Talk:Creation Engine

Shouldn't we create this page?

I mean, although Skyrim is the only game to use it so far, it's a very well documented engine. The Russian Wikipedia, for example, has a page on the CE: http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creation_Engine

99.231.253.3 (talk) 16:33, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Deletion of Fallout 4 features

The reason for deletion is because features such as "advanced character creation" are attributed to the game engine, rather than the game itself as the citations attribute them to. This could be mistaken as features of the game engine and not the game itself. Fallout 4 is a game using it, rather than a version of the engine. FortyFiveBananas (talk)

Respectfully, I'd have to disagree. The character generation is closely tied to how the engine supports rendering of character models and morphing them. Similarly, how well it supports changing the game world, whether temporarily or persistently, is an engine feature. -- ferret (talk) 19:30, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

That is plausable, yes, but I am unable to find any citations attributing it to be actually part of the engine rather than the game (programming) as the current citations do, as per the NOR policy. FortyFiveBananas (talk) 20:14, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Regarding the PS3 Optimization section

It's a bit out of place and doesn't contain anything relevant to the article compared to the paragraph mentioning the issue on the Skyrim page. FortyFiveBananas (talk) 19:16, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

I would agree about removing this for now. Skyrim had an issue, but as of yet, we don't know if the latest Creation Engine for Fallout 4 will continue to have issues on Playstation. If Fallout 4 also has issues, we can bring it back. -- ferret (talk) 19:33, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

No fair use rationale

@The1337gamer: The fact that the screenshot was from the first game that used this engine, is a no fair use rationale? What about the image in the box here or here? They all have the same licensing. Lone Internaut (talk) 16:56, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

@Lone Internaut: Read Wikipedia:Non-free content. Non-free images (like video game screenshots) should have a rationale (sufficiently in line with Wikipedia's non-free content criteria policy) on the file page explaining it's usage on each article it is used on. The screenshot you added does not have a fair use rationale for usage on this article, therefore I rightly removed it. As for other articles, it's not my job to police all 40,000 video games articles. This article is on my watchlist, therefore I keep a track of changes on it. --The1337gamer (talk) 17:06, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

@The1337gamer: And exactly which one of the 10 criteria the screenshot in subject should not meet in order to be NOT put there? Cause as far as I can see, the screenshot meet especially "Contextual significance. Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the article topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding" and "One-article minimum. Non-free content is used in at least one article" since it is used even on The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim. The same thing happened even here, with the same screenshot took from Maniac Mansion - and I very, very, doubt that users (and I mean Wikipedians) who put screenshot in other pages like that just didn't care about violating rules. Lone Internaut (talk) 20:25, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

@Lone Internaut: Look at the screenshot file page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Skyrim_combat.jpg. You see the giant box that says MEDIA DATA AND NON-FREE USE RATIONALE. This thing:

Read what this box says. It says the image is being using the article The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim and it explains the purpose of its use. Do you see a similar giant box that says the image is being used on the article Creation Engine and explains its purpose there? No, you don't. You need to add a similar giant box saying that this non-free screenshot is also being used on the Creation Engine article and explain its purpose before you insert the screenshot. It's not hard to understand. --The1337gamer (talk) 21:04, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

Sorry but I am very new to these things and I'm just trying to understand, to not do same errors in the future. You're right it's not hard to understand, but you could had explain this thing as you did now, way before. That's quite clear, actually. Unfortunately I don't know how to add a giant box for Creation Engine, never done it, but that would be good since it's good to have a screenshot of a thing that is a graphic engine, which in fact is all about how a game is construct in its visual and graphical context. That would be the "Purpose of use in article". Lone Internaut (talk) 21:24, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

Edit the file page. Copy and paste the existing box, so there are two. Replace the text in the pasted box so it is relevant to this article. --The1337gamer (talk) 21:26, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

 Done Should be good, I think. Lone Internaut (talk) 21:37, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

Obsolete

This engine has been in the media recently because of near universal criticism. If calling it "obsolete" is pov, then the issue should be raised in another way. But it's a legitimate issue that's being discussed in many venues and not "vandalism." 2600:1702:890:73F0:7146:21EE:ED62:6A9 (talk) 04:43, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

So provide sources that explicitly discuss the engine's issues in detail, instead of the obvious POV drive by silliness of adding "obsolete". Even if an engine is old, we would never call it obsolete or outdated in that manner. And any criticism of Fallout 76 belongs at that article, not here. It already quite extensively covers the negative reception of the game. -- ferret (talk) 04:51, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Programming language

What is the source for the programming languages used ? As far as I know it's C++ and papyrus, where do the other programming languages come from ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:2788:265:E338:DDDB:7EA4:E2FB:D87C (talk) 15:21, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

None of the languages listed in the infobox were in any way sourced, so I removed them for now. You're saying that it is built on C++ and Papyrus, could you provide a source for this? Regards, IceWelder [✉] 15:28, 3 April 2020 (UTC)