which engine should the next TES game use....

Post » Fri Nov 26, 2010 12:36 pm

assuming they arent using gamebryo..........i hope not at least. which engine should they use in their next game. i remember the video of imperial city being rendered in the crytech engine and it looked spectacular. its probably wishful thinking but i would like to see the next game use a modified version of Idtech 5 or dunia or even the crytech engine.
User avatar
Anne marie
 
Posts: 3454
Joined: Tue Jul 11, 2006 1:05 pm

Post » Fri Nov 26, 2010 12:35 pm

assuming they arent using gamebryo..........i hope not at least. which engine should they use in their next game. i remember the video of imperial city being rendered in the crytech engine and it looked spectacular. its probably wishful thinking but i would like to see the next game use a modified version of Idtech 5 or dunia or even the crytech engine.


Don't they have their own engine (Correct me if I'm wrong) and they work from the previous every time.
User avatar
Farrah Lee
 
Posts: 3488
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2007 10:32 pm

Post » Fri Nov 26, 2010 8:53 pm

Do we all have to go over this again? They have pretty much been using Gamebryo for 10 years now (at least), and they have turned it into almost their own engine. They will most likely not change engines and stick with what they've been using for the past 10 years.

EDIT: Correct me if I'm wrong, but Morrowind was Gamebryo too, right?
User avatar
JUan Martinez
 
Posts: 3552
Joined: Tue Oct 16, 2007 7:12 am

Post » Fri Nov 26, 2010 11:59 am

Do we all have to go over this again? They have pretty much been using Gamebryo for 10 years now (at least), and they have turned it into almost their own engine. They will most likely not change engines and stick with what they've been using for the past 10 years.

EDIT: Correct me if I'm wrong, but Morrowind was Gamebryo too, right?

Nope! The engine that Gamebryo evolved from was called NetImmerse and that is what they used to create Morrowind.
User avatar
JD FROM HELL
 
Posts: 3473
Joined: Thu Aug 24, 2006 1:54 am

Post » Fri Nov 26, 2010 6:43 pm

I'm actually hoping they use Gamebryo again, whether it is a new version or a heavily modified version of the one used to make Oblivion. Bethesda is familiar with Gamebryo, so why change?
User avatar
Love iz not
 
Posts: 3377
Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2007 8:55 pm

Post » Fri Nov 26, 2010 3:31 pm

God, they seriously need to advance. Get a new engine, Bethesda. Like Havoc engine or Unigine.
User avatar
Lucky Girl
 
Posts: 3486
Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2007 4:14 pm

Post » Fri Nov 26, 2010 6:33 pm

Yes, they're going to use Gamebryo again. Ashley Cheng implied this in an interview a while back. They're redoing their basic technology though. Don't worry.
User avatar
Angelina Mayo
 
Posts: 3427
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2007 4:58 am

Post » Fri Nov 26, 2010 6:57 pm

Yes, they're going to use Gamebryo again. Ashley Cheng implied this in an interview a while back. They're redoing their basic technology though. Don't worry.

Well, I am just a bit worried... there have been quite a few advances made with some of the new engines and you can really only customize something so much. I think of it like a Hummer... while at the time it was rockin' but now it seems a bit old and clunky, not to mention that is isn't green... so you rework it, take out the engine put in some lithium-ion batteries and an electronic power-train... yeah so now you have a green monster... but someone just invented a flying car that runs on dreams; doesn't seem like much fun to roll around town in your panzy electric hummer when you could be shootin' the breeze :)
User avatar
Laura Ellaby
 
Posts: 3355
Joined: Sun Jul 02, 2006 9:59 am

Post » Fri Nov 26, 2010 4:10 pm

Like Havoc engine or Unigine.

Are you referring to Havok, the physics engine? That's not a game engine, it's a physics engine. And Bethesda already uses it.

Well, I am just a bit worried... there have been quite a few advances made with some of the new engines and you can really only customize something so much. I think of it like a Hummer... while at the time it was rockin' but now it seems a bit old and clunky, not to mention that is isn't green... so you rework it, take out the engine put in some lithium-ion batteries and an electronic power-train... yeah so now you have a green monster... but someone just invented a flying car that runs on dreams; doesn't seem like much fun to roll around town in your panzy electric hummer when you could be shootin' the breeze :)

Todd Howard said in the Kotaku interview that they're very aware of the technical deficiencies in their games. I wouldn't worry about anything. ESV is going to run much better and look better at the same time.
User avatar
Anne marie
 
Posts: 3454
Joined: Tue Jul 11, 2006 1:05 pm

Post » Fri Nov 26, 2010 6:01 pm

Bethesda is familiar with Gamebryo, so why change?

Something about the engine's limitations.
User avatar
Laura
 
Posts: 3456
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 7:11 am

Post » Sat Nov 27, 2010 12:05 am

Something about the engine's limitations.

