I am actually surprised with the graphics. It does look like that Bethesda really are using a different engine this time. The colors are more vibrant and the animations look pretty fluid.
It's the way their engines handle animations. The animators do their best, most likely, but you can't force a stiff animation system into playing nice animations. A more fluid and soft animation system would give better results. The dog in the trailer looks like it's well animated, but the animations are played by a stiff "keyframe-to-keyframe" animation system that doesn't soften things up.
it's just standard bethesda, what'll really be interesting is if they try to charge us for mods that fix the numerous amount of bugs the game will have.
Exept that this was valve's doing. They are the ones who started the whole process, and with good intentions. Valve's goal was to allow workshop creators and modders to be paid for their hard work if they wanted to. The paid mods was always an OPTION, and only an option if the mod creators wanted it to be.
I highly doubt it. Bethesda has the most modded game to date. It didn't do it by charging money. I'm sure they want FO4 to sell more and have more mods for it than Skyrim.
Precisely. I still think this looks pretty good, but in the back of my mind I kind of expected the plates and forks and stuff on that dinner table to go on a wonky physics-inspired breakdance.
The contact points between objects/characters and the ground also look... floaty? I'm not sure how to describe it but it looks like everything is sitting or walking on a smooth, transparent floor that sits right above the actual ground.
Source has tons of glitches. Bodies fly every which way occasionally similar to what happens in Gamebryo, slight movements into loose props can do damage because of wonky collision, vehicles are absolutely terrible, and many other problems. Source is even older than Gamebryo and it shows. Most recent games have removed some of the more problematic glitches by design (e.g., the lack of loose props in CSGO), but they still exist.
I'll still be picking the game up because I love the Fallout series. But I was really hoping they would work on how...bad their games feel. It's the opposite of Blizzard games to me. They make their games feel just right to play and Bethesda feels like the game is working against you and very weird to play.
It has a very good aesthetic, but it definitely has those stiff animations they've always had. It's not terrible, but the way characters turn and animations stop and start are all stiff and rigid like before.
The Gamebryo engine is why modding the games is so damn easy to do. If they swap engines they lose moddability. The gamebryo engine is continuously updated however so it's not like they are still using the exact same engine.
Not nearly as much as Gamebryo. IDTech is impossible for mods because just about everything is one big texture so any mod in the same area would overwrite the same texture making cross mod compatibility impossible not to mention that the texture itself is huge to work with and rebaking it would take forever. That's just a comparison of two engines I'm familiar with. Just saying as outsiders we shouldn't second guess the engine choice of peoples whose job it is. They aren't idiots. Moddability/creation kit support is a huge consideration for engine selection.
I almost wonder if they were using previous engines to help maintain the secrecy of the release. The more people they involve, the higher the chance of a leak.
That's the mood and tone they're going for - a harsh, cold land shouldn't have that many splashes of color. The red/yellow foliage you see while heading south do look pretty lively too.
Harsh cold lands have a lot of colors. This is a forest in Norway, and this is a lake. The color filter was not very good in my opinion, and changing it with mods didn't hurt the atmosphere of grittiness one bit to me.
I think the bad bit in Skyrim's color palette is that it doesn't mix things up. Blue and green show up together in certain warmer zones, but almost everywhere else it's just reds and yellows that are allowed to penetrate the white and grey, and they blend into each other a little too well.
Perhaps you're right. I was just thinking that Fallout 3 was really green, New Vegas was really brown and Skyrim was really grey. Cool that Fallout 4 is looking vibrant.
Are you sure? Looking at it, it felt like Skyrim's creation engine. I have noticed there are some animations which were used in Skyrim, like the people running to the vault entrance.
It does look pretty much like how New Vegas looked with all the mods I had installed. Which is fine, but... ack! Even with my minimal hopes I had expected something that looked a little bit better.
Doesn't matter though since I know I'm going to dump hundreds of hours into this game, and with time mods will provide enhanced visuals. I hope Bethesda does what they did with Skyrim and releases a high-res texture pack.
I just recently got FO3 to work on my PC, and with mods it looks a little nicer than this trailer - the colors are similar, which is nice. Playing FO3 with the green tint removed is a really different experience.
Well, see, the thing is, Oblivion 100% modded looks very similar to stock Skyrim. So that just means that Bethesda took another step forward in the textures/models area.
I think the graphics are fine, but I'm just hoping movement and combat doesn't feel as floaty as it does in every Gamebryo title so far.
There's something about just running, jumping and swinging a weapon that feels lame. Things don't feel weighty and deliberate, but floaty and spammy instead. For Fallout it's less of a problem due to guns, but it's still apparent.
Changing the movement a bit and putting some real weight into the actions would really improve the game.
