Are they actually building a new engine for this or is it the same old chugging, shambling, 20 year old piece of shit held together with chicken wire and duct tape?
[Reply]

Starting a new round and building up the capital and resources needed for effective weapons and armor and the first cool ship is probably my favorite part. I've got a fairly uniform system that I use, and have everything in place before I start any of the Constellation missions.

As I've said, the new mods allow you to create some truly amazing ships. An example:
[Reply]

Hold up a sec




One of my favorites as a wee Bowser!
[Reply]

Same here.

To be fair, it's somebody else's design that I saw on YT. I just tweaked it a little.
[Reply]

Hoping it’s a new engine as I agree the other one is just a relic of an earlier era that needed to be retired long ago. I haven’t played Starfield, what engine is that running on?
[Reply]

They are using the same game engine they used in Starfield. So........

It's their own engine called Creation Engine 2.
[Reply]

I think it is still their in house engine that powered Skyrim. I'm sure it has seen a lot of work, but I don't know that they ever ditched it and started over.

It's not hard to check out what Starfield looks like.

Not every game has to check every box. If they nail the story, etc. It could still be fun.

But starting with that engine is definitely starting at a disadvantage in this day and age, I think. And there are certainly a significant subset of people looking for reasons to pile on with the hate. And there will probably be plenty of things they will be able to point to.

I guess we will see soon in 2035.
[Reply]

It is quite apparent that this level of thinking is poisoning many game studios. It's pretty simple. If you CAN do it, you should. If it's been done in other games, then omitting it from yours is just committing to making a subpar product.

Take Avowed, again for instance. If a game made 4 consoles and 14 years ago has Interactive items in the environment, npcs that react to not only your actions, but things you're doing, then your modern game absolutely should have these very basic expected elements. For instance walking around in sneak mode drawing "hands to yourself sneak-theif" comments, or comments on your weapons or magic being drawn. Attacking npcs or guards should draw a response. The NPCs and enemies shouldn't be static, never moving cardboard cutouts that do nothing unless specifically needed to progress the main story or a specific distance trigger is tripped.

Sure, you don't NEED these things to make a solid game, but you do if you want to appear to your customer that you give a shit about what you're doing.

Avowed was kind of dead on arrival based on the internal politics of the studio at Obsidian. The launch trailer looked spectacular. It was supposed to be Obsidians answer to Skyrim. Their answer to Fallout 3, New Vegas remains a beloved title. So why wouldn't we be pumped for this?

Politics, DEI, and tolerance of what should be intolerable or filed under clinically insane devolved what Avowed could have been, into what it is. With nobody having a counter opinion to the echochamber of insanity, the game was allowed to devolve to such a state that the game faceplanted worse than Veilguard did.

The best description and most hilarious I've heard is as follows.

For Bethesda, they've never really been interested with quality to start with, right? How could you be with such gems as "It's not a bug, its a feature".

Starfield was bitterly disappointing, and in a couple of instances, Infuriating. If you were not a player that became engrossed in the shipbuilding aspect of the game, then Starfield for you is probably one of the biggest pieces of shit you've ever played.

Shipbuilding is its only redeeming quality. The environments are barren, lifeless, boring playspaces that repeat a handful of layouts with copy paste enemies.

Bethesda relies on the modding community to make their games playable, they can't be bothered to fix it themselves. They not only release their games at the pace of George R.R. Martin's writing, but they're hilariously flawed when they finally do come out.

Elder Scrolls 6, I mean, sure I'll take a look at it, but with how much stellar competition that there is now, and the technological advancements made since Skyrim, you'll almost need to be either a hard-core super fanboy or a huge fan of retro gaming by the time this releases to not be disappointed by what Todd Howard and his gang finally put out there.

The idea of Elder Scrolls 6 is infinitely more exciting than what the quality of Elder Scrolls 6 will actually be. I don't really see any other way to realistically set an expectation for this.
[Reply]

It was $20 as part of a Game Pass.

I’ll give it a shot.
[Reply]

Have you deleted that piece of shit yet?
[Reply]

Any news on whether ES6 will have co-op?

If not, I probably won't even consider it for that reason alone.
[Reply]

Heh.

You looking for a partner to experience the bugs with?

Imagine skyrim with co op. Getting constantly hate ****ed by your partner's dragon shouts.

Just play Elder Scrolls Online, and this desire for other humans in your elder Scrolls experience will pass. Lmao.
[Reply]

OK. I'm gonna give Fallout: London a go today. The dev team poured love into it.
[Reply]

I will try it out at some point, I love Fallout 4 as a base and think London could be awesome.
[Reply]

Plenty of these games allow you to invite your friends in such as Valheim with 1000 mods. Works flawlessly for a AA dev, so a AAA studio should be able to figure it out. To be frank we don't want some live service garbage, just let us host a friend or two peer to peer. I played most of these games before I had online friends but now it's hard for me to play single player games as I'm always doing something with them.
[Reply]