• Pratai@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Imagine relying on free labor to fix your broken ass game, and then having people defend you when called out for making a boring game that relies on free labor for content.

        • conciselyverbose@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Or what an engine is lol.

          UE5 is “the same engine” iterated on in the same way Bethesda’s is, there are plenty of games using UE that don’t run well, and it would take plenty of custom work to build to Bethesda’s scale using it.

          • CaptainEffort@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            The current iteration of Unreal is completely unrecognizable from its original rendition, meanwhile this new version of the Creation Engine literally retains bugs present back in the days of Gamebryo. You simply can’t compare the two. But, in Bethesda’s defense, this isn’t due to incompetence or anything. It’s due to resource allocation and incentive.

            There’s a reason most devs have been moving towards Unreal and away from making their own engines, and it’s because making your own proprietary engine takes insane amounts of time and resources - time and resources that devs don’t get any return on mind you. For most, it doesn’t make sense to dedicate loads of time to polishing an engine, when that time could be better spent on your next game - a game that you actually do get a return on.

            Unreal is completely different in this regard, as Epic actually does get a return on their investment into the engine, as the engine itself is their product. So they have every incentive to polish Unreal as much as possible. That’s why it’s so insanely polished and indistinguishable from its original rendition. Not because all engines magically improve over time and at the same rate.

            I know Todd Howard said that engines are somehow meaningless, and then a bunch of Bethesda fans took that and ran with it as a way to defend any criticism of the Creation Engine, but unfortunately it’s just not that simple.

            And to be clear, I want the Creation Engine to succeed. I’ve been modding Bethesda games since 2013 and am still active in the modding community! The engine is rough but makes all of it possible, and the community at this point knows it so well that it’d be devastating to suddenly lose it all. But Bethesda needs to sit down and really dedicate some time to overhauling it, and unfortunately, albeit understandably, I just don’t see that happening.

      • conciselyverbose@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Imagine thinking that what is very probably the most hand-crafted content ever in a 3D game, with one of the broadest variety of choices for anything close to that scale, is a game lacking content.

          • conciselyverbose@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            It’s not an opinion. If you ignore straight procedural generation with no human input like no man’s sky, Starfield is very probably the biggest 3D game ever made. The fact that it’s an absolutely massive game isn’t debatable in any way.

            Nobody who’s played it is making the ridiculous claim that they ran out of content. It’s fundamentally not possible for “relying on mods for content” to be in good faith.

              • conciselyverbose@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                BG3 is a top down CRPG. Having 3D assets and being a 3D game with full 3D movement aren’t the same thing.

                And whether it’s more content is debatable. There’s more pure story and production, with a lot of branching, but the overall amount of space (not counting Starfield’s use of negative space because of the setting) is significantly smaller. And even in terms of total number of quest lines, Starfield has a lot. Which you can get more time out of is all about personal preference. There will be people with 1000 hours in both, easy.

                  • conciselyverbose@kbin.social
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Turn based and action are mutually exclusive. It is not and does not resemble an action game.

                    The assets are 3D. You do not play in 3D. You do not cast a spell and have the physics of your interaction calculated in real time while 10 other characters are simultaneously acting and having their spells calculated based on the real time movements of all the other characters. You do not hit a jump button and have where you land determined by your speed and direction. The actual gameplay mechanics are all pure dice roll. There are no 3D physics in play.

            • glimpseintotheshit@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              I’m glad you enjoy the game but compared to the level of detail and polish Read Dead 2 had five years ago Starfield feels straight up antiquated imo

              • conciselyverbose@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Red dead 2 is obscenely tiny by comparison.

                Literally everything about game development is a trade off. It’s not possible to make a game at 5% of Starfield’s scale as polished as a rockstar game. The difference in scale is too massive.

                The scope of Bethesda games is a huge part of the point. Nobody else makes anything similar to what they offer.