???

[Kamen Rider Kuuga]

Fallout 5 needs to be based on F.A.T.A.L., because then mods could make you reroll for anal circumference after an encounter with a Super Mutant.

[Chbaakal]

Bouncing Bladders -> -5 to Endurance, -5 to Perception... Why would you even bother?

 

It's Immersive, man!!! Just like really running around a nuclear waste. Land. Looking for. An outhouse.....yeah, that's erm....realistic...

 

I'm still wondering why someone hasn't come up with Bouncing Scrotums, yet. 'Turn, bounce....ouch. Turn again, bounce...owww.'

 

Lol, I can see one problem. "Hey, anyone have a fix for this yet? My testicles are stretching to the horizon again..."

 

[Benmc20]

Well, ToddHoward/PeteHInes/Bethesda have already tipped they have two games in the works.  According to them the technology for what they want to do for TES6 doesn't exist.  To me that means 'new engine' since they can't use GameBryo anymore (their license expired earlier this year).  In other words they don't have a choice but to abandon an engine made 10+ years ago and modernize.  And both Howard and Hines confess work for TES6 isn't passed the 'wouldn't it be cool if' development stage.

 

An external version of FO4 (like New Vegas was for FO3) isn't being publicly discussed.  That doesn't mean it's not happening, but it doesn't mean it's a sure thing either.  Their GameByro license has expired unless they've forked over more dough to extend it.  Which is pretty fucking sad if they did considering the game market and what people are looking for as far as game play and graphics go.  FO4 has already been clowned for using a decade old engine, is Bethesda willing to risk that again?  Realistically FO4 is a one shot marketing flop.  The promise of additional DLCs and the season pass thing aren't happening.  Nuka World is it so Bethesda is done with FO4.  The game was failure so why bother perpetuating it?

 

Summary: Bethesda admits they don't have a modern engine.  They admit they have two games in the works and neither of those are implied to be a Fallout or Elderscrolls spin-off.  And that's all there is to it.

Actually, the Creation Engine is a fork made by Bethesda of the old Gamebryo. If they have lost the license of the original, it isn't be sure they can't use their fork anymore.

[PsychoMachina]

<snip>

 

Lol, I can see one problem. "Hey, anyone have a fix for this yet? My testicles are stretching to the horizon again..."

 

 

That sounds like me when I use to get heat rash.  The itching, the scratching, the stretching.

[skeletor]

Bouncing Bladders -> -5 to Endurance, -5 to Perception... Why would you even bother?

 

Yeah but it has +10 to speed, +5 protection against fire. Remember postal?

[windpl]

 

Well, ToddHoward/PeteHInes/Bethesda have already tipped they have two games in the works.  According to them the technology for what they want to do for TES6 doesn't exist.  To me that means 'new engine' since they can't use GameBryo anymore (their license expired earlier this year).  In other words they don't have a choice but to abandon an engine made 10+ years ago and modernize.  And both Howard and Hines confess work for TES6 isn't passed the 'wouldn't it be cool if' development stage.

 

An external version of FO4 (like New Vegas was for FO3) isn't being publicly discussed.  That doesn't mean it's not happening, but it doesn't mean it's a sure thing either.  Their GameByro license has expired unless they've forked over more dough to extend it.  Which is pretty fucking sad if they did considering the game market and what people are looking for as far as game play and graphics go.  FO4 has already been clowned for using a decade old engine, is Bethesda willing to risk that again?  Realistically FO4 is a one shot marketing flop.  The promise of additional DLCs and the season pass thing aren't happening.  Nuka World is it so Bethesda is done with FO4.  The game was failure so why bother perpetuating it?

 

Summary: Bethesda admits they don't have a modern engine.  They admit they have two games in the works and neither of those are implied to be a Fallout or Elderscrolls spin-off.  And that's all there is to it.

Actually, the Creation Engine is a fork made by Bethesda of the old Gamebryo. If they have lost the license of the original, it isn't be sure they can't use their fork anymore.

