The Future of Red Engine?!

+
This is also a great example that using Unreal Engine doesn't mean a "bug free" game and a well optimized game...

ARK still a "very buggy" game even after years of regular patches/updates and still run horribly on consoles. Way worse than Cyberpunk at release, that's for sure (if you have played ARK on XB1, even XB1x which was the best console possible at its release, you would know it^^)
This is exactly what I'm talking about. While ARK is a great concept and a fun romp...my goodness, it's a mess of wonky mechanics, very unintuitive systems, and strange gameplay behavior in several areas. And, look at what's happened to the graphics. They're not "bad" by any means, but they have clearly been scaled way back. The reason for this -- clearly not lack of vision! More than likely, it's because the Unreal Engine simply couldn't handle all that additional code and still provide top-notch graphics...which is what Unreal is primarily built for.

Even if I like CP2077 , the present iteration of REDengine doesn't look like a great example of robust,smooth,trouble free development cycle. And if you need to rely on crunch due to engine issues, i would say you have a problem.
Again, I never said it was. This is not the topic. CP2077 was wildly ambitious, and clearly the studio bit off too much for the time and resources they had. That has nothing to do with the fact that the REDengine is specifically built for exactly the type of RPG mechanics that The Witcher and Cyberpunk provide. Unreal Engine is directly not.

You might be able to point me "gameplay features" that were only possible in REDengine and not visuals/cinematics, but if I have to guess they switched to 3rd party engine because they cannot(or they dont want to) afford a big enough engine team able to realease a stable engine with all the (mostly visual) technical advances ahead of game development.
RED engine is not free, it costs them a significant amount of money to develop/upgrade/maintain and it might be they reached a point of diminishing returns.
Is the same reason semiconductor industry moved to mostly fabless model,r&d and operating expenses were increasing each year so it made sense to outsource manufacturing to TSMC/others and focus only on design...
This is an utterly ridiculous argument. CDPR has now released 3 massive, successful titles on REDengine: TW2, TW3, and CP2077. All of that R&D has been paid back in spades. The engine is gorgeous, and it's one of the most robust I've ever seen. It's not the most user-friendly in terms of modding, but it does what it does at a platinum standard. Yes, mistakes are still possible. Yes, the implementation of some of the mechanics could be improved. But no -- in terms of functionality, visual to gameplay balance, and in-game, real-time cinematics at the level of detail involved, Unreal Engine doesn't hold a candle to what REDengine can do.

What Unreal does offer is, in my opinion, at least, much more optimized rendering, higher FPS, with superior graphical fidelity, overall. By licensing the Unreal Engine, that's an expenditure that will be an expenditure no matter what. Why in the name of The Great Pumpkin would I take the engine I just spent 15 years to get working at this astounding level...then try to re-create the exact same functionality in an engine that's specifically not built to do those things? And pay another studio for it, to boot??? That's starting over with code I'm not even familiar with to create a product that would be a compromise at best.

This doesn't make any sense at all. The only thing that would make sense is that: the project is not a complex RPG. It will be better served by an action-based engine, and Unreal can help maximize the visuals.

You know that you can interface your own modules right? , that example from marketplace is made by an individual who makes some money selling modules to small teams/individuals.
As stated above. CDPR built their own engine from scratch. Why would they try to hamfist the same functionality into someone else's engine? Why would they start over again? That would be utterly counterproductive. That would be inefficient to an extreme.

If you have the chance,fire up the Outer Worlds is completely opposite example of what you claim.
Graphics are worse than TW3/CP2077, combat and movement is more clunky and less fluid than CP2077 but in terms of quest design-with that i meant the actual quest,not the dialogs/writing/cinematics-,rpg elements(attributes/skills/perks/flaws and they are used during gameplay) is "deeper" than both TW3/CP2077 (whather is better game than any of them, i will call a tie with CP2077/TW3).
I've fiddled with it. Watched a buddy play quite a chunk. It's Gamebryo recreated in Unreal. Modular, limited, but the graphics are cool. Gameplay is fun enough, but very tired. Been there, done that, with countless Bethesda titles and spinoffs. Outer Worlds is not doing anything new -- it's simply handling it better than Bethesda does, arguably. I did like the characters a lot better, but I could have accomplished that with a text-based adventure.

