Advertisement
Boards are fundraising to help the people of Ukraine via the Red Cross at this horrific time. Please donate and share if you can, you will find the link here. Many thanks.

**** Starfield ****

«13

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 11,654 ✭✭✭✭ Potential-Monke


    And they'll hopefully have all the usual Bethesda problems ironed out before they release it (eventually) on the PS5.



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,343 ✭✭✭ Mr Crispy


    Maybe by the 10th anniversary edition in 2031?



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,022 ✭✭✭ brainboru1104


    Cautiously optimistic about this. Hopefully it's not a Cyberpunk style disaster.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,022 ✭✭✭ brainboru1104




  • Registered Users Posts: 11,654 ✭✭✭✭ Potential-Monke


    Exactly! I mean, it could be a really, really good game, but unless I pick up an SX in the next year or so, I won't be playing it.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,022 ✭✭✭ brainboru1104


    The SX is my first Xbox, I only bought it because of BGS.

    Loving GamePass though!



  • Registered Users Posts: 14,655 ✭✭✭✭ Enfilade


    This will be going straight to gamepass, so potentially you could if the PS4/5 browser supports it play via cloud gaming? Failing that any laptop or PC.

    Caveat being I haven't found MS's cloud gaming to be great or even good over a wifi connection even on 5ghz. Wired it's playable for me but otherwise not.

    🚴‍♂️



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,654 ✭✭✭✭ Potential-Monke


    Yeah, not bothered with cloud stuff really. I can wait, I'll eventually get a SX once they're more readily available, not in any rush tbh.



  • Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 9,113 Mod ✭✭✭✭ CatInABox


    My experience with their cloud gaming really improved when I upgraded my router to a WiFi6 router recently. My old one was an Archer C7, so it wasn't exactly a slouch either, but I was surprised by the difference in speeds and consistency that I got.

    I'm looking forward to this, but warily so. Fallout 4 was a massive disappointment to me, primarily because the engine meant that the game had all the same issues that they've had for generations. I've become less forgiving of issues in games over the years, a game has to be absolutely stellar to get a pass these days.



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,376 ✭✭✭ EoinHef


    Todd Howard needs to stop promoting these games,he's a proven spoofer at this point.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,022 ✭✭✭ brainboru1104


    I have been reading the chat about this game on other platforms and a lot of people seem to be thinking that there will be space flight in this game, where I think it will probably be more like The Outer Worlds, where you basically teleport between planets on a map screen.

    Is there any indication of how this would work? They keep saying they are going for a grounded approach, so Star Wars like space flight wouldn't really make sense. And in the trailer they released it seemed like the ship used rockets which suggests traveling between planets would work much like what a rocket traveling to Mars would do today, with barely any course correction required.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Computer Games Moderators Posts: 46,934 CMod ✭✭✭✭ Retr0gamer


    It will be built on the Creation engine which is just Gamebryo with an updated renderer so my prediction is it will working jankily.



  • Registered Users Posts: 14,655 ✭✭✭✭ Enfilade


    This and Elder Scrolls VI will be using Creation Engine 2 so yeah jank v2.0 probably.

    🚴‍♂️



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,343 ✭✭✭ Mr Crispy


    I'm sure future Bethesda title's will continue to be janky as feck, but this is worth a read if you think it's all down to "the engine";




  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Computer Games Moderators Posts: 46,934 CMod ✭✭✭✭ Retr0gamer


    Well I don't blame Gamebryo. It's a solid engine that's been used in some really solid game.

    It's Bethesda continually using it's own branch of that engine is the issue. Their own branch is broken and flawed and every release of it is just building jank upon more jank. And then they go ahead and say they are using a new engine Creation when it very obviously just the same gamebryo framework with the renderer modernised. You can say the engine is 90% different and it probably is because the renderer has changed so much but the core framework of how the game actually works is still the same and still very broken and that's what causes these issues.

    Activision tried the same thing with Call of Duty saying their engine has changed so much it's no longer the Quake 3 Arena engine when it still fundamentally feels like a QA3 engine game because the core fundamentals have been carried over with less modification that the renderer. But also least the CoD engine is really solid.

    I suppose Bethesda is stuck between a rock and a hard place. Changing to something like Unreal is the obvious choice but then they are starting from the ground up. Whatever about their games but they are massively ambitious and them starting with a framework is probably saving them a lot of time. However I get the feeling that it's kind of gotten to the point now where modifying their gamebryo branch to be more modern is probably cost them as much time as an engine change.

    The ambition of their games means there always going to be jank. But it would be nice for their games to actually look and feel modern. The engine has caused lots of issues in the past, their games on PS3 would deteriorate in performance the bigger the save file got to the point the game became unplayable and yet they were consistently rewarded with insane scores from reviews despite their games being broken on the platform.

    Who knows, maybe they've fixed it to a better state but I think there's so much jank just adding on top of each release that the engine is only held together by Bethesda's software engineers sheer optimistic willpower.



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,343 ✭✭✭ Mr Crispy


    Yeah, I'm splitting hairs really. Just seems that some people think of an engine as being set in stone and that any future games using it are doomed to failure (possibly true of Bethesda regardless).



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,022 ✭✭✭ brainboru1104


    I think what they're afraid of is losing the "Bethesda feel" to their games, which is something they constantly bring up in interviews. Switching to Unreal would risk losing that. That's the most simple explanation for their resistance to change. They have to change eventually though, maybe build their own engine to keep that feel, they have the resources especially with Microsoft as their parent.

    That said, I can't think of a single open world game I've played that didn't have some jank.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Computer Games Moderators Posts: 46,934 CMod ✭✭✭✭ Retr0gamer


    True but compared to botw, Ubisoft games or what Sony is doing their games just feel.... Old.

