47
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 18 Sep 2023
47 points (91.2% liked)
Games
16180 readers
270 users here now
Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)
Posts.
- News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
- Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
- No humor/memes etc..
- No affiliate links
- No advertising.
- No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
- No self promotion.
- No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
- No politics.
Comments.
- No personal attacks.
- Obey instance rules.
- No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
- Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.
My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.
Other communities:
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
On the one hand I fully agree. They have plenty of resources to be working on multiple projects at once.
On the other, it’s very easy for studios to lose their way when spread too thin. There is value in staying focused.
On the third hand, it’s taking an absurdly long time to build their games now. It’s clear the Gamebryo/Creation Engine is no longer fit for purpose. I don’t give a fuck about object permanence for 10,000 cheese wheels. I want fewer loading screens, much better facial animations, much better lighting, much better performance, and MUCH better collision handling. Unreal proved YEARS ago that functionally unlimited polygon assets were achievable with good performance with dynamic mesh loading. Gamebryo is absolutely shitting the bed with the assets in Starfield. Maybe it wouldn’t take 5+ years to build these games if they weren’t shackled to Gamebryo.
It's weird, because they absolutely need to switch things up... but also they have a winning formula and so long as the games sell they will never adapt.
For me, the biggest fault isn't the tech itself (at least not directly), but the game design. Every time they strap another system to that Frankenstein's monster of an engine, those systems need to be justified in gameplay, which is harder to do the more there are. As everything grows in scale and scope, each component, whether locations or mechanics, feels less individually compelling. Then they hide mechanics behind the tech tree, which solves one issue by focusing the player experience, but now the quests feel even more bland because they need to appeal to every possible build.
Are you a mutant or an alien?
He's a Bethesda coder
Except you're looking at Unreal from a purely graphical perspective and as if Bethesda's slowest process was making the engine work. If either of those two points were the issue, we'd have a whole bunch of Bethesda-style games on Unreal already, but we don't.