Unless you count that time they tried to turn mods into paid mods so they could skim off other people's work.
lol you people have some short memories
And you know what I agree with you. Bethesda does need to step it the fuck up but you also solely created this thread as a drive by assault on Bethesda with no real discussion value from the jump. Gems like "GTA5 doesn't need mods to not be ugly." is just trolling.
There is already plenty of discussion surrounding the technical aspects of Fallout 4 and its shortcomings.
Bethesda doesn't cheap out on tech ffs. Their tech is unique and it's what makes their games possible.
GTA games have nowhere near the interactable object density, flexibility, and NPC complexity as Bethesda's Elderscrollesque titles. Apples to oranges.
What the hell kind of thread is this, seriously? Could the Bethesda hate be any stronger right now?
Unless you count that time they tried to turn mods into paid mods so they could skim off other people's work.
lol you people have some short memories
They did not try to turn mods into paid mods. That was a decision to be made by the developer of said mod. Please get your facts straight. Bethesda supports their modding community pretty well.
But giving someone the option to sell their work is completely different from what you are saying.
People don't understand why there are separate engines in the game developer world and think every game's "problem" is simply not being on UE4 (from reading similar threads)
I am not directly comparing the games, just the approach to not settle with "good enough".
Honestly, who can defend the clusterfuck that is the Bethesda engine?
Because people would buy their game anyway regardless if it's a 2005 engine. They don't care if the weaknesses of their engine carried out to another generation. Their fans would blindly accept it anyway.
It's such a small subset of people it doesn't even matter. The game reviewed incredibly well and sold incredibly well. People jumping on the Bethesda hate bandwagon is actually pretty hilarious to me, also seems incredibly disingenuous.What the hell kind of thread is this, seriously? Could the Bethesda hate be any stronger right now?
I am not directly comparing the games, just the approach to not settle with "good enough".
Honestly, who can defend the clusterfuck that is the Bethesda engine?
Bethesda's engine isn't a "clusterfuck". It's purpose built to do what it does, and the entire company is familiar on it and has built years of experience and middleware lessons into it.
I've yet to see anyone actually articulate WHY Beth's engine is bad.
Bethesda's engine isn't a "clusterfuck". It's purpose built to do what it does, and the entire company is familiar on it and has built years of experience and middleware lessons into it.
I've yet to see anyone actually articulate WHY Beth's engine is bad.
Bethesda doesn't cheap out on tech ffs. Their tech is unique and it's what makes their games possible.
What is possible with Bethesda's tech that isn't possible in GTA V/RDR? Not trolling, genuinely curious.
I am not directly comparing the games, just the approach to not settle with "good enough".
Honestly, who can defend the clusterfuck that is the Bethesda engine?
I dont' know if they cheap out on tech.
having not played any of their games, though, I always wonder why half of the mods released on PC seem focused on "fixing" the game somehow
Fallout 4 looks amazing OP
![]()
Inflammatory title, lack of any real contribution to discussion, dancing around the real point by *cough* coughing to make themself seem witty.
Boys, we have a shitpost here.
To answer the question, I doubt Fallout "cheaped" out on tech. There probably wasn't a meeting where they got together and said, "How can we fuck over the people buying this game the most while still selling the game?". They probably did the most they could with the time they had and provided modding tools that would conveniently allow the community to improve and fix the game they made.
Unlike, I might add, another company that went out of it's way to make modding far more difficult than it should have been. I'm talking about Rockstar, by the way, in case you were wondering.
Fallout 4 looks amazing OP
Any real world proof that RAGE engine can handle TES interactivity, per-object tracking and NPC states?Absolutely nothing, seriously. Bethesda sticks to their engines because they are used to the workflow, but there is nothing that isn't possible from an engine like GTA V's.
100 Million still a big ass budget, and their game looks not even close reflecting thatIn other news, Fallout looks like fallout. GTA looks like GTA. They aren't even fundamentally using the same art styles, so this comparison is a bit difficult.
That being said, GTA V had an ungodly amount of money poured into it. I believe it's one of the most expensive single player based games ever made in the history of video games. But you saw exactly why they could pour that sort of money into it when sales came out. So there is a massive difference between these games both stylistically and budget wise. Bethesda doesn't have any game that can touch GTA V's sales to justify the type of budget Rock Star gets to play around with.
hence, this comparison is really... silly. It's not even different approaches. Rock Star games didn't always look "cutting edge". If you look at older GTA games they looked solid, but they weren't really better looking than other games of the generation. However, they built off the success of those games to afford the budget to spend like hell on GTA V, knowing they had a 20+ million install base just because it's the next major GTA game.
Fallout 4 is a different art style that doesn't inherently need to push the boundaries of what is possible. The bigger question is how Bethesda hasn't cleaned up their primary engine to get rid of common bugs that exist across all of their games - but they aren't game breaking bugs so it's probably just not high on their priority list.
That being said, Fallout 4 probably had close to a 100 million dollar budget. GTA V doubled that. So, why are we comparing them again?
so you're comparing GTA V PC to the console versions of Fallout 4? Because the Fallout 4 PC version is actually pretty decent. Also like already mentioned, GTA V ran at a similar frame rate as Fallout 4 when it first launched on console.
Ignoring the first part, but you seem to be the angry one.
Calling bullshit on the bolded part though. Why didn't they take more time to polish the game? Also modding support is no excuse to release the game in such a rough state. I prefer to buy my games in a polished and finished state.
Bethesda's engine isn't a "clusterfuck". It's purpose built to do what it does, and the entire company is familiar on it and has built years of experience and middleware lessons into it. They've spent tons of money on it.
I've yet to see anyone actually articulate WHY Beth's engine is bad.
Appreciating a development approach that does not result in something like this:
How can you call bullshit? Did you work on the project? Did you understand its scope, resources, deadline?
Pride.
Bethesda tech always make me think their dev cycles consist of smoking weed until the June before their game releases, and then quickly pasting together unoptimized code and stilted dialogue in time for the release date.
Shit threads encourage shit posts