Talk:Gamebryo

Description wrong

Gamebryo includes more than just graphics rendering. please abide by the manufacturers description that this is in fact a game engine.

whether or not it is a "full blown" game engine is an opinion. the fact remains that it contains more than just rendering capability and the product is sold as a game engine.

most companies who use gamebryo customize and tailor the basic package with help from NDL, thereby creating an even more flexible engine suited for thier specific game.

its function as the basis for game creation warrants its lable as a game engine and not just a single function renderer.

--Omniwolf 03:50, 3 August 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for updating the information, see below. — Frecklefoot | Talk 18:27, August 3, 2005 (UTC)

---

POV edit

The original poster above, Omniwolf, made some POV edits to the article, most notably the section below, which I removed. It appears s/he works for NDL. While that is fine, Wikipedia policy strictly prohibits POV (point of view) in articles. All articles must express a neutral point of view and, furthermore, are not forums for original research. Inserting your piece about the development of the engine would fall under that realm. The section I removed:

===Creator NDL describes Gamebryo:===

Gamebryo is a cross-platform 3D graphics engine that is optimized and customized for PC, XBox, PlayStation 2, and GameCube. The programmer has access to the hardware capabilities of each individual platform. This proven engine has outstanding performance and all of the rendering, animation, and special effects features necessary to create any type of game.

The Gamebryo run-time engine is a well-architected C++ API that features a hierarchical scene graph structure. Multiple culling and sorting techniques are available to reduce CPU usage by drawing only the visible objects. The flexibility of the engine allows simultaneous use of different sorting techniques in different parts of the scene graph.

Please don't insert it again--Wikipedia is not an advertising forum. I also notice that Omniwolf removed the cross-reference to RenderWare, Gamebryo's chief competitor. Again, that edit is considered POV and is just advancing one's agenda. Wikipedia is NOT a forum to advertise one's product. If you find any information that is incorrect, please feel free to correct it. But do not insert your opinion into any article. If you can't insert something without a NPOV, don't insert it.

Thank you, I hope you enjoy Wikipedia. :-) — Frecklefoot | Talk 18:27, August 3, 2005 (UTC)

Response

First: I do not work for NDL/Gamebryo.

I first noticed this article's existence while attempting to enhance The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion. The oblivion article is something I have been attempting to expand for some time now and have had to deal with a variety of issues ranging from NPOV, to vandalism. Oblivion does in fact use Gamebryo as its base Engine. Someone had changed the referances to state that oblivion uses it only as a graphics renderer.

In doing research to correct this "fact" I read the old version of the Gamebryo article.

The original article on Gamebryo was in my opinion heavily POV and stated repeatedly that Gamebryo was nothing more than a graphics renderer completely omitting the fact that it is indeed a game engine. That is a complete mis-representation of the product. After reading the original article I honestly felt as if it was written to slander Gamebryo.

My attempt at editing was to insert the fact that Gamebryo is a game engine; and also to add the correct website links, and the logo.

The purpose of the section you removed was not to advertise, but to show that even the products manufacturer is selling it as a game engine, and it containts more features than just graphics rendering.

However; I am more than happy to concede that this may have skewed the article too far into POV in favor of Gamebryo. This was not my intent; the goal was to bring more information into the article while attempting to keep it NPOV. But I am new to wiki, and my results are not perfect.

The current correct link to NDL serves the same purpose, as this links to the facts, so the section you removed was a bit redundant anyway.

I would hope that you keep the removed section here in discusion simply to deter anyone else from removing the fact that gamebryo is an engine. A fact that was glaringly missing from the original articles POV.

As for my removal of the renderware referance, I misunderstood its purpose for being there. Given the almost biased slant contained in the old version of the article I felt the renderware referance without any comment for its existance was an advertising tag added by gamebryos competition.

Re-reading it now it makes more sense since you left in the game engine referances, and the similar "see also" tag contained in the renderware article serves the same purpose.

I am content with your current version, it reads with a better flow and I would like to see it simply continue to be described accurately.

--Omniwolf 11:35, 5 August 2005 (UTC)

Okay, I'm glad we got that cleared up. Sorry if I seemed harsh, but your edits really did look like they were done by an NDL employee. But, as you saw, I left most of your changes in. The section I removed, however, is completely out of place and shouldn't be re-inserted. It's a statement by a Wikipedia user and can't be traced to any citable source. To be honest, I don't even understand the title of the section.

I actually wrote the original version of the article. I wasn't trying to slander Gamebryo. In fact, I was evaluating it for my company since we were considering using it. I guess whether or not it is a game engine depends on one's defintion of what an engine consists of. Many game engines include features like physics engines and host of other features that are needed for modern game development. Gamebryo doesn't have a physics engine, and of course some games don't need one. But MOST of what Gamebryo does is render graphics, which is true for most game engines. However, I don't object to your edits that point out it is an entire engine. I'm sure NDL would prefer that too. Since it includes tools to streamline the entire graphics development pipeline (that is, from creation to import into the game), I guess it's fine to call it an engine. — Frecklefoot | Talk 14:39, August 5, 2005 (UTC)

I don't even understand the title of the section It's the description of Gamebryo from NDL's site: "Creator NDL describes Gamebryo as".

Hence, your 100% right that it comes off sounding like an advertisement. I'm wondering if theres a way to reword it to insert more of its features into the article, but its not important. My primary concern was actualling in keeping the oblivion article from being abused again; Gamebryo is only one facet of that project. --Omniwolf 15:36, 5 August 2005 (UTC)

Okay, it looks like they left out a comma or two. It should read: "Creator, NDL, describes Gamebryo as:" :-) — Frecklefoot | Talk 16:02, August 5, 2005 (UTC)

P.S. I've updated the Renderware article as well just to spread the love around. Logo + attempted to clean up the flow. --Omniwolf 16:26, 5 August 2005 (UTC)

Gothic 3

The Gothic 3 article says G3 uses the "Genome engine". Does this engine comes from Gamebyro or is it completly different? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.91.87.49 (talk • contribs)

I have no firsthand knowledge, but I'd suspect it is something completely different. AFAIK, Gamebryo doesn't have any spin-off engines. — Frecklefoot | Talk 16:59, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Mac support

I'm not really sure what the supported platforms part of the article means, but several Gamebryo titles run on a Macintosh. Should the Mac be added to the list of platforms? 208.54.14.50 19:36, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

No, there is no Mac support. I think the supported platforms section of the article refers to "platforms for which Emergent provides support and intends the Gamebryo engine to run without additional effort." There are two games that use Gamebryo or NetImmerse that have been ported to the Mac: Sid Meier's Civilization IV, and Freedom Force. At least in the case of Civ4, Aspyr did porting work after the game was released (the Mac version was released 10 months later). Whether the older NetImmerse engine supported the Mac is unclear, but seems dubious since only one title ever used the NetImmerse engine on the Mac.70.128.181.119 (talk) 02:15, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

NO Linux support

That a game runs in an emulator (or emulator like software) under an operating system, doesn't make it supported by that operating system. "Transgaming Cedega" is such an emulator like piece of software and unless the developers have explicitly claimed to support this way of running the software, it unsupported. Period.

I am going to remove the entry, and if anyone thinks is wrong, they should link to something that really proves that it's true. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by FrederikHertzum (talk • contribs) 22:32, 27 March 2007 (UTC).

Spike in popularity

I added the cite tag to the spike in popularity claim because although it may very well be true, it could easily be not true. Elder Scrolls is popular, that's a given but it doesn't prove that it has made GameBryoa any more popular. A reference from a gaming site or even GameBryo themselves mentioning the spike in popularity is needed. Nothing in the article shows a spike in popularity. The games list only lists 2 games in 2007 and it's very likely these were in development using GameBryo before Elder Scrolls was released. Nil Einne 10:51, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Civilization 3?

The page mentions Gamebryo being used for Civilization 3; that game seems to be purely 2D, so I don't see how it could benefit from a 3D engine. 80.120.149.138 12:05, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

About the products

I miss about the products, how this works, cost and such. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.73.30.108 (talk) 16:56, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Well, we don't typically divuldge prices and such (for several reasons), but keep in mind this is a professional grade game engine. It is intended for professional developers, probably with some sort of track record. If you aren't a professional video game developer, they probably won't even sell it to you (they interview each potential customer). But if, for the sake of argument, you are a professional developer, it'd cost several thousand $'s per SKU. — Frecklefσσt | Talk 17:03, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Description - {{advert}} and maya

I just reworded the Description section. I've left in the Maya plugins complaint, and left it as citation needed. Feel free to remove. --JamesBrownJr (talk) 15:42, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:EmergentLogo.gif

Image:EmergentLogo.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 14:02, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:ElderScrollsOblivionScreenshot11.jpg

The image Image:ElderScrollsOblivionScreenshot11.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --10:38, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

List of Gamebryo games

The list of games using Gamebryo is just supposed to be a sample of games that use the engine, not an all-inclusive list. That type of information is better left to Gamebryo's own website, not Wikipedia. I'll be going through trimming games, probably leaving just the most recent ones. If you object, state here and why. — Frecklefσσt | Talk 16:18, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Trimmed the list down to just recent and popular games. Many that were in the list were old or just obscure. — Frεcklεfσσt | Talk 13:40, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Skyrim is not a Gamebryo engine game --70.125.141.45 (talk) 20:54, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

The "Creation Engine" is just a renamed and modified version of Gamebryo, derived from Oblivion/Fallout 3/etc., just as the version of Gamebryo used in Fallout 3 was derived from Oblivion, just as the version used in Oblivion derived from Morrowind. — 24.243.114.86 (talk) 15:47, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

If it has been modified and renamed then it isn't Gamebryo anymore, otherwise you'd have to say that it's not Gamebryo, but in fact NetImmerse since the same applies. 86.184.222.1 (talk) 17:38, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Come to think of it, for an example list having anything that can be contested just seems silly, at the very least, citation needed.86.186.191.58 (talk) 07:40, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

The arguments for having Skyrim on this list aren't really valid. Even if the Creation Engine is built off of Gamebryo, Bethesda has not labeled the game as powered by Gamebryo. They list it as powered by Creation. By your logic, we'd have to edit all Valve game articles to say that they run on the Quake engine. Ctrlaltdecimate (talk) 04:18, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

You can't have it both ways

What I state above goes for the NetImmerse engine too (which is now depricated, replaced by Gamebryo). But I saw some games that are in the list for both engines: that's not possible. Either you use one engine, or the other, not both. For those in the know, please clean up. Thanks. — Frecklefσσt | Talk 16:21, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

I just removed the NetImmerse product list since it's a deprecated product. — Frεcklεfσσt | Talk 13:40, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

"Gamebryo" portmanteau

Should it be mentioned near the beginning of the article that "Gamebryo" is a portmanteau of the words "Game" and "embryo"? It seems kind of elementary, but there's no harm in mentioning it. Ctrlaltdecimate (talk) 04:48, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Unless you can find a verifiable reference, however, it's OR and not allowed. — Frεcklεfσσt | Talk 12:10, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

NetImmerse Not Mentioned

NetImmerse redirects here and this is the major result for googling such, but aside from being in the title of something cited that word does not appear on this page. Don't remember my username anymore :| --2601:646:4200:A60:DCFA:9C42:E9AC:525A (talk) 06:25, 13 March 2018 (UTC)