| Cloudman said: Oh, thanks for that. I'm kind of surprised the game released with some of those issues. I wondered if they could have been fixed with time, or it's just something outside of their control. If they're using an old engine, maybe it's time they upgrade it, or move on to a new one, haha... |
It's an interesting question and I wish some gaming writer would ask it (though perhaps they have and didn't get an answer). Fallout 3 had all of these bugs, which is somewhat understandable considering how much new stuff it brought to the table at the time. New Vegas was a spin-off given to another developer, so they didn't really touch the engine at all and the bugs were exactly the same. Skyrim had many of the same bugs but it also had a lot of improvements--or maybe they just didn't crop up as much because it used some different assets. I can't say for sure.
I suppose the jarring thing is that many of the reviewers mentioned the high quality work Bethesda does in other, non-technical areas of game creation.
So why back to the well this far out with an obviously inferior engine? I really have no idea, unless maybe they thought they'd lose too much time learning a new engine, as they'd have to try to make all of Fallout's classic systems work within a new framework. Perhaps they tried it and they couldn't make it feel like "Fallout".
Bethesda is a fairly small team in terms of "AAA". If I remember right, it's actually like 100 people who switch between Fallout and Elder Scrolls. They jumped on Skyrim immediately after finishing Fallout 3. I'd like to see them hire a dedicated expert who can start working on the next next game-engine right now without feeling the pressure of time.
