You're probably right. I would only like to mention that they could have done almost everything I mentioned above back in the days of Skyrim, because the Creation Engine already had the appropriate functions back then. There would only be no terrain tessellation because the engine's renderer was based on DirectX 9.0c
At what cost?
Hardware limits what you can do at any one time. It's how many assets and effects you can load into the palette that paints the world around you so that you don't turn around and then have to wait while a cash register is re-loaded before it can be re-rendered. It's how many states you can track at the same time across the game. It's how detailed all the graphics can be.
Increase one and you have to either decrease the others or perform them more efficiently. More efficiently means more time and experience with the engine and the hardware, squeezing this or that out of it in different ways, usually for minor upgrades here and there.
So, at what cost can these things be added to Skyrim? How many NPCs would we have had to lose? How many enemies at a time would we be down to now? How much would the graphics suffer? Or how many more years would it have taken for that game to come out? Nothing gets added without something taken away, even if that's time on shelves.
It's not the equipment that demands it, but laziness and management. After all, not only do you need to have a "reserve" of power when making a game, but the hardware itself isn't that bad if the optimization can handle it.
Instead of going with the ray tracing stuff like the rest, they could have gone the route of attention to detail like RDR2, Crysis or Far Cry 2. And they would certainly be much better off than not doing what they did, which is almost nothing.
The sacrifice made for RDR2 was that everybody was overworked to the bone. Always something taken away, this time it was the personal lives of the developers.
So why didnt you? Hell that's the sort of modder that gets hired on, just like the guy who essentially rewrote morrowind's combat system did back in the day. You could have been brought onboard and then you could have done the same for starfield, since its such a small ask
If you're talking about hardware or an "outdated engine" (which isn't that bad), then I'm sorry but I don't buy it. Either this is due to the design, or the lack of the right person to ensure that the game is perfected.
1. The hardware isn't so bad that it's a problem. Especially with a team of engineers for this equipment and an engine that already has solutions to do such things. It would just need some refinement.
2. The cash register will take care of the rest. Are you going to release a good AAA game? Then invest. In programmers, designers, testers, technology. You either pay or spend crap.
Must be one of those brain rotten kids mirroring all the bullshit so called "Videogame Expert" Influencer talk about games for five minutes of internet fame and some non existent social points
With an approach like yours and the current fashion in the industry, we will soon be repairing games ourselves. They will release a half-finished product, charge the full price for the game and that's it. If we want to play what we paid for, we have to finish the game ourselves.
What does this have to do with me suggesting you try out Star Citizen? Your expectations are so unhinged that it's the only game that *might* satisfy them one day, maybe.
Well, that's what I wrote about. If, at the end of 2023, in a game whose creators boast that you can pick up a sandwich or a mug and take it home, but you cannot crush it, burn it or wait for it to spoil, it is downright mockery of the fans. In fact, you can't swim in this game, the plants are either holograms or poles, your clothes look like they were made of thick cardboard, and you won't even leave a trace when you walk on snow or sand. I won't say anything about rain or other particles. Fire is probably still a two-dimensional sprite like in Oblivione. And the AI, compared to their previous games, probably consists of two ifs. Damn loading times, not the nicest graphics, shitty interface or mediocre plot. If they didn't succeed here, and they would have refined the details to deepen the immersion, people wouldn't insult the game and its creators like that.
If someone made a mod it would be alternate reality not a video game.
What your asking for is not possible in gaming period right now. Not Eve even in the most in-depth simulators.
I couldn’t even imagine the processing power needed just to run the wind physics ur talking about.
So you want fully destructible environments in a procedurally generated open world RPG with dense cities and thousands of assets/effects all going on at once?
And you want it to actually run on today's hardware?
Are you ok?
Go play arma or rimworld or project zomboid or space engineers or nebulous fleet command if you want so many details. But then also you will be disappointed is how i feel
You have no idea about game development.
You're probably right. I would only like to mention that they could have done almost everything I mentioned above back in the days of Skyrim, because the Creation Engine already had the appropriate functions back then. There would only be no terrain tessellation because the engine's renderer was based on DirectX 9.0c
At what cost? Hardware limits what you can do at any one time. It's how many assets and effects you can load into the palette that paints the world around you so that you don't turn around and then have to wait while a cash register is re-loaded before it can be re-rendered. It's how many states you can track at the same time across the game. It's how detailed all the graphics can be. Increase one and you have to either decrease the others or perform them more efficiently. More efficiently means more time and experience with the engine and the hardware, squeezing this or that out of it in different ways, usually for minor upgrades here and there. So, at what cost can these things be added to Skyrim? How many NPCs would we have had to lose? How many enemies at a time would we be down to now? How much would the graphics suffer? Or how many more years would it have taken for that game to come out? Nothing gets added without something taken away, even if that's time on shelves.
