The Controversy Over Bethesda's 'Game Engine' Is Misguided [Kotaku]

TheSyldat · Nov 14, 2018

xenocide said:
So here's the difference between Bethesda's engine and engines like Unity and Unreal: Bethesda isn't trying to sell their engine on the side as a core part of their business model. Companies like Crytek and Epic Games have a massive incentive to hype their engines because it not only sells he games they make—which double as sales pitches—but also drives other companies to invest in the engine itself creating a feedback loop. Gamebryo was actually licensed and used by other devs, and looking at the list of games made using it, the problem doesn't seem to be exclusively the engine. Games like Civ IV and Catherine didn't seem to suffer from using it.

I see I'm not the only one willing to point out non Bethesda games that were not plagued by immense bugginess thanks for the signal boost.

(heck in the case of Civ 4 their use of Gamebryo was so straight forward and tweaked so little of it , that linux gamers could launch it with wine fairly rapidly after release ... That's how solid that version of Civ was )

Vincent Grayson · Nov 14, 2018

MillionIII said:
Well they don't really make the same games as bethesda, but I do know that obsidian made a fallout game with it and it was a mess too.

I wonder if maybe it's the nature of the kind of games (open world, lots of AI and physics) and not the engine.

And by "I wonder" I mean: that's the issue. Bethesda games are the way they are because of what they're doing. It'd be interesting to see another developer do the same kind of game (and none have), and see if they fare any better. My guess - they wouldn't.

StuBurns · Nov 14, 2018

Dr Wily said:
Read what that quote actually says.
A blueprint has nothing to with construction, but is essential in allowing people to actually build a house.

Okay, but look what Bethesda call it...

'Seeing lots of speculation about #tesv game engine. It's brand new... and it's spectacular!'
https://twitter.com/bethesda/status/14010984884604929

Ichi · Nov 14, 2018

there was a post in here detailing some of the annoyances the game engine has for people who mod the game...I wouldn't call that misguided. Seems to have a lot of spaghetti in the code, or design decisions that seemed okay when they first built it but did not scale well and they just added feature on top of one another linking everything in a way that has a lot of dependencies.

Nanashrew · Nov 14, 2018

When I broke the news in June that Fallout 76 was an online survival game, one person familiar with its development told me that Bethesda's engineers had spent years adding multiplayer capabilities to the engine, which was a challenging and complicating endeavor that required rewriting a whole lot of code. On the outside, Fallout 76 might look similar to Fallout 4, but peeking into its guts would tell a different story. To say they use the same engine might technically be accurate, but it's misleading.

But this is very much the problem. The engine is Frankenstein's monster with things tacked on as they go that it has amassed technical debt, often tripping over itself. The engine was never designed for multiplayer in mind and it very much shows it.

Popetita · Nov 14, 2018

StuBurns said:
I would certainly agree with all of that post. With the exception that it kind of renders all criticism invalid, no?

Because it presumes that this is about a purchasing decision, I.E. I won't buy the next Elder Scrolls unless it doesn't have so and so issues that previous entries have had.

I see it more as shaping the hopes and expectations of a product. The same way we talk about games after the fact. I think the movement in RDR2 is clunky... Okay, that doesn't mean I can unbuy it, and I wouldn't even if I could. But it's still a criticism I believe to be valid. The difference being if voiced before hand, it's more likely to impact development.

Bethesda aren't going to throw away their core technology because we bitch about it, obviously, but if it even gets them to reevaluate a little aspects of it, and makes it even 1% better, that's a clear win.

I think my issue with the other side of the argument is that it presumes that the devs don't care at all and are not human. I am 100% sure they have made decision for the better of the game that were troubling to them, but it is a project and they need to move ahead sometimes.

I agree with the criticism. The RDR2 and Rockstar games have always had heavy/clunky movement. The Bethesda games have always had these bugs in their games,.

I do voice them but I also understand that some of them cannot be fixed or maybe they made a decisiona in the way they made their game that prevents it unless a much bigger change happens( this seems what the rendering issue with Bethesda) and sometimes those are not possible.

Criticisms are 100% valid. I agree that making them before the game comes out can be helpful. We have also seen sometimes that they are done after and still affect the game, but when it turns into lazy dev or armchair development or calling them out because "with all this money they need to be perfect" is just entitlement to me. At the end of the day these are people doing a job and they have limitations. Not everyone can be the "guy" at Naughty Dog or be the genius Iwata with his Earthbound/Pokemon stories. And this is even with the big companies. It is the same with most forms of entertainment.