Such as what, exactly? Bethesda needs to work on optimization, but Gamebryo works just fine for Elder Scrolls games and it is being heavily modified.
User avatar
Rex Help
 
Posts: 3380
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 6:52 pm

Post » Sat Nov 27, 2010 1:25 am

Nope! The engine that Gamebryo evolved from was called NetImmerse and that is what they used to create Morrowind.


It's still basically the same engine, albeit more optimized and updated, but uses the same rendering techniques. Even with Morrowind I thought the engine was weak and hoped that Oblivion would use a different one. I'm honestly not anticipating TES:V to be much different, but it would be interesting to see if they incorporate some of ID's technology into it - not necessarily a complete engine switch but some serious under-the-hood upgrades. :hubbahubba:
User avatar
Laura Simmonds
 
Posts: 3435
Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2006 10:27 pm

Post » Fri Nov 26, 2010 9:30 pm

Such as what, exactly? Bethesda needs to work on optimization, but Gamebryo works just fine for Elder Scrolls games and it is being heavily modified.

Allow me to redirect you to this post.
Well, I am just a bit worried... there have been quite a few advances made with some of the new engines and you can really only customize something so much. I think of it like a Hummer... while at the time it was rockin' but now it seems a bit old and clunky, not to mention that is isn't green... so you rework it, take out the engine put in some lithium-ion batteries and an electronic power-train... yeah so now you have a green monster... but someone just invented a flying car that runs on dreams; doesn't seem like much fun to roll around town in your panzy electric hummer when you could be shootin' the breeze :)

User avatar
Mrs Pooh
 
Posts: 3340
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 7:30 pm

Post » Fri Nov 26, 2010 8:07 pm

Such as what, exactly? Bethesda needs to work on optimization, but Gamebryo works just fine for Elder Scrolls games and it is being heavily modified.

Stiff. Stilted. Rigid. There is something about Gamebryo and Gamebryo Lightspeed that really falls away graphically. I am not sure if it is the rendering capabilities or the advancements in lighting that other engines are able to incorporate, but what Gamebryo does well is that it allows for almost anything you can imagine to be created, just that it won't quite get rendered in a way that is realistic (when compared to other engines). It has the capability of moving much faster with a lot more going on in the background than some engines, which is where I can see the appeal for an rpg game, yet when you watch how some of the engines allow light to bounce off a wall and then illuminate a colored object which then throws soft colored light at another object and the room gets slightly brighter with a combined soft colored glow of the two lights together, you say "holy crap" and that is when the stuff comes to life, and that is just something that doesn't happen in a believable way with Gamebryo.
User avatar
james tait
 
Posts: 3385
Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2007 6:26 pm

Post » Fri Nov 26, 2010 8:49 pm

Are you referring to Havok, the physics engine? That's not a game engine, it's a physics engine. And Bethesda already uses it.


Todd Howard said in the Kotaku interview that they're very aware of the technical deficiencies in their games. I wouldn't worry about anything. ESV is going to run much better and look better at the same time.


Let us hope they read your signature at least, Mr. Cleanex Box. :P
User avatar
Mark
 
Posts: 3341
Joined: Wed May 23, 2007 11:59 am

Post » Fri Nov 26, 2010 2:44 pm

Is Crysis Warhead still ranked as the best engine to date? Or did another game surpass it?

(I should've just edited my previous post instead of making another one. Es tut mir leid)
User avatar
RAww DInsaww
 
Posts: 3439
Joined: Sun Feb 25, 2007 5:47 pm

Post » Fri Nov 26, 2010 5:58 pm

i didnt play crysis warhead so i dont know how different it was compared to the first game. however i actually thought the dunia engine from far cry 2 looked just as good (minus the strange grass) as the first crysis engine but didnt need as powerful hardware to run it.
User avatar
Kira! :)))
 
Posts: 3496
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2007 1:07 pm

Post » Fri Nov 26, 2010 9:41 pm

Perhaps I'm just a bit behind the times in this sort of thing or it's my lack of tech-savvy, but I don't really get what's so horribly wrong with the way Bethesda's games look right now, all things considered. Sure, the animations and character models could use some extra development time, but other than that I haven't seen games with those kind of behind-the-scenes workloads look as good as TES. Maybe I'm just missing something because of the TES-fan glasses on my nose :shrug: :P
To be honest, as I've seen Cryengine 2 being used as a benchmark a lot, I'd like to see how it would run a full on TES-game. I just don't know if it would be able to handle the added workload of some form of radiant AI, rpg-gameplay, immense vastness et cetera and still look as stupendously good. In comparison, Crysis-style games don't seem to do as much at any given time. I think that, no matter what engine, we still wouldn't get the level of graphics we see in other open world titles for the next TES game, simply because of the amount of content and workload that's involved.
Be that as it may, I'd love to see Bethesda pool their resources with Id further down the line, it would certainly benefit the company as whole. For now, we will probably see Bethesda using a version of Gamebryo that implements newer techniques and stuff, and that's really just fine by me.
User avatar
Guinevere Wood
 
