tetradite Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 So... why doesn't bethesda use a new engine? This might be stupid, but I am seriously extremely new to Skyrim and video games in general. What prevents them from updating their equipment? They don't want to spend the money, even though it is painfully apparent that is required. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamlegend999 Posted June 20, 2012 Author Share Posted June 20, 2012 So... why doesn't bethesda use a new engine? This might be stupid, but I am seriously extremely new to Skyrim and video games in general. What prevents them from updating their equipment? They don't want to spend the money, even though it is painfully apparent that is required.Oh. LOL, that really WAS a stupid question on my part. :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tetradite Posted June 21, 2012 Share Posted June 21, 2012 So... why doesn't bethesda use a new engine? This might be stupid, but I am seriously extremely new to Skyrim and video games in general. What prevents them from updating their equipment? They don't want to spend the money, even though it is painfully apparent that is required.Oh. LOL, that really WAS a stupid question on my part. :D Hehe nah don't worry. It's only 'obvious' to me because I've seen so many threads here with people complaining about it. ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
breakwind Posted June 21, 2012 Share Posted June 21, 2012 That's a limitation of the game engine, i think the maximum size of a single worldspace is limited to 16km x 16km. They run the timescale so fast to give the impression that it is much larger. Note that you can easily set the timescale via console - set timescale to 10. 10 is what i use, vanilla is around 25, don't go lower than 5 or you might run into weird problems with quests. So,,, why not use a newer engine perhaps? Just sayin'. I mean, there engine still uses dx9, so.. Bethesda? Use a new engine? You crack me up. :PWhat do you mean? Maybe because they have to keep up with the mind-blowing power of the Xbox.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IsolatedPurity Posted June 21, 2012 Share Posted June 21, 2012 Consoles ruin everything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dice17 Posted June 21, 2012 Share Posted June 21, 2012 That's a limitation of the game engine, i think the maximum size of a single worldspace is limited to 16km x 16km. They run the timescale so fast to give the impression that it is much larger. Note that you can easily set the timescale via console - set timescale to 10. 10 is what i use, vanilla is around 25, don't go lower than 5 or you might run into weird problems with quests. So,,, why not use a newer engine perhaps? Just sayin'. I mean, there engine still uses dx9, so.. Bethesda? Use a new engine? You crack me up. :PWhat do you mean? Maybe because they have to keep up with the mind-blowing power of the Xbox....It's a new engine, Bethesda was using iD's (Quake) engine on their previous games. And why dx9? because it's easier to produce and handle games with it. It has less bugs and problems. And the majority of the computers around the world doesn't have DX10 or DX11 on their computers. Bethesda wants everyone to play their game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AssyMcGee Posted June 21, 2012 Share Posted June 21, 2012 I don't blame Bethesda for this. Sure there are engine limitations, but think about it for a minute. In Daggerfall if you choose to walk from one end to another it would take literal real life days to do it. There were thousands of cities and villages with hundreds of thousands of people in them. The scale as far as I know was pretty much 1:1. That worked in Daggerfall with the fast travel options and the game style. But in a first person sort of game that tries to immerse you it'd be a little to much if you ask me. I suppose a randomly generated world a la Minecraft COULD potentially work. But not with the amount of immersion and work that would have to be done on the scripting and the strain it'd put on the most powerful rigs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tetradite Posted June 21, 2012 Share Posted June 21, 2012 Consoles ruin everything. Not totally disagreeing, but the number of PC users who post in these forums saying "why doesn't my game work properly?" when they clearly haven't even bothered to check whether their system meets the published basic requirements, suggests to me that this problem would exist even without consoles. Mass market games will always be made for mass market technology, those of us with decent rigs would do well to remember sometimes that we are using technology above and beyond the true mass market level. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matth85 Posted June 21, 2012 Share Posted June 21, 2012 (edited) Why they don't use another engine? 1) Most engines are not made to take a big, static, game like the TES serie. The Gamebryo engine was specially made for these kind of jobs. Hence Bethesda uses it.2) Did you know my new toaster for the same horse power that the consoles does? Yeah, another reason why.3) It costs tons to get the license to an engine. And I mean tons.4) Did I mention that the game was made for the consoles, which got less graphic capacity than the newest Ipods? Yeah. Edited June 21, 2012 by Matth85 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PsxMeUP Posted June 21, 2012 Share Posted June 21, 2012 I don't want to brag but I asked Bethesda why they stick with the old engine. Here is what they said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts