Discussing Bethesda’s game engine is a rather complex issue, as the developer of The Elder Scrolls and Fallout has plenty of reasons to stick with the Creation Engine for its upcoming games. However, the community has expressed on numerous occasions their desire for Bethesda to change the game engine due to the limitations of the current one. It is important to note that the Creation Engine has been a key tool in the development of large open-world titles.
While it has received several updates to bring it up to current standards, as seen in aspects of Starfield, the reality is that changing game engines is a very complex task even for a large studio like Bethesda, due to the substantial investment of time and resources required. The need to redo tools, develop systems, and implement new workflows would cause internal delays in Bethesda’s upcoming video games.
We also cannot forget that developers would need a period of training and adaptation, as Bethesda has been using the Creation Engine since the days of Gamebryo, which was used before 2011 in games like Oblivion, Morrowind, and Fallout 3. In the same year, The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim was released, and it was the title that led to the evolution of the Creation Engine we know today.
Despite these difficulties, the players’ reasons for Bethesda to change the engine are understandable, especially considering that Bethesda games tend to launch with numerous technical issues like performance problems, bugs, outdated animations, and technical debt. On this last concept, we will talk below thanks to the statements by Bruce Nesmith, lead designer of Skyrim, who gave an interview to Videogamer.
Why is changing the game engine complex for Bethesda?
While changing the game engine may offer advantages that were not previously available, it might not be the best decision for Bethesda. “We are discussing the game engine, let’s discuss the game. The game engine is not important, the game engine is in service of the game itself. YOU and I could identify a hundred lousy games that have used Unreal. Is it Unreal’s fault? No, it’s not Unreal’s fault,” he says.
“Gamebryo is no longer a business, it stopped being a business a long time ago. But that engine has been constantly adjusted, updated, and refined to do exactly the type of games that Bethesda makes: The Elder Scrolls, Fallouts, Starfield. It is perfectly suited for these types of games,” he explains. His point is that switching to Unreal Engine 5, for example, would mean a radical change in how Bethesda operates because it would require several years to implement it properly.
This translates to a slower development, a long training process, and a high cost that may not be worth it for a few years. “Should they switch to Unreal Engine 5? A cost-benefit analysis must be done. The cost of moving to Unreal would be all the initial development that would have to be done to try to fit into Unreal what they are already accustomed to do,” he explains.
“It would be – I’m just going to say a figure that is probably not real – a year or two of technical work just to move it to the engine as it is. And then, more work to adjust the engine, fine-tune the game, and work on it. That’s the risky side,” he says. However, “the advantage is that a lot of technological debt is lost,” meaning the many limitations and problems that arise, as the base of the Creation Engine is not very modern and some aspects have been redesigned or replaced to adapt to current times.
This is closely related to the accumulation of obsolete code, bugs that can arise during development, inefficient performance (here come the infamous Starfield loading times), and the lack of compatibility with new technologies. While Bethesda has many limitations with the Creation Engine, Nesmith ultimately focuses on the video game, because what matters is that we are dealing with a good title.
Gameplay matters more than the game engine
“There are parts of the Gamebryo engine that wouldn’t surprise me to find out Bethesda can’t compile anymore, because the original source code no longer compiles. You have to use the compiled material as is. But discussing whether to use this engine or that, the engine is in service of the game. Is the game good? I don’t care what engine it is. The game is good. Let’s play the game,” he states. However, we cannot conclude this post without addressing the phenomenon of modding.
Mods and Bethesda have a very unique relationship, but the truth is that their game engine allows the community to share creations relatively easily. Skyrim, Fallout, and Starfield are a paradise for modders, but Nesmith believes that quality of the game should be prioritized, with a path created afterwards to facilitate the work of creators. “You have to make the best game you can, and once that’s done, look at your modding community and ask them, what can I do to help you?” he expresses.
“But you can’t let the modding community’s needs dictate if the game is what it should be. Because if you create an inferior quality game, you won’t have a modding community,” he concludes. However, he also had some words for modders’ tools, which must be updated whenever a Bethesda title receives an update. “The modding community has a huge technological debt, Script Extender is probably the easiest to talk about.”
“Unfortunately, Script Extender needs to be updated every time there is a new game update. Modders have invested a lot of effort in understanding the creation engine and creation kit tools. If there is a cut, all that effort goes out the window and you have to start over,” he concludes.
In 3DJuegos | Starfield guide with all the cheats, collectibles, secrets, and missions to complete the game 100%
In 3DJuegos | Everything I would like The Elder Scrolls VI to improve so that its open world is much more than Skyrim with great graphics