Engine-wise, Outer Worlds is a system written in the 1990s with better graphics. You can't list a single thing that Outer Worlds does that Morrowind couldn't do when it was released. Its just looks better.

i think finding people that are already familiar too UE is a big factor too. Selfmade engine has selfmade stuff and req much more time too learn then UE is also my guess. Heck i can probably learn it myself trough videos and so on right now. The tool is free too so you can actually learn it before you start working at CDPR. With the whole restructuring and agile way too work im also guessing this is a big factor. perhaps it has a much smoother workflow and so on(im not a gameprogrammer so im just guessing here). I do have some experiance with workflows and fast/just in time production tho ^^

Probably your reasons are a big factor too sadly, kinda wish they went the other way in terms of RPG elements but we shall see. Perhaps this is a reason for partnership too, too make more UE modules with RPG games in mind.
It's definitely a selling point -- absolutely! And I'll say again: I'd call Unreal the best graphics that any engine can create in the modern world. When you are looking at a game written in Unreal and taking full advantage of it, any other game is going to be hard pressed to even compete. But in order to take full advantage, it can't be doing too much other stuff in the background.

Hence, while REDengine is certainly capable of competing -- it's not built for liquid-smooth, real-time rendering and lighting. It's built for incorporating layer upon layer of mechanics that can be constantly updated in real-time to create extremely deep, cinematic moments and a wide range of different functionalities. If I don't need any of that for my title...why would I want to deal with it? I'd have to manage it whether I'm using those features or not.

So, what you're saying about workflow is likely right on the money: Don't need all the RPG mechanics for this game. Unreal would work better. Let's get those guys to partner up with us! Shortest distance between two points for this project.
 
Honestly, I think the "project" was a little bit "too big" for Wildcard which is not a big studio.
So even after years of early access, at release, the game was still so poorly optimized and full of bugs, that it would have taken years of developpement... But obviously, to keep working on it, they needed money, so they also worked on expansions, which reduced even more the resources on bug fixes /optimizations.
But they still release updates (very) regularely, but it seem to be an "insane and long" work to do it. So much that I don't know if they could even achieve it one day :D

I agree, it was too big of a project for such a small and inexperienced studio but that's just more proof that the team behind it is far more at fault for ARK's state than the engine itself.

And, while I agree that they certainly needed more money to continue supporting the game there is a point where it simply shows poor management. The game wasn't even out of early access that the first expansion was announced. They bit off more than they could chew and it shows. Still, I wish 'em the best. While my time with ARK is over and despite it's issues, I still had fun with it but, like you, I doubt it'll ever reach a mostly issue-free state.
 
I agree, it was too big of a project for such a small and inexperienced studio but that's just more proof that the team behind it is far more at fault for ARK's state than the engine itself.
Yep, I never said that was the Engine's fault. I just mean that whatever the engine used, a "messy game" can be created :D
My point by quoting ARK was > working with Unreal Engine doesn't mean that devs would now avoiding most of bugs.
 
i think finding people that are already familiar too UE is a big factor too. Selfmade engine has selfmade stuff and req much more time too learn then UE is also my guess. Heck i can probably learn it myself trough videos and so on right now. The tool is free too so you can actually learn it before you start working at CDPR. With the whole restructuring and agile way too work im also guessing this is a big factor. perhaps it has a much smoother workflow and so on(im not a gameprogrammer so im just guessing here). I do have some experiance with workflows and fast/just in time production tho ^^
Once you get to a certain scale it kinda makes sense to do some things in house. Training should be less of an issue as you should have a large enough team that impact of turnover can be absorbed. Red Engine's issues (assuming they are, indeed, engine issues) seems more caused by development practices than by the engine itself. I'd be sad to see it go as it appears to be better optimized than most UE games (which might be due to devs not knowing UE well enough, but arguably that only reinforces my point)

There's enough companies smaller than CDPR that maintain their own engines succesfully (see: Digital Extremes, for example), conversely there's a pretty good case study why standardizing on an engine that is not immediately suitable to what you are doing and that you have no direct control over can be extremely detrimental: BioWare. For Anthem, DA:I as well as for ME:A they were forced to drop their own engine and use Frostbite, an engine unsuitable to the task, compounded with lack of knowledge, and lack of support.

