core with just 2GB mem. I hope Beth is willing to give us the same high/low options.

i dont know why people are saying that Gamebryo needs to be thrown away.
Divinity 2 uses gamebryo and looks quite amazing on nearly high settings. grated it didnt blow me away like OB did but even if Beth decided to start TES:5 today there is already a quite advanced engine that they could develop from.

my thoughts...

No matter what game engine they desperately need a new sound engine. 5.1 at the extreme least. The crysis 2 engine is actually looking like a highly plausible candidate now, highly moddable and also extremely customizable when it comes to graphics. This would allow for spectacular graphics with a very good optimization. it can run on both consoles and will do justice (hopefully) to the flora and fauna. However they don't know the engine which is a massive disadvantage. I'm really hoping for cryengine quality graphics/optimization but the community is used to modding with gamebryo. I am very divided on this issue.

games should be made to run on average-high computers. the max settings should be good enough to be impressive but the average settings, made for average PCs, should still look good and be playable. I honestly don't know about today, but when crysis was released your average computer couldn't run it. if you make a game that requires 4 cores and 4 gigs of ram but looks omgbbq amazing you're not going to sell very well.

then again, i'm not entirelly sure the graphics are an engine thing. MGE makes an 8 year old game look great, brining it up to such a point that its only the physical models that are dating it. if modders can do that on an old gamebryo theres no reason professionals can't do it on a new engine. switching over the the cryengine or the unreal engine would require them to rebuild from the ground up, while they have plenty of experience with gambryo and hence know how to push it.


yes, good options are a must. playing OB on low (that is with fog) is completely unlike playing OB on high. not really an engine thing, though.

i don't know the technical terms. but i just want non-overlapping graphics. i'd kill someone in oblivion and they'd lay perfectly horizontal on a 70 degree hill with their legs fused with the ground.