I like DA:I. I've played it a lot and hardly run into any bugs. Occasionally there are small glitches. It's waaaaaaaaaay less buggy then DA:Origins or DA:2. So I'd argue that in DA:I's case, the Frostbite engine was a major boon. Though apparently they did have to do a lot of rework to the Frostbite engine to make it so.Something Amyss said:
That. Some small studios like Guerilla Games took their killzone engine and rewrote it to give us Horizon Zero Dawn. It's possible to make amazing improvements to the same engine. Bethesda has way more money, yet they choose not to improve* their engine. They choose not to fix the bugs. *Well, they do improve it, but not that much.Wings012 said:
Apparently part of the problem was being forced to use Frostbite despite not really being cut out for the type of game Andromeda is. Though apparently the other part of the problem is they spent the first half of development time trying to do the same thing No Mans Sky also failed to do and then having to use the 2nd half making the game there is now.skywolfblue said:
The problem with Fallout 76, I think, is not that the Creation Engine is terribad and must go die in a fire. The problem is that Fallout 76 is trying to do stuff with it that it really wasn't meant to do. As Shamus Young notes (see Drathnoxis post) the Creation engine is capable of handling, compiling and saving some really advanced world states. The fact that it can remember the state of the last dozen or so instances you've been in (and remember all your changes to the important ones) and can recall that basically every time you load your game is impressive in itself. But that kind of impressive probably requires some really nifty memory usage solutions to not have every game be Skyrim on PS3 on release, and those solutions are probably not gonna go down so well in an MMO where the game has to remember all of the world, all of the time.erttheking said: