161
Starfield has housing system, player jail, and more reveals Bethesda in new Q&A (www.eurogamer.net)
submitted 3 years ago by [M] to c/gaming@beehaw.org
119 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 3 points 3 years ago (8 children)

Given that its the same engine over and over and over again; I don't think they put that much work into making it extensible anymore. "It just works."

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 3 years ago (7 children)

    Everyone uses the same engine over and over. Starting from scratch instead of iterating on your previous engine is the exception, not the norm.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago (6 children)

    Sure but I wouldn't call

    making their games as extensible as possible

    hard work since it has always been like that.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 3 years ago (5 children)

    It absolutely is.

    If you don't make extensibility a core philosophy every step of the way, it disappears very quickly.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago (4 children)

    Bethesda would need to completely rework their tooling and engine to block out this core philosophy.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 3 years ago* (2 children)

    They are reworking their tooling and engine constantly.

    If they weren't making a deliberate point of making extensibility a priority, it would disappear on its own as development that didn't make it a focus left it behind. It doesn't just magically happen. It's because of good process.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago (1 child)

    We shall see with CreationEngine 2 if they would removed that facette. But I doubt it since its the essential core of that engine to be extensible.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago

    It's the core because they spend a sizable portion of their resources on making it that way. Every line of code that doesn't explicitly keep interoperability in mind is a line of code with the potential to catastrophically break it.

    It's not something you can do, then you have it. It's like exercise. The day you stop it starts to fall away.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent