411
[MEGATHREAD] Starfield - Your experiences!
(cdn.cloudflare.steamstatic.com)
For those who have pre-ordered it is already here, the rest have to wait a little longer. Starfield is finally here! Have you bought it, why or why not? If you've already played it, what do you think of it? We are very curious!
Discuss all things Starfield below!
Watched a streamer play for quite a while and my primary takeaway is that I wish Bethesda would just scrap their engine and start fresh.
It's got the same stiffness, gliding movement, butt-ugly NPC's, and just the general feel of 15 year old Bethesda RPGs. I expect I wouldn't be able to enjoy it for the same reason I struggled with fallout 4.
Something about how luminescent their eyes are bothers me. But their engine is starting to show it's age, that's for sure.
This is their first game on this new engine, so that's probably not it.
Calling Creation 2 a “new engine” is a little too generous.
It’s an upgrade of their previous engine, which was an upgrade to gamebryo.
Taking a Model T, and dropping the engine into a Porsche doesn’t mean you have a Porsche.
valves new games are still running off code from gold source
'engine old' means extremely little and i wish people would stop parroting it
Bethesda really needs to tweak their subsurface scattering for the skin and eyeballs (maybe have a separate render method of eye scatter)
Careful. The last time I spoke ill of Gamebryo+++++++ I was the subject of a short-lived harassment campaign. Bethesda fans are bizarrely protective of this Frankenstein engine. Get this: you still can't climb ladders! It's fucking 2023.
I respect the sentiment, so no disrespect to it; but in software, there’s often a lot of caution against throwing out too much code.
You often find certain modules and sections of code that really should be thrown out or overhauled. If you can convince the corporation to dedicate time to doing that, it can often, but not always, show its benefits.
Probably a lot of the popular games we still play use some old bases, but replace parts that don’t work well. I think Apex Legends is still technically using Source (HL2), they’ve just done a lot to it so it no longer looks anything like Half Life 2.
Okay but Bethesdas engine kinda sucks and source engine is still pretty good...... Why keep something if it's not very good, other than to save money of course.
I'm done paying anything above half off a Bethesda games since fallout 4/76 anyway, they were bad and awful.
we've never seen a source game at the scale of oblivion and have object permanence so you can't really compare the two.
They’ve never been able to get player models and expression right. I can totally forgive it if you get the same level of open world exploration and interaction we got in New Vegas. I personally can trade quality for depth and interesting gameplay (rimworld and dwarf fortress come to mind in the extremes of this). But it does seem like they struggle to achieve standards that were set even 5 years ago.
Bethesda is a funny company. When they are on it and get it right you end up with some of the best games ever made (Skyrim) but when they’re off it just becomes this jumbled mess that got duct taped together and released at full price (fo76).
I’m hoping this is more of the former but we will see. I suspect the modding community is going to take starfield and turn it into something magical. That ship building engine plus copyrighted space ships from pop culture, sign me up.
I think the hardest thing to do is having complex facial expressions overlapping when characters talk. You could do face capture for every dialog option but that would be a massive task.
In alot of engines characters mouths are controlled by a lip sync system that uses, pitch, tone or text fed dialog to 'mimic' words being formed in the mouth. It's far easier to have that and then having facial expressions as a separate animation layer that's blended together and triggered based on a enum that's selected by a script (say a players dialog option says "Your a mean man" and the player selects it, the NPC knows what you selected and in that dialogue option theirs a little enum (it makes more sense if you treat a dialogue option as an object) that contains the facial expression or expressions that are appropriate to use in response).
Full facial animations are used mostly for cutscenes because actors cost money while in game is just the engine trying to move the mouth using code (I know Farcry 5 had this where only the important characters had full facial animations and the rest just flapped their mouths up and down).
Would anyone else be interested in a game that aborts a dedicated “conversation mode” to just have players respond in their normal first person view? Games like Titanfall 2 did that - even though your banter with BT is inconsequential.
It could even lead to some fun “actions not words” moments. Like, a gangster explaining to you “I have the council in my pocket and every gun in the city knows your face. What’re you gonna do about it?” shoots him in the head instead of responding
I've never understood this argument, most game engines are based on 20+ year old technology and have been updated throughout the years. Can the creation engine be improved upon? Definitely yes, but the engine's age has almost nothing to do with it.
Their point is that the engine doesn't show signs of being improved upon during that time and is still stuck feeling like a 20 year old engine.
If you mean just the Creation Engine, that was 2011.
If you trace it back to Gamebryo, then Morrowind was 20 years ago, but I don't think that one can say that even Skyrim looks much like Morrowind.
