OpenMW support for other games: Oblivion, Skyrim, Fallout and more

[Envy123]

Wow.

Next thing I know, there would be screenshots of rendering a scene from Fallout 3, NV and Fallout 4.

[rstevenson1976]

I'm in the camp of fork the open mw project post-1.0 and create open oblivion independent of open mw. but this all seems to be "they shoulds" and not "I will"

[cc9cii]

Not much progress... Generic face/hair in Wellspring Cave. Lack of Face Gen is another large hurdle. No animation yet, most things are hard coded atm.

[FreeLikeGNU]

Cool! I think anything that has a chance to brings us more TES on the fantastic OpenMW engine is great! The work you are doing is laying the foundation for new functionality in the engine.

[commodore256]

Oh, that looks promising. I'd like to see open cities + better cities with this. Having a 64-bit engine and high settings and texture mods would prevent crashes after 4GB and that's after expanding the memory limit.

[Pherim]

Oh, that looks promising. I'd like to see open cities + better cities with this. Having a 64-bit engine and high settings and texture mods would prevent crashes after 4GB and that's after expanding the memory limit.

You can already use ENBoost for that... As much as I'd like to see an OpenOblivion engine, I doubt it's going to be playable anytime soon.

[commodore256]

As much as I'd like to see an OpenOblivion engine, I doubt it's going to be playable anytime soon.

Hey, 4 years ago, OpenMW didn't even render the ground. So, I guess it could be sooner than you think https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9gOqBU2oZnk

[Sslaxx]

An issue that any OpenOB-type fork would have is the increased dependencies Oblivion has, and in particular SpeedTree and Facegen. Not forgetting the physics engine. SpeedTree looks like it might be the biggest problem though, considering it appears tree data is hardcoded into Oblivion's executables.

Also, when it comes to features Oblivion has (such as multiple worldspaces and the like), it doesn't necessarily follow that OpenMW would use a similar implementation. Meaning any fork of OpenMW (and any such fork should probably be post 1.0, really) would have to re-work potentially quite a lot of these systems to work with the way Oblivion does.

It's doable. But OpenMW has been in the works for a long while now. Since 2008; so if by "anytime soon" you mean (at least) eight years, then perhaps. Though this is why a post-1.0 fork would make more sense; it'd be working from a mature codebase. It would probably not save any time though. And it wouldn't make dealing with the thorny problems (SpeedTree and friends) any easier either.

[commodore256]

An issue that any OpenOB-type fork would have is the increased dependencies Oblivion has, and in particular SpeedTree and Facegen. Not forgetting the physics engine. SpeedTree looks like it might be the biggest problem though, considering it appears tree data is hardcoded into Oblivion's executables.

Well, we already have the bullet engine, so somebody could develop a compatibility layer. As for SpeedTree, that sounds serious. When I looked it up, I came to a guess that the implementation is tree generation algorithm where there's no actual tree mesh, it's just generated with the same formula and that sounds problematic for compatibility. It sounds like reimplementing a very specific BSP algorithm.

Also, when it comes to features Oblivion has (such as multiple worldspaces and the like), it doesn't necessarily follow that OpenMW would use a similar implementation..

Didn't Morrowind have multiple Worldspaces? Like every interior was a new Worldspace and there was Mournhold or are you referring to looking outside the city in oblivion, it doesn't look like another Worldspace until you TCL out of there?

It sounds like in order for OpenOB to work, there needs to be an open source "SwiftTree", "FaceForge" and some sort of Havok to bullet compatibility modification. You need all of the links in the chain I suppose.

[raevol]

Don't forget Radiant AI.