Gizmojunk
Antediluvian as Feck
One of the problems with Gamebryo [IIRC] is that it (or most versions of it) cannot offer blended animations; such as having the character walk forward and sideways simultaneously with a blended gate.
Don't know if you guys have seen this shocking interview with Bethsoft employee...
- Thread starter benwade
- Start date
Antediluvian as Feck
From what I can read it seems also to be rather expensive.
The dev team used to it? Uh well ... bolt statement given how fucking buggy every Bethesda release is.
To my knowledge, Behtesda is licencing the engine, not creating their own engines and selling them - not that I am aware off, while the company behind Cryengine and Unreal are actually making their own engine and selling licences, and it shows that they have a lot more knowledge compared to Bethesda. At least I think they do. I am not a coder, programmer or game developer and I never claimed to be one. So feel free to correct me of course.
But why is Gamebryo not a top choice by any game developer out there, if it seems to be apparantly such an awesome product? While you hear at the same time a lot about Unity, Cryengine, Unreal and Frostbite. At least Unreal and Unity see a lot more use than Gamebyro.
The problem with Bethesda, in my opinion, is that the technical expertise seems to be very low, as most of the attention is on content production, not tech - I get that much from listen to Todd in interviews. Same as code optimization: it requires very good programmers and lots of time. But if you're making a game and actually want it profitable, you most likely can't afford very good coders, in a huge number, and keep them employed for years.
Look, I am not so much against Gamebyro, but more that I am just surprised why it isn't a top choice compared to all the other engines out there. Must have SOME reason I guess. And the only AAA development team/company still using Gamebyro ... is Bethesda. And they constantly release buggy games with mediocre graphics.
Again, is really that odd to question why a company isn't EVENTUALLY considering to switch to a new and/or maybe a better engine after almost 20 years? I am not asking a game developer to change his engine every 6 months or so ...
None.
But I worked with companies that decided after a decade or more to check if it might be a good idea to switch to a new technology. Just as how you buy eventually new cars, machines, or software for your IT department after 20, 30 or 50 years. We are not working anymore with Windows 95 for a reason, you know. Which is what I am talking about. And not something like Duke Nuke 3D by 3DRealms where they switched engines 5 times during production. Is the idea of upgrading your tools AT SOME POINT so unusual?
The dev team used to it? Uh well ... bolt statement given how fucking buggy every Bethesda release is.
To my knowledge, Behtesda is licencing the engine, not creating their own engines and selling them - not that I am aware off, while the company behind Cryengine and Unreal are actually making their own engine and selling licences, and it shows that they have a lot more knowledge compared to Bethesda. At least I think they do. I am not a coder, programmer or game developer and I never claimed to be one. So feel free to correct me of course.
But why is Gamebryo not a top choice by any game developer out there, if it seems to be apparantly such an awesome product? While you hear at the same time a lot about Unity, Cryengine, Unreal and Frostbite. At least Unreal and Unity see a lot more use than Gamebyro.
The problem with Bethesda, in my opinion, is that the technical expertise seems to be very low, as most of the attention is on content production, not tech - I get that much from listen to Todd in interviews. Same as code optimization: it requires very good programmers and lots of time. But if you're making a game and actually want it profitable, you most likely can't afford very good coders, in a huge number, and keep them employed for years.
Look, I am not so much against Gamebyro, but more that I am just surprised why it isn't a top choice compared to all the other engines out there. Must have SOME reason I guess. And the only AAA development team/company still using Gamebyro ... is Bethesda. And they constantly release buggy games with mediocre graphics.
Again, is really that odd to question why a company isn't EVENTUALLY considering to switch to a new and/or maybe a better engine after almost 20 years? I am not asking a game developer to change his engine every 6 months or so ...
None.
But I worked with companies that decided after a decade or more to check if it might be a good idea to switch to a new technology. Just as how you buy eventually new cars, machines, or software for your IT department after 20, 30 or 50 years. We are not working anymore with Windows 95 for a reason, you know. Which is what I am talking about. And not something like Duke Nuke 3D by 3DRealms where they switched engines 5 times during production. Is the idea of upgrading your tools AT SOME POINT so unusual?
Last edited:
Marionettetc
Banned
Last edited:
Dr Fallout
Centurion
Godd Howard.