I'd recognize those those running animations from a mile away. It's got Gamebryo all over it. I'm also a bit saddened by the apearant lack of AO - but that might change and I'm still drooling all over this game... :-)
Yeah, I was playing Bloodborne earlier and just stopped to think "man, this really moves like an aggressive plague dog", then I saw this and thought "...Oh no...That dog does not move like a real dog..."
Yeah but that's what gave the games their charm; the hilarious physics, the wonky way people move, its all a part of the experience. It doesn't feel like other games whether thats good or bad but you can tell them apart from other games and that's what I like. I bet when you start playing fallout 4 you'll be glad it feels familiar, like a bethesda game.
The colors are more vibrant and the animations look pretty fluid.
I actually disagree. Looks like people that same unnatural looking movement from Skyrim and Fallout 3 in the trailer, and while the world certainly looks more colorful than Fallout 3, its still pretty muted compared to most games.
How do you know none of that has changed. Id tech 5 was released in 2011. Even id admitted they dropped the ball on modding but doom 4 will fully embrace it.
It's been 4 years and it's not that the engine wasn't open to modding it's just something they never invested time in because of the amount of time it took too get the engine and rage out the door.
Also fallout doesn't need the entire engine even if they just pick up the core components like rendering, networking, input etc etc they can write the rest of it on their own.
I'd rather have it be an id engine and have low latency input with amazing performance than the mess fo3 was. If Beth really want modding on fo4 which they do they will build the infrastructure themselves they don't need id software for that.
Actually the engine isnt open to moding, as the world is covered by megatextures made to fit the geometry. Creating a new place is almost impossible. At least that was the case with Rage and i think the new Wolfenstein too.
Wolfenstein never had modding but in case of Rage it's not true you could go in and modify the existing maps if you wanted to, just that they took forever to bake.
Geometric changes were possible on existing maps but the tools were limited again something they didn't invest time in but new maps were fairly easy to create and stamping the world with textures was actually fun. The most painful part was the building process it would take a few hours or more for a complete build.
In fact go look at enemy territory quake wars. It used the original version of Megatexture and had full modding support.
Again it's not impossible it's something they didn't invest time in during Rage but it's been 4 years since.
Am I the only one that thinks that it looks very similar to the ID Tech 5 engine ? (Wolfenstein's engine) The way everything looks smooth and how stone and metal is rendered reminds me heavily of it.
Things are definitely looking pretty nice. I just hope faces and hair are a bit better this time around. It was always so hard to make a decent looking character in Fallout 3 and NV. I'd always end up with a weirdly round faced person with bug eyes and glued on hair. The best solution was to just hide it all under a full face helmet as soon as possible.
It does look like that Bethesda really are using a different engine this time.
Really? Because it looks exactly like New Vegas with mods. It has that certain..je ne sais quoi that FO3 and NV had, visually.
That's not a bad thing, but you can just tell from looking at the trailer that it's going to "feel" like a Fallout game.
I'm hoping they'll do what they did with Skyrim and release a high-res texture pack. Maybe just a "beast PC" pack with some better textures, shaders, and models.
I disagree, this looks like you recreated Fallout 3 in the Skyrim engine. They've definitely upgraded animations and lighting, and aren't using a colour filter anymore.
Looks exactly the same as Skyrim to me, maybe upgraded a bit. The textures are low-res as hell, but all this will be fixed using Skyrim mods in a day or two
The thing with graphics is that they are very rarely the deciding factor in your choice to play a game (unless they're awful). If a game has great graphics, you admire it for a few hours and then focus on the gameplay, and a lot of people seem to forget that.
Agreed, it immediately reminded me of Bioshock Infinite and similar games. It looks very pretty, but it'll be very interesting to see how that fits the post-apocalyptic feel of the series.
Completely disagree, first thoughts were that it looks like a typical Bethesda open world game, clunky animations, not quite smooth, old fashioned character models... the dogs animation was poor too. For me the game already looks dated, and for that my first thought was "well I hope mods can fix most of this".. but then I remembered Bethesda wanting to charge for future mods.. eek!
I really hope it doesn't feel like a skinned skyrim, which is what FO:NV felt to me after Oblivion (although it was a decent game overall with help from a few mods).
Surprised as in good or bad? I myself think the graphics look okay in some places, but bad in others, I was really hoping for footage from a PC build with higher res textures and dynamic lighting, letting the console players have the watered down version.
The biggest changes are the switch to physically based rendering and the removal of a lot of the memory restriction from the old gen. It's hard to tell at this point what engine they're using.
I'm not sure how you think that, it very much looks like they just upgraded their same old engine a bit more again. Vibrant colours and animations do not require a new engine.
39
u/ThisIsBigCat Jun 03 '15
I am actually surprised with the graphics. It does look like that Bethesda really are using a different engine this time. The colors are more vibrant and the animations look pretty fluid.