Mezentine · Nov 14, 2018

I take his point but there are fundamental things about how the various pieces of that framework stitch together to produce playable games that are bad

MillionIII · Nov 14, 2018

Vincent Grayson said:
I wonder if maybe it's the nature of the kind of games (open world, lots of AI and physics) and not the engine.

And by "I wonder" I mean: that's the issue. Bethesda games are the way they are because of what they're doing. It'd be interesting to see another developer do the same kind of game (and none have), and see if they fare any better. My guess - they wouldn't.

Like Rdr2 and botw?

Deleted member 5167 · Nov 14, 2018

Nanashrew said:
The engine was never designed for multiplayer in mind and it very much shows it.

Seemed to work okay in widescale MMOs like Ragnarok Online or Dark Age Of Camelot.

Musubi · Nov 14, 2018

I'm sure there is way more to why these games end up like they do but fundamentally if you just look at Bethesda Game Studios releases since Morrowind they have made pretty much the same game over and over again. And that's not to say that making those games don't require effort and skill because they obviously do.

I think when people complain a lot about the games its because they want a completely CLEAN break. Like it would be amazing if Elder Scrolls VI looked entirely different from Skyrim but in reality it won't it will be largely the same tech although adapted for a now post 4k gaming world.

Like could you imagine a Elder Scrolls game powered by the decima engine? THAT would be exciting.

okayfrog · Nov 14, 2018

StuBurns said:
Okay, but look what Bethesda call it...

'Seeing lots of speculation about #tesv game engine. It's brand new... and it's spectacular!'
https://twitter.com/bethesda/status/14010984884604929

omg, what a fantastic quote. And that was eight damn years ago. Beautiful, I love Bethesda.

Deleted member 1476 · Nov 14, 2018

Popetita said:
but if their game were really broken then they wouldn't be a billion dollar company would they?

If unpaid modders can find a way to fix some games, why aren't they raking in the cash and being hired and praised all around? Some have done so like Durante, were is the rest? If the Bethesda games are so broken where is our hero modder that will go to them and fix their issues?

Those are some garbage straw men.

Powerofthecloud · Nov 14, 2018

jschreier said:
But the article is not about people's complaints, it's about the string of inflammatory headlines titled "Bethesda says it won't change engines for Starfield and The Elder Scrolls VI" and why those headlines are meaningless.

Are headlines you are referring are sensationalist? Sure. But the problem behind this is that a lot of the same glaring issues pop up with in all of these Bethesda games. At a fundamental level the engine is what it is, as the lip stick to a pig analogy goes. The base engine seems to be the culprit. Without a complete rework it seems that we will be in the same environment of Bethesda games have been in the past 10+ years. With Bethesda expecting to use the same engine with some additional modifications how much can we realistically expect to change from traditional Bethesda jank. My guess and what a lot of other people are inferring is not much. Based off history do you think the article writers are actually wrong? I guess we will see next decade =p

Terminus · Nov 14, 2018

And frankly "misguided" is such a needlessly charged headline. The "controversy" is pointed exactly at the problem, it's just arguably using imprecise language.

Gricean · Nov 14, 2018

Dr Wily said:
Read what that quote actually says.
A blueprint has nothing to with construction, but is essential in allowing people to actually build a house.

I mean, you can click on the link and get a more in-depth idea of what the term means. I won't quote the whole Wikipedia article here. But the term game engine is used to describe the software game developers use to build games.

jschreier · Nov 14, 2018

Kadath said:
This is funny because, very obviously, Jason Schreier doesn't know what he's talking about and he's way too dumb to realize it.

A "game engine", as used in discussions in forums and articles, IS NOT A PIECE OF TECH. Nor it is a "collection", as he says.

A game engine is an heuristic. It's a term in language that works like an umbrella and that encompasses the overall "look and feel" of playing a game. *Playing* it, not building it.

Of course the look of Morrowind or Oblivion doesn't PRECISELY correspond to the look of Skyrim or Fallout, but the analogies and the general feel are absolutely there. You could make an experiment and let someone play a Bethesda game without knowing it's Bethesda and he'll know, if he's competent, within minutes. And certainly not because that game would be very complex.

If an engine is an engine, then it provides a structure. No matter how much you WRESTLE it, the structure is a structure and by being structure it imposes itself and will create limits.

No matter how many times Bethesda explains how they rewrote everything in their engine, PLAYING those games will always reveal the truth. And the truth is that they are too scared to abandon the pipeline they used until this point because they cannot afford to wipe everything clean and restart from zero. Because IT IS indeed an engine, and they don't want to discard it.

I can't believe I missed this. What a fantastic post. I'm impressed by how confidently one can be so mind-blowingly wrong.

Wumbo64 · Nov 14, 2018

I think it is a fair point by Jason to ask those lobbing complaints like they are grenades to at least be more specific than "Hey, your engine sucks."

However, there do appear to be some systemic problems with animation, rigging, loading etc that have persisted since the days of Oblivion. So, it really isn't surprising that there is a subsection of the community that ardently wants it thrown out.

Everyone should also note that up until Fallout 76, Bethesda had a very small team, only about 100 people. To accomplish an increase in visual fidelity that rivals what their peers are doing would require several times the staff and resource pool.

Now you could argue since Zenimax can afford it, they should, but Todd has expressed in interviews and such before that Bethesda likes to operate on a lean work flow. So there is honestly a bunch of conflicting elements.

I personally believe they should further staff up, overhaul all the key points of contention with the engine, and scale down the world sizes, opting for more density.

Gnorman · Nov 14, 2018

oneils said:
you should read the thread. He just explained that he has been blacklisted by bethesda for the last five years. so its really doubtful that he is an apologist. re-read the article and try again.

So the article only exists because he's upset that people use the wrong terminology?

Deleted member 5167 · Nov 14, 2018

Foreshadow said:
I mean, you can click on the link and get a more in-depth idea of what the term means. I won't quote the whole Wikipedia article here. But the term game engine is used to describe the software game developers use to build games.

I don't need to click a wikipedia link to know what a game engine does.
It doesn't build games. It facilitates others to do so.

Complaints about technical shortcomings that other gamebryo titles have never had are not complaints about gamebryo.

LewieP · Nov 14, 2018

I'd also say that this really is an infinitely analysis since it doesn't examine how the industry tends to use engine inaccurately as a marketing term on a regular basis

Vincent Grayson · Nov 14, 2018

MillionIII said:
Like Rdr2 and botw?

Neither of those games have even remotely the complexity of interactions and objects that can be manipulated. I'm serious when I say that literally no one else does what Bethesda does, and it's telling that when they do (Obsidian with F:NV) the same issues persist. I think it's pretty much inherent to the kind of game they're building.

The idea that Bethesda doesn't QA or polish their games is fucking stupid, and I've seen it parroted many times.

Deleted member 15440 · Nov 14, 2018

jschreier said:
lmao yes I am very interested in defending the corporate interests of a company that has blacklisted me for five years.

Or maybe I consider it my job to help clear up misinformation and try to explain to people what video game engines actually are and how they work, so they can criticize Bethesda games in a more insightful way than "their engine is creaky :("?

Guess we'll never know the answer.

when people say "their engine sucks" and you reply with "well actually the issues you have aren't with the engine" then you're deflecting from the problems at hand

deadbass · Nov 14, 2018

This thread and the thread about the RAGE engine are fascinating examples of how gamers who aren't programmers view game engines in very, uh, fanciful ways.

jschreier · Nov 14, 2018

Gnorman said:
So the article only exists because he's upset that people use the wrong terminology?

The article exists because news articles and YouTube videos titled "Bethesda isn't changing engines for Starfield or TES VI" have misled hundreds of thousands of people. If you read the entire article, you'll see that that's made very clear. Hope that helps!

8byte · Nov 14, 2018

Seems that the article sidesteps that many of the tools they're using to build their games are still rather old.

They're trying to say they're still using some of these tools because of x, y, or z, but that's not really a solid excuse when it's been causing significant problems for nearly a decade.

Regardless of the semantics, the article misses a lot and puts the onus on the consumer to "know the lingo" instead of on the developer to "fix their shit".

jschreier said:
The article exists because news articles and YouTube videos titled "Bethesda isn't changing engines for Starfield or TES VI" have misled hundreds of thousands of people. If you read the entire article, you'll see that that's made very clear. Hope that helps!

"Mislead" semantically, maybe, but at the end of the day, people still understand one thing: Bethesda is still using tools that have not aged well, and have been introducing problems (bugs) in their games for over 10 years.

I think that's an important distinction to make, and way more concerning than whether or not people have been mislead on what exactly "engine" means in game development. It's far more misleading to tell consumers "they've upgraded all these parts of their toolsets, it's not the same engine" when the reality is that the problem causing toolsets are still present, and with no consequence to them publicly or financially.

Timeaisis · Nov 14, 2018

Ship of Theseus. It's basically a new engine. I hate that word.

Derrick01 · Nov 14, 2018

Gnorman said:
So the article only exists because he's upset that people use the wrong terminology?

Essentially yes. It's completely missing the point why people are so upset with Bethesda and comes off as muddying the waters a bit whether intentional or not.

Instead of focusing on what the proper name we should call something is we should be focusing on why people are upset and what needs to be done to solve it.

Drencrom · Nov 14, 2018

I don't know how game engines and tech are made or function tbh, so I won't comment on that.

But what I do know is that Bethesda continue to release games with tons of bugs, glitches and awful performance. They need to do better if they want to stay comepetive.

Conkerkid11 · Nov 14, 2018

I mean, what's at stake here? It's not like the creators of these articles are spreading information that's potentially damaging to developers using the game engine correctly. It's just Bethesda that's using it. This isn't like all those people spreading misinformation about Unity or something.

Also, yeah, weird timing on this article, considering Fallout 76 released, and it's got all the same issues that plague other Bethesda releases, and then some due to the multiplayer component.

Watched all of 1 minute of a Twitch stream, and heard the dude say, "yeah, I have a custom INI with a different FOV and all these postprocess settings turned off. Oh, but don't use VATS, it can mess with the FOV." and that was enough to determine whether or not I would buy it. The PC modding community provides so much for them, and they shit all over us. Enough with that.

Vincent Grayson said:
Neither of those games have even remotely the complexity of interactions and objects that can be manipulated. I'm serious when I say that literally no one else does what Bethesda does, and it's telling that when they do (Obsidian with F:NV) the same issues persist. I think it's pretty much inherent to the kind of game they're building.

The idea that Bethesda doesn't QA or polish their games is fucking stupid, and I've seen it parroted many times.

Did I miss a /s in there somewhere?

finalflame · Nov 14, 2018

Vincent Grayson said:
Neither of those games have even remotely the complexity of interactions and objects that can be manipulated. I'm serious when I say that literally no one else does what Bethesda does, and it's telling that when they do (Obsidian with F:NV) the same issues persist. I think it's pretty much inherent to the kind of game they're building.

The idea that Bethesda doesn't QA or polish their games is fucking stupid, and I've seen it parroted many times.

Are you out of your mind here? The level of interactivity and interoperability of the physics and game systems in BOTW are LEAGUES ahead of anything Bethesda has ever built. The only thing "lacking" is a dialog system, which in and of itself is entirely not complex. Yet BOTW is a polished gem and there are multiple examples of all its systems working flawlessly, whilst entirely more complex than any Bethesda game. Feel free to read more here:

https://www.resetera.com/threads/th...polished-and-complex-in-gaming-history.31680/

It is LEAGUES ahead of what Bethesda does. Let's not put a very modest and dated engine on a pedestal.

WinFonda · Nov 14, 2018

qatak said:
Schreier's recent stint of articles telling people to calm down have been great lol. Enjoyed his Diablo Immortal and AC Odyssey microtransaction coverage too.

It's almost like a major gaming website wants to play nice with big gaming publishers because they live or die by access. The pedantic use of semantics here to downplay the actual misgivings the community has around Bethesda's games is not exactly a sterling example of consumer advocacy. The proof is in the pudding, and the "pudding" remains glacially slow to improve or advance in meaningful ways across several generations now. It's going to take actual, concrete results before I give Bethesda and their "engine" or "technologies" the benefit of the doubt. Especially when Fallout 76 is mentioned in the same breath by them as an example of the advancements taking place as a means to assuage any doubts. Bethesda should be taken to task over this. The best way to make sure they change is to raise hell, and I can't say I'm a fan of the attempts to placate.

Gricean · Nov 14, 2018

Dr Wily said:
I don't need to click a wikipedia link to know what a game engine does.
It doesn't build games. It facilitates others to do so.

Complaints about technical shortcomings that other gamebryo titles have never had are not complaints about gamebryo.

Did you see the post I was replying to? I think we are arguing different things. What I am saying is indeed technology, and not at all "an heuristic [or] a term in language that works like an umbrella and that encompasses the overall "look and feel" of playing a game. *Playing* it, not building it."

EDIT: By the way, I did say developers use these tools to build games, meaning game engines facilitate the process.

Yukinari · Nov 14, 2018

Vincent Grayson said:
Neither of those games have even remotely the complexity of interactions and objects that can be manipulated. I'm serious when I say that literally no one else does what Bethesda does, and it's telling that when they do (Obsidian with F:NV) the same issues persist. I think it's pretty much inherent to the kind of game they're building.

The idea that Bethesda doesn't QA or polish their games is fucking stupid, and I've seen it parroted many times.

Genuinely want to know what FO4 does thats complex or impressive. I havent played it.

Conkerkid11 · Nov 14, 2018

Yukinari said:
Genuinely want to know what FO4 does thats complex or impressive. I havent played it.

I thought it was impressive how they managed to make a Fallout game that's not an RPG.

rras1994 · Nov 14, 2018

WinFonda said:
It's almost like a major gaming website wants to play nice with big gaming publishers because they live or die by access. The pedantic use of semantics here to downplay the actual misgivings the community has around Bethesda's games is not exactly a sterling example of consumer advocacy. The proof is in the pudding, and the "pudding" remains glacially slow to improve or advance in meaningful ways across several generations now. It's going to take actual, concrete results before I give Bethesda and their "engine" or "technologies" the benefit of the doubt. Especially when Fallout 76 is mentioned in the same breath by them as an example of the advancements taking place as a means to assuage any doubts. Bethesda should be taken to task over this. The best way to make sure they change is to raise hell, and I can't say I'm a fan of the attempts to placate.

Jason Schrier has been blacklisted for five years by Bethesda.

Budi · Nov 14, 2018

Nice article, thanks for sharing OP and thanks for writing it Jason. Having informative pieces bit like this one isn't bad at all, even to the average consumer/reader.

rras1994 said:
Jason Schrier has been blacklisted for five years by Bethesda.

Even more reason to get back on their good side!

Pantaghana · Nov 14, 2018

Game engines are difficult to talk about because every single one is it's own Ship of Theseus. Even the most recent and modern engines have code in them that is a decade or more old.
I'm willing to give Bethesda more slack than other AAA devs because they are the only ones that are willing to go to extreme lengths to make their games moddable to hell and back.

Nanashrew said:
But this is very much the problem. The engine is Frankenstein's monster with things tacked on as they go that it has amassed technical debt, often tripping over itself. The engine was never designed for multiplayer in mind and it very much shows it.

Gamebryo was made with MMOs in mind, and quite a few were made in it.

Deleted member 15440 · Nov 14, 2018

WinFonda said:
It's almost like a major gaming website wants to play nice with big gaming publishers because they live or die by access.

well as jason said he's been blacklisted by bethesda so that's not really a concern for him here

shaneo632 · Nov 14, 2018

Even if you're OK with how the FO games play you would be incredibly glib to say their games look and feel slick and modern.

Drencrom · Nov 14, 2018

jschreier said:
The article exists because news articles and YouTube videos titled "Bethesda isn't changing engines for Starfield or TES VI" have misled hundreds of thousands of people. If you read the entire article, you'll see that that's made very clear. Hope that helps!

Agreed. YouTubers spouting "TES VI / Starfield will have the same engine and be bad" nonsense are wrong for sure. But you can't really blame consumers for having low expectations when Bethesda have such a bad trackrecord regarding bugs and bad performance.

TheSyldat · Nov 14, 2018

Conkerkid11 said:
I mean, what's at stake here? It's not like the creators of these articles are spreading information that's potentially damaging to developers using the game engine correctly. It's just Bethesda that's using it. This isn't like all those people spreading misinformation about Unity or something.

This just this
How many people have I seen weirded out when they shat on Unity not knowing what they were talking about , when I pointed out that both Hearthstone and Wasteland 2 and Hollow Knight do use the unity engine and last I checked they didn't complain about those games engine wise.

Again the underlying issue is how Bethesda uses and wields the refactored , forked version of Gamebryo that they call Creation Engine.
For better or for worse they need to hone their hammer wielding should they fail to do so real soon will lead them to develop an awful carpel tunnel syndrome. Except that the pain will manifest in money drying up from the studios pockets ...