In EA's case the decision was entirely based on management not understanding that these things are purpose built and that you can't just put your sports car engine into a tractor and still expect it to function properly as a tractor, or vice-versa, for that matter.

Moreover the broader a range of applications you try to support the more complex your tool becomes, with all consequences that come with that (harder and harder to understand, bugs, harder to find things in documentation, additional runtime overhead).

Based on SigilFey's comment earlier it would seem that CDPR is making this decision for the right reasons: they have a project UE is suited for, so instead of shoehorning it into RE, which isn't as suitable, they pick the right tool for the job.
 
Firstly, the studio is not "switching to Unreal Engine". They're working with the Unreal Engine for a future title. The REDengine is right where it has always been and will be used again in the future, I'm very certain.

The studio is definitely switching to Unreal Engine 5 and will be creating their AAA open world games with its help. What's more, the deal is for 15 years, so Cyberpunk will probably get an Unreal 'facelift' as well. It's not really something up for debate. The board announced it officially by informing shareholders and more broadly in a statement to the press.


The project utilizing UE5 will most likely not be a very heavy RPG. As expressed above, it's not an engine that works really well for RPGs -- by design. The reason Unreal Engine is so powerful at creating sharp textures, dynamic and accurate lighting, etc. is because it does not busy itself with all of the background robustness that's needed for complex layers of RPG functionality.

So, if my purpose was to build a super-complex RPG or Strategy game with tons of intricate mechanics...UE5 would be a terrible place to begin. I'd be much better off using something like Unity for a wide range of different features, Gamebryo if modularity is key, or REDengine if I want to include lots of cinematics and unique, set-piece scenes.

I said it was not a great choice. In fact, it's a pretty terrible choice. Go research the time the developers had trying to get their ambitious, robust games built in Unreal. Read up on similar dev cycles, like trying to get Dragon Age Inquisition built in Frostbite.

Anyone can do anything they want...but using the right tool for the right job is always a good idea. Especially if you have a choice.



CDPR has spent well over a decade building their own, powerful RPG engine from the ground up for exactly the type of games they wanted to make. Why would they then decide to build something in Unreal Engine, requiring them to pay out for the use of a third-party product...rather than just using their in-house product for free?

Is it because a toolkit released for Unreal is somehow better than REDengine overall for making RPGs? I seriously doubt it.

Is it because Unreal works better on more diverse systems (Windows, Playstation OS, Android, etc.)? Possibly!...but they did get TW3 to run on the bleepin' Switch. Not sure that's the core reason.

Is it because the game they're making may be more action-oriented and linear, rather than a full-on RPG? <--- That makes total sense. They want to do something light on RPG elements, with spectacular graphics, and faster, more action-oriented gameplay. That's exactly what Unreal Engine was built for.

UE5 is an excellent choice. AAA RPGs have been successfully developed on this engine since its third iteration, around the time it changed from a 'shooter engine', to a general purpose engine.

Some great examples have already been given here, but I would personally add the Mass Effect series.

There is also virtually no 'behind the scenes' story from AAA studios describing the problems and struggles with the engine when creating cRPGs.

Let's go back to the RED Engine itself for a moment. Is it a bad engine? No. Is it ideally suited to the needs of Reds and the games they create. Yes, it is. So why the change?

CDPR is a studio with less than a thousand people working directly on games. Between generations of RE engine RE-> RE3 (RE2 is an exception and version for Xbox 360) -> RE3 ->RE4 the studio had to rewrite about 90% of the engine code, create tools for developers, debug and test, and create the game AT THE SAME TIME. CD Projekt, simply does not have the adequate manpower.

And simply given the increasing complexity of the games themselves and the increasing number of versions supported at the time of release, they reached a wall, resulting in the 'spectacular' release of CP2077.

What does the UE have that RE doesn't? An incredibly tested, extremely stable base. Perfectly described tools as well as the engine itself. Proven ease of writing new tools. Gigantic technical support from Epic available on the spot, guaranteed by signed contract.

This way, once the right tools have been written, developers can focus on iterating and creating the game, instead of struggling with the never-complite, ever-changing technology.

And yes, RE was "free", the UE is not. But it's a price CDPR has to pay, and the first really tangible evidence of real change within the studio as well as in its approach to game development. Which hopefully shows that management has learned the right lessons from the release of CP2077 and isn't afraid to make tough decisions to avoid a similar situation in the future.
 
Some great examples have already been given here, but I would personally add the Mass Effect series.
I don't want to be negative, I'm an unconditional fan of the mass effect serie, but RPG elements are not deep at all in Mass Effect. From the first to the third, it's became mostly a shooter with a tiny bit of RPG elements here and there. I don't say it's due to the engine, but it's a fact.
 
See,now we can start to agree to a degree
But no -- in terms of functionality, visual to gameplay balance, and in-game, real-time cinematics at the level of detail involved, Unreal Engine doesn't
Because this is somewhat different to this
The reason Unreal Engine is so powerful at creating sharp textures, dynamic and accurate lighting, etc. is because it does not busy itself with all of the background robustness that's needed for complex layers of RPG functionality.
And we will drift off-topic widely about "RPG functionality" but I think we were talking about 2 different things-there is a thread about if cp2077 would have been better without rpg elements, but nobody talked about ditching in-game cinematic storytelling as far as i know, the discussion was about removing number crunching stuff-.
That being said, i guess we will need to wait and see what comes out from that deal but i frankly doubt they will go for another re-spin of REDengine if they can just fit their flow into Unreal and forget about renderers,physics or other stuff.
 
Based on SigilFey's comment earlier it would seem that CDPR is making this decision for the right reasons: they have a project UE is suited for, so instead of shoehorning it into RE, which isn't as suitable, they pick the right tool for the job.

You say shoehorn but that's definitely not it. Nor is it "a project".

It's a 15 years partnership. It's their long-term future. It's multiple games.

You are right that plenty of studios have struggled with engines being imposed on them. We've all heard of Bioware's struggles with Frostbite but that's not the same situation at all. This is Epic and CDPR working together to improve the tech. They'll get all the support they need. It's not a typical licensing deal at all. Both companies have said it..

I don't want to be negative, I'm an unconditional fan of the mass effect serie, but RPG elements are not deep at all in Mass Effect. From the first to the third, it's became mostly a shooter with a tiny bit of RPG elements here and there. I don't say it's due to the engine, but it's a fact.

I'm inclined to disagree. I don't think the games became less of an RPG as the series developed. The shooting surely was refined and improved over the years and that's a good thing considering how bad it was in the first ME game. There surely was a lot streamlining of the RPG elements to improve accessibility to new players and increase appeal but I don't feel like it reduces their qualities as RPGs.

Besides, what makes TW3 or CP2077 such deep RPGs that they could've never happened on UE? It's one of the most common complaints leveled at CP2077. It's a conversation that constantly pops up on the forum and the general consensus seems to be that CDPR's games are not deep and complex RPGs. They have deep and complex narratives - that can easily be achieved on UE. It's already been done.
 
I'm inclined to disagree. I don't think the games became less of an RPG as the series developed. The shooting surely was refined and improved over the years and that's a good thing considering how bad it was in the first ME game. There surely was a lot streamlining of the RPG elements to improve accessibility to new players and increase appeal but I don't feel like it reduces their qualities as RPGs.

Besides, what makes TW3 or CP2077 such deep RPGs that they could've never happened on UE? It's one of the most common complaints leveled at CP2077. It's a conversation that constantly pops up on the forum and the general consensus seems to be that CDPR's games are not deep and complex RPGs. They have deep and complex narratives - that can easily be achieved on UE. It's already been done.
Again, I didn't said that Mass Effect is not an RPG (nor it is better/worse/less/whatever than CDPR games), but it's maybe not the best example of RPG on Unreal Engine. Outer Worlds is way better in my opinion :)
Those who complain that there isn't enough "RPG things" in Cyberpunk, maybe didn't play Mass Effect, because there are even less.

