Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Decline WTF is happening in InXile?

Zed Duke of Banville

Dungeon Master
Patron
Joined
Oct 3, 2015
Messages
13,309
Missed opportunity for post-acquisition InXile to create either Fallout Tactics 2 with the Wasteland 3 engine or Fallout: New New Orleans with the Fallout 4 engine. Instead, they're spending 5 years or so of development time gambling on their steampunk action RPG. :M
Bethesda doesn't want to share and Microsoft doesn't want to force them to just yet.
Microsoft and Bethesda should both have realized that Starfield was still years away from release and would be followed by the Elder Scrolls VI, meaning that Bethesda's next Fallout game was at least a decade in the future from the time Microsoft acquired Bethesda, which occurred just a few months after the release of Wasteland 3. Even if Microsoft or Bethesda incorrectly worried that an Open World Fallout game by InXile would conflict with Starfield (which does not adhere to Bethesda's own Open World RPG formula established with Morrowind in 2002), Microsoft could have directed InXile to develop a Falllout tactics game, which would have been much cheaper and faster than an Open World game.
 

MerchantKing

Learned
Joined
Jun 5, 2023
Messages
1,697
Missed opportunity for post-acquisition InXile to create either Fallout Tactics 2 with the Wasteland 3 engine or Fallout: New New Orleans with the Fallout 4 engine. Instead, they're spending 5 years or so of development time gambling on their steampunk action RPG. :M
Bethesda doesn't want to share and Microsoft doesn't want to force them to just yet.
Microsoft and Bethesda should both have realized that Starfield was still years away from release and would be followed by the Elder Scrolls VI, meaning that Bethesda's next Fallout game was at least a decade in the future from the time Microsoft acquired Bethesda, which occurred just a few months after the release of Wasteland 3. Even if Microsoft or Bethesda incorrectly worried that an Open World Fallout game by InXile would conflict with Starfield (which does not adhere to Bethesda's own Open World RPG formula established with Morrowind in 2002), Microsoft could have directed InXile to develop a Falllout tactics game, which would have been much cheaper and faster than an Open World game.
My question is: Why is Bethesda still running the Gamebryo engine? It's been 26 years since they started using the engine. Time to get truly new engine instead of just trying to patch the same buggy engine again to get it to run on Windows 12 and just renaming it again.
 

Roguey

Codex Staff
Staff Member
Sawyerite
Joined
May 29, 2010
Messages
36,888
My question is: Why is Bethesda still running the Gamebryo engine? It's been 26 years since they started using the engine. Time to get truly new engine instead of just trying to patch the same buggy engine again to get it to run on Windows 12 and just renaming it again.
All the Gamebryo code was completely rewritten by the time they rebranded it as Creation. They're familiar with it and it's good for making the kinds of games they want to make. Obsidian struggling with Unreal is a good example of why that would be a terrible decision. id's engines aren't really suitable either.
 

Old Hans

Arcane
Joined
Oct 10, 2011
Messages
2,168
InXile seems to have fallen victim to the "we need to spend 10+ years making our next game"
My question is: Why is Bethesda still running the Gamebryo engine? It's been 26 years since they started using the engine. Time to get truly new engine instead of just trying to patch the same buggy engine again to get it to run on Windows 12 and just renaming it again.
All the Gamebryo code was completely rewritten by the time they rebranded it as Creation. They're familiar with it and it's good for making the kinds of games they want to make. Obsidian struggling with Unreal is a good example of why that would be a terrible decision. id's engines aren't really suitable either.
this got me thinking how much better Dragon Age would have been if they never switched to shitty garbage frostbyte engine.
 

scytheavatar

Scholar
Joined
Sep 22, 2016
Messages
712
InXile seems to have fallen victim to the "we need to spend 10+ years making our next game"
My question is: Why is Bethesda still running the Gamebryo engine? It's been 26 years since they started using the engine. Time to get truly new engine instead of just trying to patch the same buggy engine again to get it to run on Windows 12 and just renaming it again.
All the Gamebryo code was completely rewritten by the time they rebranded it as Creation. They're familiar with it and it's good for making the kinds of games they want to make. Obsidian struggling with Unreal is a good example of why that would be a terrible decision. id's engines aren't really suitable either.
this got me thinking how much better Dragon Age would have been if they never switched to shitty garbage frostbyte engine.

An engine is a tool, surely you are not blaming Frostbite for Veilguard's writing being the worst ever? There's no such thing as an engine that can prevent the lost of talent in BioWare.
 

sebas

Am I the baddie?
Patron
Joined
Dec 20, 2015
Messages
482
Strap Yourselves In Codex Year of the Donut
Dragonveil ran smoothly at launch and looked, from a fidelity pov, extremely well. Frostbite was a success.
 