Nanashrew · Nov 14, 2018

Pantaghana said:
function scrollToId(selector, offset = 60) { window.scroll(0, document.querySelector(selector).offsetTop - offset); return false } Gamebryo was made with MMOs in mind, and quite a few were made with in it.

Well that only leaves me with more questions on what the heck happened.

MillionIII · Nov 14, 2018

Vincent Grayson said:
Neither of those games have even remotely the complexity of interactions and objects that can be manipulated. I'm serious when I say that literally no one else does what Bethesda does, and it's telling that when they do (Obsidian with F:NV) the same issues persist. I think it's pretty much inherent to the kind of game they're building.

The idea that Bethesda doesn't QA or polish their games is fucking stupid, and I've seen it parroted many times.

Thanks for the late night laugh, I needed that.

OhmygoditsJROD · Nov 14, 2018

So can we just call them bad developers then instead of blaming the engine?

Popetita · Nov 14, 2018

rashbeep said:
i don't think it's entitled at all to feel irritated that a team with the budget BGS has literally cannot implement better looking graphical effects than a single person (the ENBseries creator)

I don't think it is entitled to be annoyed or criticize the issues. It is when it turns to sort of dictating what their game should be.

They way you phrased it seems entitled because I ask: Why doesn't the ENBseries creator apply for a job a Bethesda and saves us all from the issue they have? I think there is a real reason behind that.

I do not think it is that they cannot do it, or that they won't but that they made development/project choices and they want to stand by them. That you can criticize, saying lazy devs what about this other guy that does it better is not a valid argument IMO.

Maintenance said:
Those are some garbage straw men.

Great drive-by post with zero substance. Maybe you'd care to expand on it instead of just calling it a strawman?

Why aren't more of these modders getting jobs with these game developers they have helped get out of their own mess?

I think you have an unrealistic view of how software development cycles work.

OhmygoditsJROD said:
So can we just call them bad developers then instead of blaming the engine?

Why are the exactly a bad developer now? This is more of that "lazy dev" stuff.

ohitsluca · Nov 14, 2018

We can argue semantics about what consumers and YouTubers refer to it as, but their complaints are still valid. BGS games are constantly buggy and broken and have been for a while. Whether it's the 'engine' or a part of the 'engine' or something else altogether, they need to change something.

Alex · Nov 14, 2018

Press sure is going overdrive on corporation defense lately.

Deleted member 25117 · Nov 14, 2018

This article tells me everything I already knew whilst I was complaining about the creation engine. it doesn't refute any of the complaints people have leveled against it.
Upgrading the renderer doesn't change fundamental core functions of the engine, and gamebryo's are years behind modern engines which is why people repeat over and over that Bethesda should ditch it and use something more modern because it's clear at this point that they aren't able to optimize and rewrite the base engine, just attach new shiny features on it held with duct tape, the end result always being super disappointing visually and performance wise, and full of load screens.

Musubi · Nov 14, 2018

Vincent Grayson said:
Neither of those games have even remotely the complexity of interactions and objects that can be manipulated. I'm serious when I say that literally no one else does what Bethesda does, and it's telling that when they do (Obsidian with F:NV) the same issues persist. I think it's pretty much inherent to the kind of game they're building.

The idea that Bethesda doesn't QA or polish their games is fucking stupid, and I've seen it parroted many times.

You know when you have Todd Howard making self aware jokes about their shit being broken on the E3 stage I think thats kind of a problem. Is making games tough? Sure. Are their games ambitious? Sure.

Yet every time we get a Bethesda Game Studio release we go through the same cycle of them touting how much they learned from the previous game and how this game is going to be better and yet shit is always broken.

And it always comes down to modders to fix Bethesda's problems. Gaming communities adding to games is great but when modders are helping shore up fundamental problems that is an issue that needs to be addressed.

Prototype Viktor · Nov 14, 2018

one could care less of them updating the graphics if the bugs persist constantly. if the next MassEffect had the same bugs as the last one no one would care how great it looked.

The Controversy Over Bethesda's 'Game Engine' Is Misguided [Kotaku]

Self Requested Ban

Attempted to circumvent ban with alt account

User requested account closure

Unshakable Resolve - Prophet of Truth

User requested account closure

Press Sneak Fuck

User requested account closure

User requested account closure

Press Sneak Fuck

Attempted to circumvent ban with alt-account

Product Management

User requested account closure

Weekend Planner

Teyvat Traveler

Attempted to circumvent ban with alt account

Unshakable Resolve - Prophet of Truth