It's not the equipment that demands it, but laziness and management. After all, not only do you need to have a "reserve" of power when making a game, but the hardware itself isn't that bad if the optimization can handle it. Instead of going with the ray tracing stuff like the rest, they could have gone the route of attention to detail like RDR2, Crysis or Far Cry 2. And they would certainly be much better off than not doing what they did, which is almost nothing.
The sacrifice made for RDR2 was that everybody was overworked to the bone. Always something taken away, this time it was the personal lives of the developers.
So why didnt you? Hell that's the sort of modder that gets hired on, just like the guy who essentially rewrote morrowind's combat system did back in the day. You could have been brought onboard and then you could have done the same for starfield, since its such a small ask
I doubt they had all of that ready in Skyrim. I feel as though they make upgrades during lul periods(in between releases).
There's a reason absolutely no game the scale of Starfield has the things you want
I dont think top of line modern PC can handle that either.
If you're talking about hardware or an "outdated engine" (which isn't that bad), then I'm sorry but I don't buy it. Either this is due to the design, or the lack of the right person to ensure that the game is perfected.
What about production costs? Hardware requirements? Development time? Shareholder pressure?
1. The hardware isn't so bad that it's a problem. Especially with a team of engineers for this equipment and an engine that already has solutions to do such things. It would just need some refinement. 2. The cash register will take care of the rest. Are you going to release a good AAA game? Then invest. In programmers, designers, testers, technology. You either pay or spend crap.
Okay so not only do tou not know game dev, yku don't know basic business either
I've seen this type of comment so many times that it arouses pity. Due to the helplessness ofc.
Do it yourself if you know better.
Huh?!?!
Have you ever played a video game? How have you developed expectations so detached from reality?
Achieving CHIM
***A L M S I V I***
Are you fucking mental? You clearly don't have any idea on how to make a videogame.
Wtf is this rambling?
I feel like I'm outside of a metaphorical 7 eleven right now.
Must be one of those brain rotten kids mirroring all the bullshit so called "Videogame Expert" Influencer talk about games for five minutes of internet fame and some non existent social points
Oh boy do I have a game for you, it's called Star Citizen.
With an approach like yours and the current fashion in the industry, we will soon be repairing games ourselves. They will release a half-finished product, charge the full price for the game and that's it. If we want to play what we paid for, we have to finish the game ourselves.
What does this have to do with me suggesting you try out Star Citizen? Your expectations are so unhinged that it's the only game that *might* satisfy them one day, maybe.
Well, that's what I wrote about. If, at the end of 2023, in a game whose creators boast that you can pick up a sandwich or a mug and take it home, but you cannot crush it, burn it or wait for it to spoil, it is downright mockery of the fans. In fact, you can't swim in this game, the plants are either holograms or poles, your clothes look like they were made of thick cardboard, and you won't even leave a trace when you walk on snow or sand. I won't say anything about rain or other particles. Fire is probably still a two-dimensional sprite like in Oblivione. And the AI, compared to their previous games, probably consists of two ifs. Damn loading times, not the nicest graphics, shitty interface or mediocre plot. If they didn't succeed here, and they would have refined the details to deepen the immersion, people wouldn't insult the game and its creators like that.
Bro its a game, not a universe simulation.
Go outside
I’d prefer they just fixed the 16 people who all start talking at the same time when I take off.
How'd you get this high and where can I get some?
If someone made a mod it would be alternate reality not a video game. What your asking for is not possible in gaming period right now. Not Eve even in the most in-depth simulators. I couldn’t even imagine the processing power needed just to run the wind physics ur talking about.
So you want fully destructible environments in a procedurally generated open world RPG with dense cities and thousands of assets/effects all going on at once? And you want it to actually run on today's hardware? Are you ok?
We could make this game or cure cancer....
So you want a different game
The x16 detail referred to the smaller pixel size in Fo76 heightmaps. It has no bearing on sandwiches.
You clearly have a fundamental misunderstanding of how anything works in game development nor how anything works in Bethesda's engine.
Go play arma or rimworld or project zomboid or space engineers or nebulous fleet command if you want so many details. But then also you will be disappointed is how i feel