    Maybe they can leverage the engine wizards at ID to work some magic for them considering they are all under the same umbrella now.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,022 ✭✭✭ brainboru1104


    I can accept someone not liking their games. I can understand it. I can see the flaws in their games. I don't claim that they're the greatest games ever made.

    But I like them. I'll probably like Starfield, jank and all.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Computer Games Moderators Posts: 46,934 CMod ✭✭✭✭ Retr0gamer


    I'm sure it will be a great game. It's just frustrating how much better it could be with a modern engine.

    Well as long as said engine is as open to mods.



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 25,795 Mod ✭✭✭✭ pixelburp


    The "Jank" doesn't keep me up at night... but it is something that always elicits a sigh whenever it rears its head. Not angry, just disappointed. And yes, I'm sure at this stage the engine has been patched, refactored, amended and tweaked so much it's debatable how much of "gamebryo" remains. But the point would be: the foundations of the code would still be gamebryo; certain behaviours, logic etc. that all the refactoring in the world can't change. Or feature additions that the engine was never designed to handle (such as the building mechanic in Fallout 4, or anything involving a 3rd person perspective really). Or, more critically to development: the various toolsets used by those creating assets for the games; it's not all about what the end-user sees.

    Similar enough scenario to Boards' recent migration when you look at it: the old software was technically "vBulettin": but over the 20 years of the site's lifespan, that software had been customised, changed, edited and patched so much it was distant enough from the original code that it couldn't be upgraded to the most recent, official 2021 version of vBulletin. Still technically vBulletin yes; but not really as well. Enough that an upgrade was impossible, even while the code was falling apart.

    The problem is: the Open World genre - and especially Bethesda's flavour - are possibly the most logistically complex games out there; to upgrade every pipeline for every department (such as Design, DEvelopment, AI, Mapping, Misson building, QA etc. etc.) to Unreal 4+ or similar would probably require about 3-5 years heavy development alone. So Bethesda would have to be happy with a giant investment of time and resources on a maybe, just so future games could use a new engine.

    While the other thing about GameBryo, as we have seen with Skyrim and the 50 million releases - it'll work on any system you throw it at. Hard to ignore that degree of portability.



  • Moderators, Computer Games Moderators Posts: 21,693 Mod ✭✭✭✭ Kiith


    Even with the expected jank, i am really looking forward to this. They seem to be emphasizing the exploration side of the game, which i absolutely love. There's not enough games that focus on exploration, and actually have good rewards for it.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,022 ✭✭✭ brainboru1104


    It's the world building I'm anticipating the most. Despite their flaws as a developer, I think they are clearly talented when it comes to creating worlds. They always feel like there's a sense of history, of a before. Especially in The Elder Scrolls. Even if you're the world's saviour, you are still just a thread in the tapestry of the world's history and lore.



  • Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 25,795 Mod ✭✭✭✭ pixelburp


    It'll be interesting to see what they do with something far outside of their comfort zone: Tamriel is their baby and basically a bag of High Fantasy clichés, while Fallout was an existing IP and relatively straightforward to adapt (take 50s Americana and turn it into a satirical nuclear wasteland). Starfield is something altogether different, and you'd imagine BEthesda will look at everything from Mass Effect, to Star Wars to Star Trek for inspiration on creating a vibrant galaxy.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 26,754 CMod ✭✭✭✭ johnny_ultimate


    One thing that'd make a big difference IMO would be making conversation seems more dynamic. The familiar 'zoom in on dead-eyed NPC' approach is a bit of a mix of a technical limitation and an artistic one.

    The problem in the Bethesda games is compounded by a first-person perspective and rigid character animation that really makes them feel rather awkward overall. Fallout 4 did mix things up, but the player character animation was... less than stellar. Having characters move around more or even gesture / emote more convincingly would make a big difference. Not remotely a small ask, I'm aware - doing it well requires a lot of resources. But it would make a big difference, and plenty of games have done conversations much more convincingly than Bethesda's games (CDPR games for instance, although Cyberpunk I think also suffers from a first-person perspective even with much stronger character animation).



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,022 ✭✭✭ brainboru1104


    Also I'm wondering if they are going for a voiced protagonist in Starfield.



  • Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 25,795 Mod ✭✭✭✭ pixelburp


    That reminds of this YouTube video; it's a good channel in general TBH: specific to the subject of Animation in games; what makes them memorable, impactful or ... in the case of Skyrim's mining animation, very bad




  • Registered Users Posts: 3,022 ✭✭✭ brainboru1104


    I think pointing about Bethesda jank is whipping at dead horse, at this point. Their games are like that. I'd be willing to bet the house on Starfield having a similar feel. So I'd say if you're not a fan of Skyrim or Fallout, you'll probably not like Starfield either.



  • Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 25,795 Mod ✭✭✭✭ pixelburp


    I love Skyrim and Fallot, I can also see the engine's a duct tape slapped piece of crap. It's not an absolute scenario and a perfectly valid form of cognitive dissonance; it's simply a shame there's no latitude to better the architecture for a less buggy experience. Yes it'd take supreme effort as I speculated, but I daresay Bethesda may have the liquidity to do so, given the aforementioned bajillion forms of Skyrim.

    I accept jank to a degree with low budget European mainland games like your Truck Simulators; it's a bit harder to totally swallow in one of the larger AAA studios going. It was cute at first, funny even, now it's just... well, disappointing.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,022 ✭✭✭ brainboru1104


    Yeah, I guess we'll have to wait and see what the game is like.

    Like I said, people expecting a non Creation Engine type game are setting themselves up for disappointment. That's my opinion anyway. I hope I'm wrong and it's bug free!

    Perhaps start drafting your outraged comments now. 😄



Advertisement