Posts: 3368
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2006 3:06 pm

Post » Sat Nov 27, 2010 1:22 am

my problem is with things that other engines at the time had down pretty well. namely water, shadows, and lighting. all three of them were horribly implemented in oblivion. other games of that era way back then had much better looking lighting and shadow implementation and even half life 2 had better water than oblivion and that game came out in the 1970s. as for the radiant AI, its not really AI of any kind. they have schedules they they perform and wander packages but its nothing like they originally advertised it was going to be.

im not so worried about textures cause those are easiliy replacable, shadows and lighting are much more difficult to change and i think most everyone has given up making oblivions water look better except for fog value changes and coloring. someone tried adding wave meshes but it wasnt practical to hand add them all to the game.
User avatar
stevie critchley
 
Posts: 3404
Joined: Sat Oct 28, 2006 4:36 pm

Post » Fri Nov 26, 2010 8:09 pm

Perhaps I'm just a bit behind the times in this sort of thing or it's my lack of tech-savvy, but I don't really get what's so horribly wrong with the way Bethesda's games look right now, all things considered. Sure, the animations and character models could use some extra development time, but other than that I haven't seen games with those kind of behind-the-scenes workloads look as good as TES. Maybe I'm just missing something because of the TES-fan glasses on my nose :shrug: :P
To be honest, as I've seen Cryengine 2 being used as a benchmark a lot, I'd like to see how it would run a full on TES-game. I just don't know if it would be able to handle the added workload of some form of radiant AI, rpg-gameplay, immense vastness et cetera and still look as stupendously good. In comparison, Crysis-style games don't seem to do as much at any given time. I think that, no matter what engine, we still wouldn't get the level of graphics we see in other open world titles for the next TES game, simply because of the amount of content and workload that's involved.
Be that as it may, I'd love to see Bethesda pool their resources with Id further down the line, it would certainly benefit the company as whole. For now, we will probably see Bethesda using a version of Gamebryo that implements newer techniques and stuff, and that's really just fine by me.


Yeah, but someone was able to run Oblivion off of the crysis engine, so it obviously can be done, and should be done I think.
User avatar
Jessie Butterfield
 
Posts: 3453
Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 5:59 pm

Post » Fri Nov 26, 2010 10:13 pm

my problem is with things that other engines at the time had down pretty well. namely water, shadows, and lighting. all three of them were horribly implemented in oblivion. other games of that era way back then had much better looking lighting and shadow implementation and even half life 2 had better water than oblivion and that game came out in the 1970s. as for the radiant AI, its not really AI of any kind. they have schedules they they perform and wander packages but its nothing like they originally advertised it was going to be.

im not so worried about textures cause those are easiliy replacable, shadows and lighting are much more difficult to change and i think most everyone has given up making oblivions water look better except for fog value changes and coloring. someone tried adding wave meshes but it wasnt practical to hand add them all to the game.


Thanks, that clears it up a bit for me... even though personally I didn't notice these things (well, except for the water) I can understand your concerns about them if you did/do notice them.

Yeah, but someone was able to run Oblivion off of the crysis engine, so it obviously can be done, and should be done I think.


Is it live gameplay? Because I've seen something similar, but it just showed the Imperial City without much going on. Just the assets rendered with the Cryengine or something like it. Do you have a link?
User avatar
Jesus Duran
 
Posts: 3444
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2007 12:16 am

Post » Fri Nov 26, 2010 10:37 pm

A heavily modified version of Gamebryo would be great.
I also like the Source engine, but I think Source wouldn't be good for a TES game.
User avatar
danni Marchant
 
Posts: 3420
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 2:32 am

Post » Fri Nov 26, 2010 8:55 pm

The game engines currently used are fine. There are other, far more important aspects Bethesda need to think about.

If it aint broke, don't fix it.
User avatar
Inol Wakhid
 
Posts: 3403
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2007 5:47 am

Post » Sat Nov 27, 2010 12:55 am

They have to get shadows working at some point. Other than that their engine is not that different from others. I consider Crysis and Oblivion/Fallout(and GTA4) engines as best engines out there. They have parallax mapping, day-night cycles and good AI-Physics. For AI and physics we have GTA4 which is a good example for a Tes game, imo.

PS. I want them to make the engine to be capable of displaying true open worlds(no closed cities and game zones, please).
User avatar
Jonathan Braz
 
Posts: 3459
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2007 10:29 pm

Post » Fri Nov 26, 2010 5:25 pm

CryEngine 2 would be nice, but it requires a high-end computer. I found a video in Youtube just a while ago. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hmLzNbPXMDg&feature=related is what TES V might look like, if it was on CryEngine 2
User avatar
C.L.U.T.C.H
 
Posts: 3385
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 6:23 pm

Next

Return to The Elder Scrolls Series Discussion