Anyway, honestly, I don't care too much about the engine that studios use, I loved Mass Effect, loved Outer Worlds, loved The Witcher and loved Cyberpunk :)
 
Again, I didn't said that Mass Effect is not an RPG (nor it is better/worse/less/whatever than CDPR games), but it's maybe not the best example of RPG on Unreal Engin. Outer Worlds is way better in my opinion :)

And I never said or even implied that's what you said. I'm not sure where you're getting this.

What you said is that the later games were lesser RPGs. I'm not sure how else anyone could read "shooter with a tiny bit of RPG elements here and there".

Which I disagree with.

It's all very subjective at this point though.
 
Hopefully this will be the end of the RedEngine. Its had its day, and now it long in the tooth and CP77 has shown this to be the case.

Its time to move on.
 
It's all very subjective at this point though.
Yeah it's subjective and only my point of view, but I don't know how said it "better" than :
"shooter with a tiny bit of RPG elements here and there"
- Most of quests consist to shoot/kill everything on your way (gun/biotic power).
- You choose a class at the beginning and you're stuck with it until the end.
- Character development is limited to a few skills (about 6 or 7).
- The only skills which could influence dialogues are Paragon or Renegate level.

But I don't say it's bad/worse (it's one of my favorite games ever...) nor it's due to the engine, it's totally a decision from Bioware. But speaking how Unreal Engine allow to make "deep RPG systems" by taking Mass Effect as example is maybe not the best idea :)
 
The studio is definitely switching to Unreal Engine 5 and will be creating their AAA open world games with its help. What's more, the deal is for 15 years, so Cyberpunk will probably get an Unreal 'facelift' as well. It's not really something up for debate. The board announced it officially by informing shareholders and more broadly in a statement to the press.
I wasn't aware it was for 15 years -- where'd you find that?

UE5 is an excellent choice. AAA RPGs have been successfully developed on this engine since its third iteration, around the time it changed from a 'shooter engine', to a general purpose engine...
Well, if I'm wrong, then I'm wrong.

Still, all I can say is that I've never played an RPG in Unreal that I've been utterly blown away with. The Unreal games I've always preferred are the action-oriented ones: Unreal Tournament 2004, Batman Arkham series, Bioshock, Everspace, and more recently Jedi Fallen Order and Mechwarrior 5. All of which are very straightforward, action-oriented titles. (MW5 pulls through on my "Like!" list because the handling and mechanics are well done...but I was woefully disappointed, at first, that it wasn't more of a simulation. Missions boil down to a glorified "horde mode" for the most part.)

The one notable exception is XCOM EU/EW. That was a fantastically robust take the genre, though I really missed the wider strategical gameplay of the original. (But I have Xenonauts -- so I'm all set! :giggle:)

I won't count Mass Effect in this list, as they were originally written in Frostbite. Although, I must acknowledge that the remakes were done in Unreal...so there's proof of the fact that Unreal can, in fact, pull off the rendering for complex RPG systems. (I'll come back to this just a moment...)

What does the UE have that RE doesn't? An incredibly tested, extremely stable base. Perfectly described tools as well as the engine itself. Proven ease of writing new tools. Gigantic technical support from Epic available on the spot, guaranteed by signed contract.
Yup! This is what I reference above, but I don't think that was really the selling point. Something about it was what the devs were looking for, obviously. But I don't see it "replacing" REDengine...
...
...unless (coming back to the point above), the plan is to somehow build a lot of the REDengine functionality into Unreal at a core level. The only issue is: REDengine works. We've seen it work. Why start over? For a few extra pixels per texture? If that's their actual plan, there's obviously something we don't know about the future of Unreal. It would still boggle my mind if they just dumped REDengine, though.

And the last thing I can throw out is that they don't intend to do complex RPGs for the foreseeable future. Maybe they will be taking a new direction with game design overall. The announcement never mentions "The Witcher 4". Not once. It says:

1652989816888.png


That's a lot different than saying, "...the sequel to the acclaimed The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt" or "The Witcher 4: An Ofir He Can't Refuse". Perhaps they simply intend to design this saga to be more action-oriented and focus on the storytelling instead of RPG aspects.


