So is it truly that bad of news if they stick with this engine (and update it) for Starfield and TES VI? We also have to keep in mind that TES VI will have photogrammatry and also will be using new animations, which begins with Starfield.Ĭlick to shrink.The lighting is not really the main issue with Fallout 4, it's actually pretty great all things considered, the evidence of this is that when it works it actually looks quite pretty. As for visual improvement, if we go from Oblivion to Fallout 3 we already see a real nice improvement, then on to Skyrim is even bigger and Fallout 4 was significantly better looking. Sticking with this engine means bugs, this engine is known for it but personally I never had all that many issues with bugs. If the engine isn't the problem though, why is everyone frustrated with BGS for sticking with their engine and bringing updated versions of it when it's exactly what other companies do too, apparently? Based on this Starfield has the potential to look miles better than Fallout 4 and 76. The easiest example is UE4 that is based on UE3. Anything can be implemented with enough resources and time.Īny engine you're familiar with right now is based on an older version.
"the engine was never the problem, it's the bugs and they can be fixed. At one point the conversation went towards that it's a bummer they are still using Gamebryo/Creation engine for Starfield and likely TES VI as well. The other day on Twitter I was talking to a fellow BGS fan about Starfield and TES VI. I thought this here was the right place to ask such a thing.
0 kommentar(er)
