Gamebryo: From Catherine and beyond

#1 Edited by metalsnakezero (2342 posts) -

We all, well most of us to be precise, know that Elder scroll Oblivion and Fallout 3 & Vegas ran on Gamebryo and it was a mess. Now Atlus has it hands on it and from what I seen, from game footage and my first hands look on the demo, it was running beautifully. So what did Atlus do that Bethesda (And Obsidian for Vegas) didn't and are you happy to hear that this engine will be use in Atlus's future games? 
I say that if they are able to keep this engine up to quality like this then I'll be a happy person.

#2 Edited by FluxWaveZ (19383 posts) -

I don't know much about game engines and I don't really care, either. I'm not happy or mad that (whatever modified version of) Gamebryo will potentially be used in Atlus' future HD console games. If it means that an eventual Persona 5 and SMT5 look as good as Catherine, then I'm all for it.

#3 Posted by yami4ct (156 posts) -

Plenty of games use Gamebryo and aren't super glitchy like Fallout or Oblivion. It's just a matter of what Bethesda vs what atlus are asking the engine to do. Fallout and Oblivion both have massive worlds being streamed in with little to no load screens. Catherine is a much smaller game with a handful of environments and loads in between. It's more that Bethesda picked the wrong engine for the task than the engine itself being the problem.

#4 Posted by DonutFever (3536 posts) -
@FluxWaveZ said:
I don't know much about game engines and I don't really care, either. I'm not happy or mad that Gamebryo will potentially be used in Atlus' future HD console games. If it means that an eventual Persona 5 and SMT5 look as good as Catherine, then I'm all for it.
Pretty much this.
#5 Posted by WatanabeKazuma (989 posts) -
@DonutFever said:
@FluxWaveZ said:
I don't know much about game engines and I don't really care, either. I'm not happy or mad that Gamebryo will potentially be used in Atlus' future HD console games. If it means that an eventual Persona 5 and SMT5 look as good as Catherine, then I'm all for it.
Pretty much this.
Yep, a strong art direction is the main thing for me in regards to how a game looks. 
 
The very same thing can be said for Fallout 3 & NV though and they have horrible problems besides their looks, but I think that's more due to the nature of the games we're talking about. I can't imagine that all the unique instances and triggers within those games lend themselves well to the engine. Which is why in the case of Atlus it doesn't bother me too much, I can't see any of those games having huge open worlds. In fact I would not be too bothered if Persona 5 was mostly navigated through snappy menus and an over-world of sorts. I know, some people will balk at such an idea but a lot of 'wasted' time was trimmed in Persona 3 portable where you never really achieved much in the console version.
#6 Posted by Dany (7887 posts) -

Catherine is not made by Obsidian and is not an open world game so we can be assured that the game has some level of quality to it.

#7 Posted by MistaSparkle (2148 posts) -

Catherine horse armor DLC confirmed??

#8 Edited by MikkaQ (10344 posts) -

Well Bethesda have been asking a lot more out of that engine than pretty much any other developer. They make a habit of pushing that old engine to the limit.

#9 Posted by DetectiveSpecial (464 posts) -

When Todd Howard was discussing Skyrim, he mentioned that the Gamebryo engine was merely the rendering device for the Fallout games, and that Bethesda had done the majority of the coding on the engine running the game processes.  
So while everyone was giving the Gamebryo engine shit (myself included), it really had more to do with Bethesda.  
I thought the demo for Catherine ran very well, so maybe Gamebryo isn't as bad as we thought.

#10 Posted by FluxWaveZ (19383 posts) -
@WatanabeKazuma said:
In fact I would not be too bothered if Persona 5 was mostly navigated through snappy menus and an over-world of sorts. I know, some people will balk at such an idea but a lot of 'wasted' time was trimmed in Persona 3 portable where you never really achieved much in the console version.
I'm one of those who would balk at such an idea. Navigating the world in real time in both Persona 3 and Persona 4 was an important, immersive aspect for me and I consider P3P to be crap (even though I haven't played it) just because the game's presentation took so many hits in its portable port.
#11 Posted by Brackynews (4094 posts) -

I admit I've had some fun harping on Gamebryo, but several good games have been crafted using it, and as has already been mentioned the worst of the glitches are more tied to a developer's use of the engine. Anyone can pick up a tool and break it in new and creative ways. (hm, did I mean to say break it, or break it in? eh...)

@WatanabeKazuma said:

I know, some people will balk at such an idea but a lot of 'wasted' time was trimmed in Persona 3 portable where you never really achieved much in the console version.

I balk at this idea every time I need to go from the Dorm to the Map to the Mall to the Alley to the Velvet Room, back to the Alley, back to the Map, back to the Dorm entrance, and back into the Dorm. I CAN SEE there are two more doors covered in tarp, Igor, WTF can't you build one outside my bedroom??? aaaaauuuggghh

My point being: there's a difference between gaining intrinsic benefits from an overhauled navigation system, versus design decisions that are actually smart and efficient to save the player needless effort. One could also argue that RPGs appeal because of needless efforts. :)

#12 Posted by TehFlan (1928 posts) -

Yo, I like video games.