See,now we can start to agree to a degree
...
Because this is somewhat different to this
They're saying exactly the same thing. The reason Unreal doesn't offer those things is because its primary concern is graphcial output. Engines do what they're designed to do. No engine can do everything. If I make it good at one thing, it's going to be worse at something else. There's no "easy button" to make an engine "just work like this".

And we will drift off-topic widely about "RPG functionality" but I think we were talking about 2 different things-there is a thread about if cp2077 would have been better without rpg elements, but nobody talked about ditching in-game cinematic storytelling as far as i know, the discussion was about removing number crunching stuff-.
That being said, i guess we will need to wait and see what comes out from that deal but i frankly doubt they will go for another re-spin of REDengine if they can just fit their flow into Unreal and forget about renderers,physics or other stuff.
Not off topic at all this time! :p RPG gameplay functionality means:
  • Complex skill trees of both active and passive abilities
  • Specifically designed weapons and armor with wide ranges of modular augmentations (status effects, specific resistances, secondary abilities, etc.)
  • Dialogue options directly affected by skills and abilities
  • Layered, interconnecting quests and storylines that can be altered by player actions
  • Leveling system that directly impacts progression, options, regions, enemy types, etc.
  • Multi-faceted combat system allowing for various approaches in execution and coinciding results
  • Quest-specific items or NPCs that are tracked and identified separately from non-essential items
^ And ALL of that being pretty free to mix and match at any moment, meaning the game has to know about everything, track everything, recognize when anything is active/inactive, then make every other part of the game react accordingly.

That's a far cry from an engine like Unreal, which has always presented challenges to devs that wanted that level of functionality. Hence, most of the games written in Unreal are either pretty linear or pretty simplistic in their execution...or they're pretty clunky in their execution:

There's no "skill system" in Fallen Order -- just a linear system of unlocks that do not overlap. You just get everything eventually. In return, the game offers a fluid combat system with gorgeous environments and a high level of visual detail.

There's no deeply layered complexity in Everspace -- just ships with different models and movement values and a series of interchangeable weapons. It's mostly rock-paper-scissors or superficial differences (like a gun that does little damage per round with a high rate of fire...and a gun that does more damage per round with a slower rate of fire...but both do virtually identical DPS). It's just the same values mirrored with different graphics applied. In return, we get a visceral-looking game that's easy to pick up and play and runs like silk.

In ARK, we've got all sorts of menus within menus for crafting and eating and breeding dinosaurs and overlapping menu wheels for controlling behaviors and naming dinos and accessing their inventories and having them hoot at you. And in return, we've got a game that runs fairly poorly on even high-end hardware, is often buggy, and prone to unclear mechanics and feedback.

...

But...as I mentioned before, if I'm wrong, then I'm wrong. Big studios like EA were able to write Mass Effect Andromeda and get the Mass Effect Remaster working smoothly on it. So, maybe it's more robust than it has been in the past. It's as you say, we'll have to wait and see.
 
I wasn't aware it was for 15 years -- where'd you find that?

The agreement was concluded for a period of 15 years with a prolongation option. It places no restriction on the number of games developed with the use of Unreal Engine. It also provides for dedicated technical support on the part of Epic for games published by the Company.

Yeah it's subjective and only my point of view, but I don't know how said it "better" than :
"shooter with a tiny bit of RPG elements here and there"
- Most of quests consist to shoot/kill everything on your way (gun/biotic power).

Have you replayed ME recently? I'm just wrapping up the first game through the legendary edition myself. This was true throughout the entire series.

- You choose a class at the beginning and you're stuck with it until the end.
- Character development is limited to a few skills (about 6 or 7).

I remember the limit being higher in ME2 and 3 but I'll know for certain in the coming days.

Regardless, some would consider this to make it a deeper RPG than today's "be everything and anything". Y'know, meaningful choices in your character's development.


- The only skills which could influence dialogues are Paragon or Renegate level.

While it's certainly true that TW3 and especially CP2077 have stats/skills base choices, it's hardly a deeper choice than ME.

TW3's Axii dialogue options aren't exactly a game changer and neither are most of CP2077's stats based decisions. The overwhelming majority of them lead to the exact same result than non-stat related choices. It's flavor at best. I'd argue that ME's paragon/renegade choices had many more impactful effects that were sometimes only felt in later games.

