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.Bethesda doesn't want to share and Microsoft doesn't want to force them to just yet.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.
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.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.Bethesda doesn't want to share and Microsoft doesn't want to force them to just yet.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.
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.
It's only been four years since their last release and remote work cratered productivity. It's not going to take 10 years, the target is next year, likely late https://www.gamesradar.com/games/rp...aked-early-possibly-confirming-a-2025-launch/
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.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.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.Bethesda doesn't want to share and Microsoft doesn't want to force them to just yet.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.
Stop talking about yourself
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.
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.
