Gamebryo isn't inherently bad.

When Bethesda announced Skyrim would use a new engine, many on the internet sounded relieved, associating the Gamebryo engine with the bugs encountered in Oblivion, Fallout 3, and New Vegas. I just want to clarify to these people that the Gamebryo engine is merely one of the many tools used to create a game and isn't necessarily an indicator of quality. It should be noted that the Gamebryo engine was also used to create Epic Mickey, Warhammer Online, and the lauded Civilization IV. 
 
Think of it this way: the Unreal Engine was used in making both Gears of War and Alpha Protocol. One was technically proficient; the other, not so much. 
 
Let's see less hate for the Gamebryo engine. It may not be its fault.

Noted to self: will not hate on machine code again.

It is not the Gamebryo engine's fault, it is how Bethesda uses and modifies it for their games that has caused the glitches, bugs, crashes, and thus made it unpopular with some people.

Gamebryo apologists? 
 
Man, people will argue anything.

I suspected Civ IV would be brought up. As I've said many times, it's not my favourite Civ game, but you're right, from a technical standpoint it, along with several other Gamebryo titles is perfectly acceptable. The problem is Bethesda has been recycling a lot of buggy in house code since Morrowind.

" Gamebryo apologists?  Man, people will argue anything. "

I think it's more the fact that Bethesda insists on using it even though they always do a terrible job that makes people complain.

I've been saying this for ages, whenever the Gamebryo engine gets bashed. Gamebryo is a decent engine. It's Bethesda's implementation of the Gamebryo engine that's absolutely terrible. Plenty of non-buggy games have been made using the engine by developers other than Bethesda. Bethesda have ruined a perfectly good engine's reputation, and they'll probably do that with the next engine they use too.

Civ 4? Really? I didn't know that, but yea, gamebryo can be fussy at times, but On pc anyways, it works fine. 

Good engine or not, it's been around long enough and seen its fair share of games. Time to move on to something new.

The unreal engine isnt really a great engine either.
 
But you are right, it's how its implemented and coded that matters. I am interested to see, though, if bethesda has learned anything or if they still release buggy code when they come out with the new stuff. I do know a lot of the reasons it was so buggy is because it was old code they never fully fixed properly. Will be interesting to see.

So what you're saying is that Bethesda is the one that sucks... Well, I already knew that.

The engine isn't bad, it's just old, plus Bethesda couldn't handle their own engine for some reason -_-

" There's a good reason it is now a dead engine, cause it was horrible. Have any of you ever tried using it? Some of the ways that engine does stuff and tries to make you do stuff is just utterly horrible. It seriously does have some messed up stuff going on. With some of the other engines, doing this stuff is way easier and so you're much more unlikely to end up with weird bugs and stuff, mainly cause the engine already does a lot of the work for you. "

I still hate the engine to this day.

Yeah, it just Bethesda who are really bad at making games that work. As I've said previously, remember Buggerfall?

Even if it is technically competent with other games, it was terrible in Fallout 3 and Fallout: New Vegas. Thus, we don't need another open-world game like those two to use it, because it will be terrible.

has their been any word if they are changing engine for fallout 4 

" @Shirogane: Out of curiosity, as someone who knows nothing about making games, how does that work? Like, what makes engines different? Is is just the code language or logic they use? And, on the topic, what makes engine have distinctive looks, like the plasticky Unreal look that it's often associated with?  I've always wondered about this.  "

" @HarlequinRiot said:

" @Shirogane: Out of curiosity, as someone who knows nothing about making games, how does that work? Like, what makes engines different? Is is just the code language or logic they use? And, on the topic, what makes engine have distinctive looks, like the plasticky Unreal look that it's often associated with?  I've always wondered about this.  "

I am by no means any sort of learned when it comes to this subject, but I would guess it has to do with the way they're coded, the assets the use, how it puts them to use, etc. "

" @Shirogane said:

" There's a good reason it is now a dead engine, cause it was horrible. Have any of you ever tried using it? Some of the ways that engine does stuff and tries to make you do stuff is just utterly horrible. It seriously does have some messed up stuff going on. With some of the other engines, doing this stuff is way easier and so you're much more unlikely to end up with weird bugs and stuff, mainly cause the engine already does a lot of the work for you. "

 it's not a dead engine. I was just used to make Epic Mickey. Modders love it. Emergent kept it pretty updated. Emergent  (and the Gamebryo tech  by extension) has already been sold via Gerbsman Partners liquidation to another company.  The "new" engine in Skyrim is probably "really" a modified Gamebryo derivative designed to have new features once you get past all the PR double talk.  "

Remember Gamebryo  for what it was supposed to be...

I just want a diagonal walking animation.

There has been no word about Fallout 4 that I know of, unless you are counting the MMO that Interplay is supposedly working on despite the lawsuit with Bethesda about alleged contract violations.