But I don't say it's bad/worse (it's one of my favorite games ever...) nor it's due to the engine, it's totally a decision from Bioware. But speaking how Unreal Engine allow to make "deep RPG systems" by taking Mass Effect as example is maybe not the best idea :)

But I agree, I wouldn't consider Mass Effect a deep RPG myself. A deep narrative with deep and extensive lore, etc. Sure, but a deep RPG I wouldn't consider it to be. The same goes for CDPR's games though :shrug:
 
Last edited:
Have you replayed ME recently? I'm just wrapping up the first game through the legendary edition myself. This was true throughout the entire series.
Yep I replayed, last time, few weeks ago and almost every 3/4 months since ME-LE release^^ :)
(and by "replayed" I mean the 3 episodes in a row each time...)
TW3's Axii dialogue options aren't exactly a game changer and neither are most of CP2077's stats based decisions. The overwhelming majority of them lead to the exact same result than non-stat related choices. It's flavor at best. I'd argue that ME's paragon/renegade choices had many more impactful effects that were sometimes only felt in later games.
Right, but I didn't compare TW3, nor Cyberpunk to Mass Effect ;)
With Unreal Engine, Outer Worlds, already "beat" these three games.
 
Yep I had, last time, few weeks ago (and almost every 3/4 months since ME-LE release^^) :)

Then how can you say it "devolved", so to speak, into only a shooter with very few RPG elements when it's been the same the entire time?

Right, but I didn't compare TW3, nor Cyberpunk to Mass Effect ;)
With Unreal Engine, Outer Worlds, already "beat" these three games.

I know you're not. There also an overarching discussion about Unreal's capabilities around deeper RPG mechanics. ;)

I'm aiming this more at that. I see us more as a group of individuals all "talking" together rather than isolated conversations regardless of quotes.
 
I won't count Mass Effect in this list, as they were originally written in Frostbite. Although, I must acknowledge that the remakes were done in Unreal...so there's proof of the fact that Unreal can, in fact, pull off the rendering for complex RPG systems. (I'll come back to this just a moment...)
ME 1-3 is UE too (UE3 if im not miss remembering). Only mass effect andromeda is frostbite. Frostbite wasent even made untill after Me3 came out i think...

Edit: ops was wrong on when Frostbite came out, 2008. Frostbite 3 came out with BF4 and was pretty much when EA started too force studios too use it.
 
Then how can you say it "devolved", so to speak, into only a shooter with very few RPG elements when it's been the same the entire time?
It's between the first one and the second and third ;)
So in the second, the loot disappeared, the character skills was "limited" and armor/weapons are almost "cometics". But in the first one, combat gameplay was quite clunky, not very good so to speak. So I guess that Bioware mainly focused on the story, the relation with your crew and the gameplay than "RPG elements".
Exact same character on the first episode / the second (the same in the third) :
19-05-2022_22-38-37-gdkoxb1r.jpeg19-05-2022_22-39-16-fobr4e5z.jpeg19-05-2022_22-40-49-jd3zzvu2.jpeg
To compare, Outer Worlds (but combats are not that great, biotic are just so fun in ME^^) :
(And I don't count the various buffs/debuffs that you can acquire by beating enemies, be beaten by enemies... nor the reputation with factions)
19-05-2022_22-49-44-rw3js1fo.jpeg19-05-2022_22-50-04-tpqctbeo.jpeg19-05-2022_22-50-35-bp4dgp3b.jpeg

Edit : example of difference with Paragon/Renegate in ME
In the first one Renegade and Paragone determined how much perk point you were allowed to put in charme/intimidation. But if you didn't put any point, dialogues were unavailable (it was up to you). In the second and the third, nothing like that. You have the Paragon/Renegade level, dialogues are directly available.
 