 

 

If they lost license to original they cant use creation engine, same as CD project lose license for aurora they couldn't use their modification of it any more.

[Kendo 2]

 

Actually, the Creation Engine is a fork made by Bethesda of the old Gamebryo. If they have lost the license of the original, it isn't be sure they can't use their fork anymore.

If they lost license to original they cant use creation engine, same as CD project lose license for aurora they couldn't use their modification of it any more.

 I called this last year and I was 'corrected' then too.   Anyway, Bethesda has no choice but to purchase a license for a modern engine, re-license Gamebyro, or develop an engine of their own.  Whatever 'improvements' they made to Gamebyro is moot at this point.  They modified software they don't own and the license for that software has expired.  So they can take that 'fork' and stick it in because it's done.

 

Anything modern for TES/FO is a long way off.  They might release a spin-off like New Vegas but that would require a new negotiation for software use they don't own.  Since anything derived from Gamebyro is dead that translates to 'Don't hold your breath'.  It takes Bethesda about 4 yrs to make a game with an existing engine.  So how long will it take them to make an original engine AND a game that uses it?

 

Skyrim64 bit was already developed when their Gamebyro license expired so yeah they can release it.  New titles based on that engine?  Highly unlikely.  FO5, an Obsidian version or FO4, TES6, etc. will have to wait for new technology; technology Bethesda admits they don't have.  But anything is possible.

[Hamguy31]

is it possible he accidently typed 5 instead of 4?

[bjornk]

Bethesda has no choice but to purchase a license for a modern engine, re-license Gamebyro, or develop an engine of their own.

Reminds me of a 4chan meme...

 

Father: Todd, my son, you must choose a new engine... *shows him the options*

Todd: *re-licences Gamebryo*

 

[GrimReaper]

They don't use the gamebryo engine anymore, though. Sure, the creation engine is just a heavily modified version of gamebryo, but if they have the right to do that and declare that engine as something they own, well. That speaks for itself I think. Looks to me like what happened with the IW engine Infinity Ward uses for CoD - started out as id tech 3 and now has its own name and all. Valve's engines have a similar story and despite them starting out as edited versions of existing engines, I doubt they have to pay anything to the people that developed the original engine anymore. There's probably a hefty amount of cash involved if you want to own the in-house modification of an existing engine, but it is apparently something that happens.

 

 

John Carmack said this about the Q3 engine in 2004 on his blog:

 

I intended to release the Q3 source under the GPL by the end of 2004, but we had another large technology licensing deal go through, and it would be poor form to make the source public a few months after a company paid hundreds of thousands of dollars for full rights to it. True, being public under the GPL isn’t the same as having a royalty free license without the need to disclose the source, but I’m pretty sure there would be some hard feelings.

 

Previous source code releases were held up until the last commercial license of the technology shipped, but with the evolving nature of game engines today, it is a lot less clear. There are still bits of early Quake code in Half Life 2, and the remaining licensees of Q3 technology intend to continue their internal developments along similar lines, so there probably won’t be nearly as sharp a cutoff as before. I am still committed to making as much source public as I can, and I won’t wait until the titles from the latest deal have actually shipped, but it is still going to be a little while before I feel comfortable doing the release.

[bjornk]

They don't use the gamebryo engine anymore, though. Sure, the creation engine is just a heavily modified version of gamebryo, but if they have the right to do that and declare that engine as something they own, well. That speaks for itself I think.

I don't know anything about Bethesda's engine licensing deals, but just by inspecting Skyrim's executable a little bit, I can easily tell that what they call the "Creation Engine" is nothing but a modified Gamebryo/NetImmerse. They obviously licensed it with the full source code, which is a licensing option. I wouldn't jump to conclusions just because they call the modified version as something else, and I certainly wouldn't say that "they don't use Gamebryo anymore", as if they have switched to a completely new engine, as some of the core parts of their engine still use NetImmerse technology (which I'm sure require licensing).

[GrimReaper]

I doubt that you can buy a license for the UE4 engine and call it whatever you want, though. There's also no mention of the gamebryo engine in Skyrim's / FO4's credits, something which is required (I think) if you just buy the license to use an engine to make your game. Even if it is technically a modified version of gamebryo, from a legal point of view it seems that the creation engine is something that belongs to bethesda and not gamebase.

 

I don't think it's impossible to make a deal where you can buy the right to own your in-house modification, even if it started as the original engine at one point. Like I said, Infinity Ward and Valve did similar things and you can probably find remnants of the original quake engines in both GoldSource and IW engine but I doubt that id software is the legal owner.

[Benmc20]

Some ressearchs :

 

Gamebryo : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamebryo

 

Creation Engine : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creation_Engine

 

The Creation Engine is an in-house engine created by Bethesda Game Studios (XnGine being the previous in-house engine by Bethesda). After using Gamebryo to create The Elder Scrolls III: Morrowind, The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion, and Fallout 3, Bethesda decided that Gamebryo's graphics were becoming too outdated and began work on Creation Engine for their next game, The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim. The Creation Engine offers basic real-time shadows and more detail to distant objects. The updated version of the Creation Engine, that is powering Bethesda's Fallout 4, offers physically-based rendering,[1] dynamic volumetric lighting, and more advanced character generation.[2]

And another interresting link : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XnGine

[bjornk]

Skyrim uses NIF (NetImmerse File) files which is a propriety file format of NetImmerse/Gamebryo and you'd quite possibly need a license just to use it in your game. Skyrim also uses other NetImmerse libraries, for example...

C:\_Skyrim\Code\TESV\Gamebryo\CoreLibs\NiAnimation\NiBlendTransformInterpolator.cpp

which would most certainly require some sort of a license to redistribute. (Open the TESV.EXE file in a HEX editor and search for Gamebryo if you don't believe me).

 

I don't know what sort of a licensing deal they have, but I'm sure they can call their modified version whatever they want, as long as they don't resell its license to 3rd parties. Of course, they might have bought the entire source code or part of it to use in their own engine, but then why was there a license deal in the first place?

 

 

 

 

 

[Kendo 2]

That 'radiant AI' they talk about is patrol packages, sandboxes and idle/furniture markers.  They've been doing that since Oblivion.  NPCs reacting to player actions; same thing.  Been happening since 2006.

 

But all of this is irrelevant since Bethesda is very far away from releasing a game that can compete with other modern games on a technical level.  Again, Bethesda admits it.

[GrimReaper]

Well, I don't know why Bethesda has this or that licensing deal or not, because I have no insight in the inner workings of that company. It just seems to me that the creation engine is legally speaking not the same as the gamebryo engine and that it would seem that they don't need the standard gamebryo license to make games with the creation engine, which looks to me as something that Bethesda owns despite it being a modified gamebryo engine. There's a lot of maybe and if involved and unless someone knows what Bethesda does behind the scenes, it is pretty much just speculation.

 

Maybe they own just the part of the engine they themselves have created, maybe they have a deal where they can advertise it as their own engine despite it still belonging to the folks that own gamebryo, maybe they bought full rights except them being able to license the creation engine to other companies.

[Kendo 2]

Doesn't matter.  Bethesda is being forced into the current decade technology-wise to compete in the market.  No license, modified engine they don't have the rights to, 'we don't have the technology' all have the same result; a new and modern Bethesda release is years away..maybe several.  That was the point of my original post.

[ousnius]

For once, I agree with Kendo 2. Who would have thought.

 

Bethesda is working on "multiple titles" now, because if they were working on only TES 6 now (which will most likely require a new or HEAVILY modified engine), then they would have no new game release for the next half of a decade.

 

So they need to work on multiple things simultaneously now. Including smaller things.

[bjornk]

Whatever. There's something fundamentally wrong about Bethesda's handling of Fallout, no engine can fix that. I still have a little bit of hope for TES6 though, but if they replace Jeremy Soule with somebody else, fuck that game too...

[Slammer64]

Amen Bjornk, my favorite composer.