#13 Posted by DonutFever (3536 posts) -
@FluxWaveZ said:
@WatanabeKazuma said:
In fact I would not be too bothered if Persona 5 was mostly navigated through snappy menus and an over-world of sorts. I know, some people will balk at such an idea but a lot of 'wasted' time was trimmed in Persona 3 portable where you never really achieved much in the console version.
I'm one of those who would balk at such an idea. Navigating the world in real time in both Persona 3 and Persona 4 was an important, immersive aspect for me and I consider P3P to be crap (even though I haven't played it) just because the game's presentation took so many hits in its portable port.
I can see a middle ground, where you can still move around the environment, but there's a sort of "fast travel". It's a weird thing to say about a game like Persona, since the areas are comparatively small.
#14 Edited by Gamer_152 (14109 posts) -

I've been really tired of the bashing of Gamebryo, I can't speak to the quality of the engine myself, maybe it has some issues, maybe it doesn't, I don't know enough about its internal workings to really say, but a lot of people have been heavily criticising it without having any idea what they're talking about. It seems that when something goes wrong with a game a lot of people are willing to make certain assumptions about problems in the development process or tech, even when we don't have insight into that sort of thing or the person knows nothing about games development themselves. Yes, Bethesda have made a few somewhat recent games that have run on Gamebryo and those games have had a lot of technical faults, but people didn't start questioning whether Bethesda wasn't being given enough development time, whether there were flaws in their development process, whether the tech they'd built on top of Gamebryo was fundamentally bad or even if they had subpar programmers, everyone just jumped on the "Gamebryo sucks" bandwagon because it was the easiest thing to blame, even if they didn't have the most basic idea of how a video game runs or a fair sample of games that use Gamebryo.

Moderator
#15 Posted by buzz_killington (3532 posts) -

As far as I know (which is to say very little), Gamebryo is not a complete game engine like, say Unreal with scripting features and such. It's just a renderer, and the busted things about Fallout and Oblivion and Persona were not really because of Gamebryo itself, because it's just a graphics renderer.

#16 Posted by mutha3 (4986 posts) -
@WatanabeKazuma said:
In fact I would not be too bothered if Persona 5 was mostly navigated through snappy menus and an over-world of sorts. I know, some people will balk at such an idea but a lot of 'wasted' time was trimmed in Persona 3 portable where you never really achieved much in the console version.
I gotta side with FluxwaveZ on this. The towns in P3/4 helped a great deal in establishing the feel and the aesthetic of their respective games. It also created a sense of familiarity and attachment to the places.
 
In the original P3, that attachment turned into sheer, utter hate, though.Because of the lack of a fast-travel option and the maps being fairly big. P4 struck a nice balance. The areas are well designed and immersive, but you don't need to spend 15 minutes everyday(ingame) to get around. If P5 doesn't have a real town attached to it, that would be a massive bummer. It already sucked that P3P was basically a visual novel, but at least you had the image of the town from the PS2 title in your head when they went to these locations. 
 
I'm with ya on a open world being tremendously stupid in a Persona game, though. Would even outdo La Noire's overworld.
 
@buzz_killington said:
As far as I know (which is to say very little), Gamebryo is not a complete game engine like, say Unreal with scripting features and such. It's just a renderer, and the busted things about Fallout and Oblivion and Persona were not really because of Gamebryo itself, because it's just a graphics renderer.

Persona games didn't use Gamebryo. And, uh, there was absolutely nothing busted about them.
#17 Edited by MattyFTM (14431 posts) -

Gamebryo is a fine engine. Plenty of good, non-glitchy games have been made with it. The best example I can think of from the top of my head is Civilization IV. That was a Gamebryo game. The issue with Fallout & Oblivion were because of Bethesda's shoddy implementation of the engine, not the engine itself.

Moderator
#18 Posted by WatanabeKazuma (989 posts) -
@mutha3 said:
@WatanabeKazuma said:
In fact I would not be too bothered if Persona 5 was mostly navigated through snappy menus and an over-world of sorts. I know, some people will balk at such an idea but a lot of 'wasted' time was trimmed in Persona 3 portable where you never really achieved much in the console version.
I gotta side with FluxwaveZ on this. The towns in P3/4 helped a great deal in establishing the feel and the aesthetic of their respective games. It also created a sense of familiarity and attachment to the places.
 
In the original P3, that attachment turned into sheer, utter hate, though.Because of the lack of a fast-travel option and the maps being fairly big. P4 struck a nice balance. The areas are well designed and immersive, but you don't need to spend 15 minutes everyday(ingame) to get around. If P5 doesn't have a real town attached to it, that would be a massive bummer. It already sucked that P3P was basically a visual novel, but at least you had the image of the town from the PS2 title in your head when they went to these locations. 
 
I'm with ya on a open world being tremendously stupid in a Persona game, though. Would even outdo La Noire's overworld.
   
That too, P4 had the right balance which I completely forgot to mention to begin with. This is my recent P3 endgame hate spilling out.

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.