ESO on the Source 2 Engine would be beautiful (Just Thoughts)

ArchMikem

I had gotten into the mood to play through the Half Life remake Black Mesa and it's reminded me just how amazing Valve's Engine is. I swear I've never played a game that has run so well on my average joe system as a Source game has, and yet I've seen just how much the Engine can still deliver graphically without sacrificing performance. It really makes me wonder if ESO running on an Engine like this would simply solve all the instability problems for most players on all platforms.

Sure the way the Source Engine renders character models is vastly different than what we've seen with Zenimax/Bethesda, but honestly the character model detailing with Source has come a LONG way and it might seem like a breath of fresh air. But please don't imagine Team Fortress 2 when you think of Source, that particular game was meant to look cartoony. Look at titles like Black Mesa and Portal 2.

I've even seen now that Black Mesa supports multiplayer, so I wonder if that Engine could support multiplayer on an MMO scale.

starkerealm

From what I remember of the Source engine, it really doesn't handle open spaces very well.

Ragnarock41

Well, I don't think you understand how that game engine stuff works.

If you don't want to read the whole thing, let me just say that changing game engine means remaking almost the whole game except the models and stuff, so its very costy. And Source isn't an engine made for massive multiplayer games with open world. Read my post below if you want to read why.


Now yes, Valve's game engine source is AMAZING, for how old it actually is(I still remember the first time I played half life 2, I can't forget, Its just something else,and newer titles like titanfall 2 prove that how beatiful source games can look), but source 2 isn't really something revolutionary its just source with a few changes and optimizations ,

You have to realize the difference between a single player corridor shooter and a multiplayer massive open world game. The same server load and cpu load is not there in those single player games.

Now yes, changing to a better game engine with better code and better server technology would improve the game performance especially in prime time and in trials.(some new experimental games use multiple servers to split the server load, thus preventing server lag).

But source 2 or source for that matter is NOT an engine made for massive playerbases, even in games like CS:GO or insurgency, custom servers with more than 40 people can lag or completely crash and reset , and this should prove to you that source does not handle these kind of games very well. In a 5v5 ranked game at 128 tick servers, I get around 200 to 400 fps depending on the map and where I'm looking at, this number drops down to 150-250 in custom servers with more than 20 people in it, and that is only 64 tickrate. So , Source scales terribly with this kind of load and It can never run battles with 200+ people on a massive map. (edit: Now yes, you could dumb down the physics and graphic aspects of the engine to make it work better.A good example is archeage, built on cryengine. But my point is that it wouldn't look as beatiful as those single player games. Archeage looks nowhere near as good as the crysis despite being built on the same engine.)

But on the plus side source has this very realistic and smooth physics that is still unmatched in today's gaming. Which is why I'm so sad at the fact that Valve doesn't make games anymore. They make money instead.

Judas Helviaryn

Vindictus was an MMORPG built around the source engine some years ago. Was pretty unique and surprising for what it did, and I had played it for a little while.

It can be done, but it shouldn't be done for ESO, and obviously can't be done for ESO. Moot discussion is moot.

Knootewoot

They should remake ESO in the old Adventure Game Interpretor (AGI). So in Cyrodill it would be like:


> ATTACK THE OTHER

<<I am sorry, i don't know what you mean>>

> LIGHT ATTACK PLAYER POOPS-IN-WOODS

<<You deal player POOPS-IN_WOODS 500 damage

Ragnarock41

Knootewoot wrote: »

They should remake ESO in the old Adventure Game Interpretor (AGI). So in Cyrodill it would be like:


> ATTACK THE OTHER

<<I am sorry, i don't know what you mean>>

> LIGHT ATTACK PLAYER POOPS-IN-WOODS

<<You deal player POOPS-IN_WOODS 500 damage

I would totally pay 15 bucks a month for this.

starkerealm

Knootewoot wrote: »

They should remake ESO in the old Adventure Game Interpretor (AGI). So in Cyrodill it would be like:


> ATTACK THE OTHER

<<I am sorry, i don't know what you mean>>

> LIGHT ATTACK PLAYER POOPS-IN-WOODS

<<You deal player POOPS-IN_WOODS 500 damage

ESO: Very Special Edition.

Agalloch

Source engine was good but not for open spaces.

CryEngine, ForgeLight or Unreal Engine 4 are different things and much better than Hero Engine.

The moded Hero Engine that Eso uses is nice but full of bugs and doesn't compare with the most advanced engines .

ArchMikem

Ragnarock41 wrote: »

Well, I don't think you understand how that game engine stuff works.

If you don't want to read the whole thing, let me just say that changing game engine means remaking almost the whole game except the models and stuff, so its very costy. And Source isn't an engine made for massive multiplayer games with open world. Read my post below if you want to read why.

Now yes, Valve's game engine source is AMAZING, for how old it actually is(I still remember the first time I played half life 2, I can't forget, Its just something else,and newer titles like titanfall 2 prove that how beatiful source games can look), but source 2 isn't really something revolutionary its just source with a few changes and optimizations ,

You have to realize the difference between a single player corridor shooter and a multiplayer massive open world game. The same server load and cpu load is not there in those single player games.

Now yes, changing to a better game engine with better code and better server technology would improve the game performance especially in prime time and in trials.(some new experimental games use multiple servers to split the server load, thus preventing server lag).

But source 2 or source for that matter is NOT an engine made for massive playerbases, even in games like CS:GO or insurgency, custom servers with more than 40 people can lag or completely crash and reset , and this should prove to you that source does not handle these kind of games very well. In a 5v5 ranked game at 128 tick servers, I get around 200 to 400 fps depending on the map and where I'm looking at, this number drops down to 150-250 in custom servers with more than 20 people in it, and that is only 64 tickrate. So , Source scales terribly with this kind of load and It can never run battles with 200+ people on a massive map. (edit: Now yes, you could dumb down the physics and graphic aspects of the engine to make it work better.A good example is archeage, built on cryengine. But my point is that it wouldn't look as beatiful as those single player games. Archeage looks nowhere near as good as the crysis despite being built on the same engine.)

But on the plus side source has this very realistic and smooth physics that is still unmatched in today's gaming. Which is why I'm so sad at the fact that Valve doesn't make games anymore. They make money instead.

Interesting, I didn't know Titanfall 2 used the Source engine.

Your explanation is insightful and yes I can agree, I understand the sheer load so many players connected and rendered in the same open space can be compared to just one or a few in a small corridor like map. You're right that I don't understand how game Engines work, cause I never went into tech like that. Honestly my own limit of knowledge was using modeling programs to make custom assets for Simcity 4 back in the day.

Thing is though I didn't create the OP to say I want an Engine change, but I can see how people assume it as that. I'm not naive as to think ZOS can just change it willy nilly. This was purely spur of the moment Hypotheticals. A fanciful what-if.

Spartabunny08

New frostbite engine though gonna be awesome

MLGProPlayer

Unreal Engine 4 should become the new go-to MMO engine. It looks fabulous and runs buttery smooth even on potatoes.

I'm hoping we see an end to these crappy proprietary/junk engines like Hero, GW2's in-house engine, etc.

vometia

Spartabunny08 wrote: »

New frostbite engine though gonna be awesome

Loading times, though... At least if Inquisition is any guide: ESO might be irritating in that regard, but certainly not the worst.

I'm not even sure what engine ESO uses, but based on some of the bugs I've seen (not replacing LOD textures when you're actually in that area, for example) I'm assuming that underneath it all it's still the ancient Bethsoft engine at large. Edit: I see it isn't, so it's just a coincidental bug!