But… both of those engines are terrible.

Pff, whatever.

The Creation Engine won because it meant they could make yet another game by reskinning the existing formula and tacking on a couple more, janky systems. I’m playing it again, though. It’s alright with mods if you manage to ignore the steady trickle of bugs and nonsense.

The creation engine won because it’s an in-house engine. Why would Bethesda want to pay the licensing fees to Epic games lol.

The engine is holding them back. How many people in Bethesda really know how that taped together engine really works? And they act like they’re getting games out quickly?

Starfields facial movements still aren’t as good as a 20 year old call of duty game. If they got rid of the Todd I would immediately be 25% more likely to buy their next game.

In the past, Bethesda has claimed that their engine allows them to move faster and do more because of their experience with it over the years.

I can see them combining that with their audience loving mods, and their embrace of paid mods as why they keep their engine.

Makes sense. But it sure does lead to the same sloppy stilted games that haven’t evolved enough to keep up with the times.

I really hate to praise bethesda these days, but it’s good to see a studio still using an inhouse engine. Now if only that engine wasn’t garbage.

Eh, the unreal engine is crap at RPGs.
It’s really not good at friendly NPCs. Which fit all of its many faults, the creation engine is really good at.

Proof: The Outer Worlds 1+2. Both games hugely suffer from using the unreal engine.

Fuck Unreal 5. Bethesda games have already lost enough appeal as is.

And then modders didn’t give a fuck. Well there’s a star wars mod that does well apparently but that’s about it.