NaturallyCarnivorousSheep

Albanian Deliberator Kang
Patron
Possibly Retarded
Joined
Sep 29, 2021
Messages
2,367
Location
EGT Tower 14th floor, Tirana
Missed opportunity for post-acquisition InXile to create either Fallout Tactics 2 with the Wasteland 3 engine or Fallout: New New Orleans with the Fallout 4 engine. Instead, they're spending 5 years or so of development time gambling on their steampunk action RPG. :M
Bethesda doesn't want to share and Microsoft doesn't want to force them to just yet.
Microsoft and Bethesda should both have realized that Starfield was still years away from release and would be followed by the Elder Scrolls VI, meaning that Bethesda's next Fallout game was at least a decade in the future from the time Microsoft acquired Bethesda, which occurred just a few months after the release of Wasteland 3. Even if Microsoft or Bethesda incorrectly worried that an Open World Fallout game by InXile would conflict with Starfield (which does not adhere to Bethesda's own Open World RPG formula established with Morrowind in 2002), Microsoft could have directed InXile to develop a Falllout tactics game, which would have been much cheaper and faster than an Open World game.
My question is: Why is Bethesda still running the Gamebryo engine? It's been 26 years since they started using the engine. Time to get truly new engine instead of just trying to patch the same buggy engine again to get it to run on Windows 12 and just renaming it again.
It does what they need decently enough. The issues the engine has is that it needs heavy separation of non-empty areas and some stuff is janky because accumulated spaghetti code. However the core beth team(about 120 people in total) are well acquainted with it and the modders are capable to very quickly get going with any projects on the new game, partially because the engine hasn't changed for so long.
 

Skinwalker

*meows at 3AM for no reason*
Patron
Village Idiot
Joined
Aug 20, 2021
Messages
13,184
Location
Yessex
6 years later (almost 7, at this point) Obsidian already released Grounded and Pentiment. We can safely say Avowed is almost ready, so 3 games are done.
So, three turds that no one is interested in. Wow.
 

Azdul

Magister
Joined
Nov 3, 2011
Messages
3,754
Location
Langley, Virginia
Dragonveil ran smoothly at launch and looked, from a fidelity pov, extremely well. Frostbite was a success.
Andromeda was a shitshow mainly due to switching to Frostbite. Otherwise it would be paint-by-numbers, but working on basic technical level, sequel to Mass Effect 3.
 

Lord_Potato

Arcane
Glory to Ukraine
Joined
Nov 24, 2017
Messages
11,020
Location
Free City of Warsaw
Dragonveil ran smoothly at launch and looked, from a fidelity pov, extremely well. Frostbite was a success.
Andromeda was a shitshow mainly due to switching to Frostbite. Otherwise it would be paint-by-numbers, but working on basic technical level, sequel to Mass Effect 3.
Inquisition was already made in Frostbite. They should have had most of the tools they needed already prepared.

And you'd think a shooter engine that was Frostbite would be better suited from the get go to action rpgs like Mass Effect than to more traditional Dragon Ages.
 

Azdul

Magister
Joined
Nov 3, 2011
Messages
3,754
Location
Langley, Virginia
Dragonveil ran smoothly at launch and looked, from a fidelity pov, extremely well. Frostbite was a success.
Andromeda was a shitshow mainly due to switching to Frostbite. Otherwise it would be paint-by-numbers, but working on basic technical level, sequel to Mass Effect 3.
Inquisition was already made in Frostbite. They should have had most of the tools they needed already prepared.

And you'd think a shooter engine that was Frostbite would be better suited from the get go to action rpgs like Mass Effect than to more traditional Dragon Ages.
The changes / fork made by Inquisition team / Bioware Edmonton were never merged back into Frostbite / Battlefield / DICE source code. So Andromeda / Bioware Montreal started without any of them.

EA does not need to license an engine, they have engine at home.

What Bioware Montreal could get for free is a copy of latest Battlefield source code. They could port Bioware Edmonton fork back into their fork of latest Battlefield, port Mass Effect 3 changes to Unreal Engine 3 to latest Battlefield source code, or write everything from scratch based on whatever DICE planned for the next Battlefield. All of the above involve serious technical challenges and corporate politics.

There is a reason why Epic is able to charge money for Unreal engine license.
 

Raghar

Arcane
Vatnik
Joined
Jul 16, 2009
Messages
24,268
What Bioware Montreal could get for free is a copy of latest Battlefield source code. They could port Bioware Edmonton fork back into their fork of latest Battlefield, port Mass Effect 3 changes to Unreal Engine 3 to latest Battlefield source code, or write everything from scratch based on whatever DICE planned for the next Battlefield. All of the above involve serious technical challenges and corporate politics.
They couldn't, they have brainpower of monkeys.
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom