Comment on Open source community figures out problems with performance in Starfield

TheOnlyMego@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

• Neato@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Creation Engine 2.0.

  AKA Creation Engine 1.0 with more patches than a 1sqmi quilt.

  source

  • aksdb@feddit.de ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Evolution isn’t wrong. It’s not like Unreal Engine gets rewritten from scratch for each major version.

    source

    • Virkkunen@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Exactly, people forget that most of the well known engines today are as old or older than Creation Engine, they're all patched/upgraded as it fits, though Creation Engine has no apparent version numbers and it's made by Bethesda so you get free internet points and a feeling of superiority for hating on the popular thing.

      If you took these folks opinions as truth you'd think Bethesda games are massive flops that barely sell 10 copies and are a study case on how not to develop a game, but the real world is very different from the echo chamber...

      source

      • all-knight-party@kbin.cafe ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        It boggles my mind how many things people say about this game that are patently untrue, obviously extremely biased against the game/studio, or make it seem like this game killed their dog.

        The game has issues, for sure, some things like the nonexistent city/building local map systems are indefensible, but damn dude, I wish people would just try to have mature discussions with realistic expectations about it instead of whatever this shit show is that we call "gaming discussions"

        source

        • -> View More Comments
      • TheOnlyMego@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        Oh don’t get me wrong, Bethesda games are generally great (with notable exceptions like Fallout 76), and do phenomenally well in sales. However, dismissing any and all criticism of the games’ numerous flaws (including glitches which often carry over between subsequent titles, like clipping through collision boxes and falling through maps) is willful ignorance at its finest. Every Bethesda game has performance issues and game-breaking bugs, and there was no reason to expect Starfield to be any different in that regard.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
    • jjjalljs@ttrpg.network ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      That’s not really a good metaphor for software.

      Or maybe it is if you meant how many weird and inefficient things living creatures have because it was good enough. Think about that the next time you accidentally choke on nothing

      source

      • aksdb@feddit.de ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_evolution

        source
    • executivechimp@discuss.tchncs.de ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Or the Source 2 engine, which is just a patched version of the Quake 1 engine.

      source
    • Edgelord_Of_Tomorrow@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Evolution frequently discards baggage.

      Bethesda just keep piling shit on top without doing any of the necessary groundwork to make it run well.

      source
    • Rough_N_Ready@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Except unreal engine literally was rewritten from 3 to 4.

      source

      • aksdb@feddit.de ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        Which is, literally, not every major version. I didn’t say “all Unreal Engine versions are evolutionary steps over their predecessors”, I said “they don’t get rewritten from scratch for each major version”.

        Someone else also brought up the Quake engine, which has even more evolutionary steps; even with forks like the Source engine.

        source
  • altima_neo@lemmy.zip ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    aka Gamebryo

    source

    • Virkkunen@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      That's the engine in which Creation Engine was based on, so what? Saying that name won't somehow invalidate everything that was developed using the two engines or accomplish anything really. By your logic, we should call Source 2 engine the Quake engine

      source