Last edited:
It's between the first one and the second and third ;)
So in the second, the loot disappeared, the character skills was "limited" and armor/weapons are almost "cometics". But in the first one, combat gameplay was quite clunky, not very good so to speak. So I guess that Bioware mainly focused on the story, the relation with your crew and the gameplay than "RPG elements".
Exact same character on the first episode / the second (the same in the third) :

To compare, Outer Worlds (but combats are not that great, biotic are just so fun in ME^^) :
(And I don't count the various buffs/debuffs that you can acquire by beating enemies, be beaten by enemies... nor the reputation with factions)
Have too agree with most said here. Me1 was much more RPGish. Nothing compared too BG1 and 2 and DAO but it was more of a SWTOR/3p shooter. Me2 streamlined it ALOT. Its still a great game its just more action oriented. It was done too broaden the audience and i remmeber beeing pretty pissed about it at the time. Nowdays i think ME2 is probably the best in the series overall.

The same thing happend too the DA franchise. Less rpg more combat focus (and in DA2 Crappy enviroments and rushed production) But DAI when back a bit too more rpg. Bioware pretty much founded this way of doing RPGs and had ethe same status as CDPR hade before EA started messing with them ^^

This hade nothing too do with engines tho, ME used UE3 up untill ME andromeda when EA forced Frostbite. ME3 could possibly have escaped the frostbite since it was almost done when frostbite 3 came and EA got even more greedy. Since DICE owns Frostbite its no extra cost even if it was a shit engine for RPGS. It dident even have a save function originaly since it was made for BF/shooters :D
 
It's between the first one and the second and third ;)
So in the second, the loot disappeared, the character skills was "limited" and armor/weapons are almost "cometics". But in the first one, combat gameplay was quite clunky, not very good so to speak. So I guess that Bioware mainly focused on the story, the relation with your crew and the gameplay than "RPG elements".
Exact same character on the first episode / the second (the same in the third) :
View attachment 11305753View attachment 11305756View attachment 11305750

You say it's worse but I see a streamlined system that made away with the absurd incremental and way too constant upgrades of the first game. Just like the inventory system was a convoluted mess that had you spend a ridiculous amount of time dismantling the stupid amount of loot. A perfectly valid critic that was leveled at CP2077(which CDPR adressed). Heat seeker rounds I-X. Mantis armor I-X. Cryo rounds I-X. The list goes on, you play the series regularly, you know how long that list is.

Point being, a system having a million different option doesn't make it deep. That's not depth. It's options for the sake of options. The system was needlessly convoluted and needed a streamlining.

As a side note - je n'avais jamais vue la traduction française de ME et je dois dire que c'est vraiment une très mauvaise traduction. Spécialement considérant que les mots renégat et paragon existe en français aussi et ont la même définition. Je m'attendais a mieux d'une compagnie Canadienne.

To compare, Outer Worlds (but combats are not that great, biotic are just so fun in ME^^) :
(And I don't count the various buffs/debuffs that you can acquire by beating enemies, be beaten by enemies... nor the reputation with factions)
View attachment 11305759View attachment 11305762View attachment 11305765

Just to be clear, I'm not disagreeing that Outer Worlds is a deeper RPG. It is. I think it's combat was fine, it accomplished what it needed to accomplish.

Edit : example of difference with Paragon/Renegate in ME
In the first one Renegade and Paragone determined how much perk point you were allowed to put in charme/intimidation. But if you didn't put any point, dialogues were unavailable (it was up to you). In the second and the third, nothing like that. You have the Paragon/Renegade level, dialogues are directly available.
But it also made no sense at all that dialogue would be unavailable to you as a paragon or renegade. It's a measure of your moral alignment and the choices were representations of that - morality (not very deep, we can agree on that I'm certain). It made far more sense that someone wanting to be a renegade could choose renegade dialogue options regardless of having that one last point in intimidation.

This hade nothing too do with engines tho, ME used UE3 up untill ME andromeda when EA forced Frostbite. ME3 could possibly have escaped the frostbite since it was almost done when frostbite 3 came and EA got even more greedy. Since DICE owns Frostbite its no extra cost even if it was a shit engine for RPGS. It dident even have a save function originaly since it was made for BF/shooters :D

From what I've read and heard, the biggest issue with Frostbite was how it was just dumped on Bioware without any support from Dice. It was a learn as you go experience and ME Andromeda suffered greatly from it. It could've done far better had Bioware received the needed support.

That's EA though. I can't think of any other publisher that has killed as many franchises.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom