Jump to content

Fallout 4 bad engine? Why Bethesda?

spiralfuzion

I know I'm a bit late to the party but I played fallout 4 for the first time. This is due to the major backlash and horrendous issues with the game in ways only writing a book could have you understand if you haven't played it for yourself. I've only played a few hours of the game and have maxed out the graphics in 1080p, 1440p and 4k (almost). Why is it that the games graphical fidelity is lackluster and decent at best? It seems that the engine may be old? I feel like with the cards that I've tested (Rx 480, fury, Gtx 1070, Gtx 1080) It feels like the cards are doing worse than they should.  I've made sure the test benches are fine and there is no thermal issues or bottle necks of any kind but for some reason the game just doesn't look that good. Maybe it's me? I just feel like something is holding the game/cards back and just makes the game looks god awful. Even at 1080p high settings I see jaggies out the ass and even when putting everything on ultra @1080p (God rays turned off) it still looks terrible. It feels mushy and like someone smeared Vaseline on the screen. It could be the style of the game but I have a rather unanimous consensus from my circle of friends that have played the title. I'm assuming it's an old engine (Which if it is shame on Bethesda) Honestly the game wasn't worth my money and will return the game asap. What do you guys think? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Because the engine is old.

 

 

i7-6700k  Cooling: Deepcool Captain 240EX White GPU: GTX 1080Ti EVGA FTW3 Mobo: AsRock Z170 Extreme4 Case: Phanteks P400s TG Special Black/White PSU: EVGA 850w GQ Ram: 64GB (3200Mhz 16x4 Corsair Vengeance RGB) Storage 1x 1TB Seagate Barracuda 240GBSandisk SSDPlus, 480GB OCZ Trion 150, 1TB Crucial NVMe
(Rest of Specs on Profile)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, DarkBlade2117 said:

Because the engine is old.

dang thats a shame. I saw the trailers knowing the game wouldn't look the exact same but it was such a let down to see such a hyped game be reduced to a Vaseline smeared rpg.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, spiralfuzion said:

dang thats a shame. I saw the trailers knowing the game wouldn't look the exact same but it was such a let down to see such a hyped game be reduced to a Vaseline smeared rpg.  

Same issue with GTA IV that will actually run worse on Maxwell and Pascal cards, old engine with no compatibility path.

Personal Desktop":

CPU: Intel Core i7 10700K @5ghz |~| Cooling: bq! Dark Rock Pro 4 |~| MOBO: Gigabyte Z490UD ATX|~| RAM: 16gb DDR4 3333mhzCL16 G.Skill Trident Z |~| GPU: RX 6900XT Sapphire Nitro+ |~| PSU: Corsair TX650M 80Plus Gold |~| Boot:  SSD WD Green M.2 2280 240GB |~| Storage: 1x3TB HDD 7200rpm Seagate Barracuda + SanDisk Ultra 3D 1TB |~| Case: Fractal Design Meshify C Mini |~| Display: Toshiba UL7A 4K/60hz |~| OS: Windows 10 Pro.

Luna, the temporary Desktop:

CPU: AMD R9 7950XT  |~| Cooling: bq! Dark Rock 4 Pro |~| MOBO: Gigabyte Aorus Master |~| RAM: 32G Kingston HyperX |~| GPU: AMD Radeon RX 7900XTX (Reference) |~| PSU: Corsair HX1000 80+ Platinum |~| Windows Boot Drive: 2x 512GB (1TB total) Plextor SATA SSD (RAID0 volume) |~| Linux Boot Drive: 500GB Kingston A2000 |~| Storage: 4TB WD Black HDD |~| Case: Cooler Master Silencio S600 |~| Display 1 (leftmost): Eizo (unknown model) 1920x1080 IPS @ 60Hz|~| Display 2 (center): BenQ ZOWIE XL2540 1920x1080 TN @ 240Hz |~| Display 3 (rightmost): Wacom Cintiq Pro 24 3840x2160 IPS @ 60Hz 10-bit |~| OS: Windows 10 Pro (games / art) + Linux (distro: NixOS; programming and daily driver)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

also the game file is so huge. I'm not sure how compression could fit into this but why is the game so big if the game looks terrible? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Princess Cadence said:

Same issue with GTA IV that will actually run worse on Maxwell and Pascal cards, old engine with no compatibility path.

It's not even the performance I'm worried about it's more of the actual game looks like crap. I've tried many panels even to go as far to travel to my friends house with better displays but yield the same result. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, spiralfuzion said:

It's not even the performance I'm worried about it's more of the actual game looks like crap. I've tried many panels even to go as far to travel to my friends house with better displays but yield the same result. 

Well not much you can do mate, unless you are too into slow paced RPG I could recommend you to play Metro, I find it a much more pleasing apocalyptic game [:

Personal Desktop":

CPU: Intel Core i7 10700K @5ghz |~| Cooling: bq! Dark Rock Pro 4 |~| MOBO: Gigabyte Z490UD ATX|~| RAM: 16gb DDR4 3333mhzCL16 G.Skill Trident Z |~| GPU: RX 6900XT Sapphire Nitro+ |~| PSU: Corsair TX650M 80Plus Gold |~| Boot:  SSD WD Green M.2 2280 240GB |~| Storage: 1x3TB HDD 7200rpm Seagate Barracuda + SanDisk Ultra 3D 1TB |~| Case: Fractal Design Meshify C Mini |~| Display: Toshiba UL7A 4K/60hz |~| OS: Windows 10 Pro.

Luna, the temporary Desktop:

CPU: AMD R9 7950XT  |~| Cooling: bq! Dark Rock 4 Pro |~| MOBO: Gigabyte Aorus Master |~| RAM: 32G Kingston HyperX |~| GPU: AMD Radeon RX 7900XTX (Reference) |~| PSU: Corsair HX1000 80+ Platinum |~| Windows Boot Drive: 2x 512GB (1TB total) Plextor SATA SSD (RAID0 volume) |~| Linux Boot Drive: 500GB Kingston A2000 |~| Storage: 4TB WD Black HDD |~| Case: Cooler Master Silencio S600 |~| Display 1 (leftmost): Eizo (unknown model) 1920x1080 IPS @ 60Hz|~| Display 2 (center): BenQ ZOWIE XL2540 1920x1080 TN @ 240Hz |~| Display 3 (rightmost): Wacom Cintiq Pro 24 3840x2160 IPS @ 60Hz 10-bit |~| OS: Windows 10 Pro (games / art) + Linux (distro: NixOS; programming and daily driver)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, spiralfuzion said:

It's not even the performance I'm worried about it's more of the actual game looks like crap. I've tried many panels even to go as far to travel to my friends house with better displays but yield the same result. 

Modding.

My life

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Princess Cadence said:

Well not much you can do mate, unless you are too into slow paced RPG I could recommend you to play Metro, I find it a much more pleasing apocalyptic game [:

I've played the metro games and the stalker games. Honestly the stalker games have better graphical fidelity (to me at least) and feels more atmospheric. I prefer them over all of the fallout games for that very reason. But now that you mention It I should play through the metro games once again.  But it's so sad Fallout 4 had so much going for it. Especially the opening I really enjoyed the home life turned disaster approach pov. Ah I guess i'll wait for the next game. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Himommies said:

Modding.

that's the thing. I shouldn't have to mod a game recently released so that It won't bother me while playing the game. Also adding extra elements to a game and on an engine like the ones Bethesda use is nonsense and continuously eat up resources the more you add. I have modded the game extensively to make it more enjoyable. But when my gtx 1070 and 1080 are struggling that's when you know modding isn't the issue.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Games like this are CPU intensive, wouldn't matter how many cards you tried if the CPU wasn't up to scratch. I find that I get 1080p 60fps anywhere in the game with just a 980 ti. Haven't tried the texture pack, series tend to of got more boring with each release after 3

 

  • Laptop: MSI GF65 + 16GB + 1.2TB + 2060 GTX + i7 9750H Display: 24" LG Ultra Gear 144hz Keyboard: Logitech G213 Mouse: Corsair Harpoon Sound Card: Traktor Kontrol S2 MK2 Speakers: Behringer CR4-X Other: Gaomon Graphics Tablet COOLING: Thermaltake Massive S14 Laptop Cooler

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, sgtsmokey said:

Games like this are CPU intensive, wouldn't matter how many cards you tried if the CPU wasn't up to scratch. I find that I get 1080p 60fps anywhere in the game with just a 980 ti. Haven't tried the texture pack, series tend to of got more boring with each release after 3

It's not really the performance and more of the actual textures being produced that bother me. It just doesn't satisfy me. I think the part that really bothers me is that the game is relatively new and is being outperformed by games almost a decade ago. I also monitored the cpu usage and had loads of headroom so that wasn't the issue. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Jorgen297 said:

It's bad because they can just put "Fallout", "Bethesda" and a picture of Vault Boy on the cover and people will eat it up regardless of how bad the game is. 

I do strongly agree with this point. I'm not going to generalize most people but having my friend hype me so much to see the game turn to this is very disappointing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, huilun02 said:

Its Bethesda. They pretty much reuse the same old engine, modified to run new assets on new OS/hardware without breaking apart.

On the other hand we got games like BF1 which is optimised to the sun and back and looks/runs stellar with 64player mayhem on both PC and console.

BF1 looks amazing. Honestly the frostbite engine is a beautiful thing for fps games such as battlefield. I actually had never played a battlefield game and decided that bad company 2 would be my first. I was blown away from a game released in 2010 playing it in 2017. Great job from EA/dice honestly.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wouldn't a game that came out a decade ago use less resources than a game that came out today. Which would of also been designed for a GPU that runs probably around 50% slower than a modern card :). Therefore every game that came out a decade ago, badly optimized or not, should run reasonably well. Badly optimized games like Assassins Creed Black Flag run at 144fps on my 980 ti, but when it cam out it couldn't reach 30 fps on my 780. This game only came out in 2013. I would expect games that are badly optimized from 10 years ago to run at 8k now

In fact Fallout 3 run at about 40 fps on my BFG 8800 GTX when it came out, crashed every five minutes and corrupted saves as it crashed going through doors. it has never got worst, because it has never been good lol

 

  • Laptop: MSI GF65 + 16GB + 1.2TB + 2060 GTX + i7 9750H Display: 24" LG Ultra Gear 144hz Keyboard: Logitech G213 Mouse: Corsair Harpoon Sound Card: Traktor Kontrol S2 MK2 Speakers: Behringer CR4-X Other: Gaomon Graphics Tablet COOLING: Thermaltake Massive S14 Laptop Cooler

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, spiralfuzion said:

It's not even the performance I'm worried about it's more of the actual game looks like crap. I've tried many panels even to go as far to travel to my friends house with better displays but yield the same result. 

if you're crying about the looks of the game, why not the HD Texture pack? it's bethesda, if you want to mod it go to nexus and download some nice graphics mods. You can't expect bethesda to create great looking games when they have such a major modding community, it's too little profit.

Spoiler

CPU: R5 1600 @ 4.2 GHz; GPU: Asus STRIX & Gigabyte g1 GTX 1070 SLI; RAM: 16 GB Corsair vengeance 3200 MHz ; Mobo: Asrock Taichi x470; SSD: 512 gb Samsung 950 Pro Storage: 5x Seagate 2TB drives; 1x 2TB WD PurplePSU: 700 Watt Huntkey; Peripherals: Acer S277HK 4K Monitor; Logitech G502 gaming mouse; Corsair K95 Mechanical keyboard; 5.1 Logitech x530 sound system

 01000010 01101001 01101110 01100001 01110010 01111001 00100000 01100100 01101111 01100101 01110011 01101110 00100111 01110100 00100000 01101101 01100001 01101011 01100101 00100000 01111001 01101111 01110101 00100000 01110000 01110010 01101111 00101110

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Cryptonite said:

if you're crying about the looks of the game, why not the HD Texture pack? it's bethesda, if you want to mod it go to nexus and download some nice graphics mods. You can't expect bethesda to create great looking games when they have such a major modding community, it's too little profit.

It's not necessarily crying more of surprise to see that the games graphical fidelity even with major modding isn't something to write home about. It's more I expect a little bit more from a game released near the end of 2015 to look more pleasing and run smoother even with some of the maxwell cards I posses. Once again I've modded the game extensively but don't get the pop I would have expected. I just would have like to see a little more thought put into the game when designing aesthetics and not have to mod my game which would add more resources which in terms kills performance. I do understand that most people don't posses rigs like mine and need to optimize the game for others. I think the conclusion is that the engine is old and overused that and combined with all of the various other issues with the game makes the game uninteresting and disappointing, 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, sgtsmokey said:

Wouldn't a game that came out a decade ago use less resources than a game that came out today. Which would of also been designed for a GPU that runs probably around 50% slower than a modern card :). Therefore every game that came out a decade ago, badly optimized or not, should run reasonably well. Badly optimized games like Assassins Creed Black Flag run at 144fps on my 980 ti, but when it cam out it couldn't reach 30 fps on my 780. This game only came out in 2013. I would expect games that are badly optimized from 10 years ago to run at 8k now

In fact Fallout 3 run at about 40 fps on my BFG 8800 GTX when it came out, crashed every five minutes and corrupted saves as it crashed going through doors. it has never got worst, because it has never been good lol

I'm quite contempt with the performance if only it looked as good as it should have. Should I purchase I do have a 970 and will see if the previous generation of cards makes a huge difference. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, huilun02 said:

And the Frosbite engine isn't just limited to Dice or the Battlefield franchise ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

Yeah running a high tick rate online game with 64 players on huge maps is totally not CPU intensive...

You realize almost every other triple A game has utter garbage optimization in comparison.

I do see that and am very impressed. i do see that the games/engine does incredibly well running a crossfire setup. I really appreciate that and it amazes me how well the games perform. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

The engine has always been bad. My most memorable bug in fallout 3 was the one that caused animals to fly through the air. Sometimes they would crash land and kill you. Sometimes an animal near you would get warped across the landscape. 

             ☼

ψ ︿_____︿_ψ_   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also it's not a Bethesda aesthetic only thing. When skyrim was released the game looked amazing for it's release and still does with the new relaunch of skyrim having more opportunity to mod the game and not tank the performance. Hell even basic skyrim with max graphics are more pleasing than fallout 4. It could just be the way the game was made but I don't find that to be the case. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, SCHISCHKA said:

The engine has always been bad. My most memorable bug in fallout 3 was the one that caused animals to fly through the air. Sometimes they would crash land and kill you. Sometimes an animal near you would get warped across the landscape. 

I don't know why but I laughed way harder than I should have and woke people up. I'm just imagining animals flying across the map with the intent to smash the everlasting shit out of you. Bwahahahaha!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Vanilla FO4 doesnt look that bad and you can mod the shit out of it. So....

CPU i7 6700k MB  MSI Z170A Pro Carbon GPU Zotac GTX980Ti amp!extreme RAM 16GB DDR4 Corsair Vengeance 3k CASE Corsair 760T PSU Corsair RM750i MOUSE Logitech G9x KB Logitech G910 HS Sennheiser GSP 500 SC Asus Xonar 7.1 MONITOR Acer Predator xb270hu Storage 1x1TB + 2x500GB Samsung 7200U/m - 2x500GB SSD Samsung 850EVO

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Praesi said:

Vanilla FO4 doesnt look that bad and you can mod the shit out of it. So....

Well I guess it's based on preference but the general consensus is that the graphics are far from good even with a decent amount of modding. I tried modding for hours to get some improvement but tanking performance. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, spiralfuzion said:

Well I guess it's based on preference but the general consensus is that the graphics are far from good even with a decent amount of modding. I tried modding for hours to get some improvement but tanking performance. 

There must be two different Fallout 4's than.

CPU i7 6700k MB  MSI Z170A Pro Carbon GPU Zotac GTX980Ti amp!extreme RAM 16GB DDR4 Corsair Vengeance 3k CASE Corsair 760T PSU Corsair RM750i MOUSE Logitech G9x KB Logitech G910 HS Sennheiser GSP 500 SC Asus Xonar 7.1 MONITOR Acer Predator xb270hu Storage 1x1TB + 2x500GB Samsung 7200U/m - 2x500GB SSD Samsung 850EVO

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×