Creation Engine 2 is not good for Sci Fi

[PrometheusTS]

Apparently the game engine is not adapt at all for modern technological and sci fi settings.

In Morrowind, Oblivion , Skyrim its ok to just walk around and eventually have a mount ... ITs middleages more or less and nobody expects to fly around on ships.

In Fallout the world collapsed, an apocalypse destroyed most vehicles and so it can make sense if you just have to walk around ruins and debris by foot.

But in a world 300 in future highly technological with flying cars and spaceships are the norm , where everyone can fly from a planet to another well I would have expected to have this kind of imersion and not just "Loading screens" and imagine the trip...

This technology is too old and not suit for a sci fi setting , I mean you take the metro ... loading screen , you enter a building, loading screen , you enter your ship , loading screen , you lift from planet, loading screen etc etc... its 2023 , Unreal engine proves its all doable have great graphics, 64 bit precision coordinate system and loads of items on screen without performance loss ...

SO I think that Bethesda should stick to fantasy settings and medieval ones if they want to keep using their propietary engine or better change engine if they will ever want to produce Starfield 2 because with loading screens in a sci fi setting there is no imersion at all!

 

[xrayy]

i confirm this. the "slightly dusty" game engine relies on a cell or grid structure which works for slow paced changes but not for "simulation like" tasks. so starfield can not do much more than fallout4 or skyrim does. probably also the reason why my modded fo4 npc look better or at least on par with starfield npc

 

this said i stumbled over the way the "1000 planets" are treated for exploration. each world is "tiled" in procedurally generated areas and displayed as 2 - 8km sized limited regions with a hard boundary. direct hopping from area to area on a planet is not implemented and it seems that these would not fit together at all - even "direct neighbor areas"

these areas will not represent the planet as a whole - this is for sure. the idea is that you can discover a handful of preselected areas containing a few generated or even fewer manually placed points(on a few planets eg. with cities) of interest.

 

so the strength of the known bethesda open worlds seem to be cut down in space to these kind of small tiles or boxes.

at least i expected more after 6 or more years of development of a "star exploring" game than a cut down version of skyrim or fallout4 open world with pimped but still not on par graphics and at best a mediocre performance.

 

if you like to explore a big open world full of items and npc like in skyrim, oblivion, or fallout 3 and 4 you will not find it in starfield outside of a few selected places/cities. for me personally a step backwards and not a reason for a hype.

[cherbert]

So the award winning games Mass Effect and The Outer Worlds are not good space games? Some people do spout a load of twaddle. These are space RPGs. If you want an action simulation then play Star Citizen or Elite Dangerous. Learn to understand basic gaming genres.

Edited September 3, 2023 by cherbert

[GaiyeniJipsa]

So the award winning games Mass Effect and The Outer Worlds are not good space games? Some people do spout a load of twaddle. These are space RPGs. If you want an action simulation then play Star Citizen or Elite Dangerous. Learn to understand basic gaming genres.

Neither of those games have ship customization, 1000 planets to fully explore, the ability to create/ manage custom outpost and another one I forgot.

They were much more scaled back games concept wise, which made them less ambitious, but more effective at what they were setting out to do... being a space rpg.

Instead, Bethesda tried to do more than they feasibly could, which only shows the played how limited they were (and in part, it just feels like bloat).

 

[Stealthfoot]

Yup pretty much this.

[PrometheusTS]

 

So the award winning games Mass Effect and The Outer Worlds are not good space games? Some people do spout a load of twaddle. These are space RPGs. If you want an action simulation then play Star Citizen or Elite Dangerous. Learn to understand basic gaming genres.

Neither of those games have ship customization, 1000 planets to fully explore, the ability to create/ manage custom outpost and another one I forgot.

They were much more scaled back games concept wise, which made them less ambitious, but more effective at what they were setting out to do... being a space rpg.

Instead, Bethesda tried to do more than they feasibly could, which only shows the played how limited they were (and in part, it just feels like bloat).

If instead of making 1000 planets they just did 10 but well craftes and with proper vehicles and flight it would have been better...

 

Check Avatar setting ... just one planet but totally scifi...