Skyrim literally had some of the same exact problems that Morrowind had.
Personally I want them to keep the creation engine, if only for the stellar mod support. But let’s not kid ourselves, it desperately needs an overhaul.
What specific functionality is it that you want?
I listed one feature that I'd like to have (dynamic generation of polygons in curved surfaces), which I do not consider to be a very important limitation in another comment.
But if you strongly feel that the engine imposes constraints, then I'm curious what particular functionality it is that you're after.
EDIT: Another: I don't think that the game can generate billboards for player-built structures (so you can see the structures you've built in Fallout 4 and Fallout 76 many cells away). I don't think that that's actually a fundamental engine limitation -- you could probably do it with the existing engine, just that the game doesn't do it today. Instead, stuff like that is generated via offline map-generation tools. But again, it's not really a huge deal in either of the above Fallout games.
Old or not it's clear it needs a fundamental reworking if the same complaints persist across literal decades.
Yeah, they can just append a number to it like unreal does and call it a new engine but that's not what you actually want. It's not a matter of a "new engine", it's them not investing enough into the existing one to make it feel more modern. I know some things like physics and animations are part of the "bethesda charm" but it stopped being charming after skyrim :P
It also is new, it used the creation engine 2.
It would be like arguing that UE5 isn’t new just because it’s an upgraded UE4.
UE5 doesn't still have UE2 limitations. Gamebryo still won't let me climb ladders. It's clear that UE has been upgraded extensively, while Gamebryo has not.
The one thing Unreal still has bug wise is the fact I can't place hundreds of actors in a blueprints viewport because it lags like Satan but if I run code that spawns the same amount attached to said actor or drag the same quantity into the level itself it works without issue.
Modern game engines are extremely complex machines, starting from scratch would take decades because it's fundermental things like drawing geometry in a 3D space, getting input, memory handling, garbage collection and all that low level stuff that needs to be re-done. Physics requires lots of work, so much infact for a time HAVOK was the go to plugin for most engines (still kinda is) just because of how God damn hard it is to have nice physics and high frame rates (tried to build a physics engine from scratch in C++ and I couldn't get past the floating point position problem so anything too far away from 0,0,0 would spaz and handling multiple collisions on an object simultaneously caused all sorts of freaky things to happen).
Then when that's done you still need to write additional tools and plugins so developers can import assets and scripts into the engine plus a level editor for designers to place objects, triggers and all that fun stuff.
After that you can now start making the game.
Bethesda probably rewrote huge chunks of their engine to support larger texture sizes and improve performance across the board for Starfield.
If they do decide to dump it then they're most likely to use an existing engine like Unreal or Cry rather than build one from scratch.
Personally I believe the reason why they didn't re-write the character movement is because it would also mean altering way to much stuff on the front end.
A good example would be if I use FunctionGetVelocity in my script to determine if a player is moving and it use to return an int but now it returns a float because of the rewrite, without conversion would mean you'd probably get a crash.
Another example would be AI related. If I use a variable to get a rot data type but now that's been replaced with a struct that needs to be split to get rot now suddenly you have to touch the code to make it compliant.
Which is why I'm sad that cdpr decided to ditch their red engine. So much work turning a buggy mess engine from Witcher 2 into a beautiful (still buggy) engine in cyberpunk. If only they would at least open source it, or sell it to another studio.
I agree. I really admired their persistence with it and it would be nice to have some actual competition to Unreal.
With nanite, live coding and lumen Unreal is unbeatable at the moment and lots of studios are hiring like crazy for Unreal Engine specialists to try and beat the competition.
If CDPR wants to compete they'll have to do a ton of work making those tools for designers and artists easy to use (alot more in-house engines still have source 2 hammer editor style toolkits and command line conversion tools which are shit compared to Unreals drag and drop advantage).
Plus Unreal 4/5 was built to be as modular as possible so you can build whatever you want while CDPR engine was built specifically for this genre of games Cyberpunk is in. They definitely could and I see the engine having potential but afraid that's it's not flexible enough without serious work.
It is a new engine for this game.
It’s like arguing the UE5 isn’t new since it’s an upgrade UE4.
They've been saying a new engine for a long time. It's just not. they change subsystems, but people are saying they can feel the morrowind in their latest titles.
I can't feel the unreal 1 in UE5 games.
Yeah it’s really weird to feel it again in a game. Especially coming from baldurs gate 3 where the npc interactions and realness of characters is so good
To be thrown into npc dialogue straight at you with no natural movement.
Otherwise the game is really cool so far. Flight is a little complex but I guess I’ll get used to it. The robot even says it’ll be like second nature soon. Assume he was talking directly to the player