Morrowind: (N)PC evolution

[jpark]

For more dynamic worlds - whether MMORGPS or single player RPGs - I have wondered about whether folks would one day move to having NPCs interact based on sophisticated models.

WoW.  It's dead simple - but you will see predator attack prey in some zones - and the interaction appears random.  I wonder if the game will develop this further some day - and use this model more widely in the game - creating dnynamic exchanges between animals not unlike ecologists would build into simple environmental models.

Morrowind Oblivion.  The NPCs sound cool - it seems that each has a propensity to engage in different behaviors - and depending upon what those are (determined by some probability) the character itself develops by learning new information by exchanging with others, changing locations or advancing some of their skills.

If Morrowind makes the splash that some expect with the NPCs in its new version - I wonder if this might herald a new era in the way games are developed.  For animals and NPCs - we move beyond spawn timers, and instead see them with a deep repretoire of actions that probablisitic and impact their own "development" over time.  They will appear "real" with their own agendas - rather than sitting or patrolling pointlessly until and PC arrives to engage them.

[Murgos]

Okay, I'm going to be a pedantic jerk for a second.

It's The Elder Scrolls IV:  Oblivion

The others were

The Elder Scrolls III: Morrowind

The Elder Scrolls II: Daggerfall

The Elder Scrolls: Arena

Okay, you can carry on now.

[jpark]

Okay, I'm going to be a pedantic jerk for a second.

It's The Elder Scrolls IV:  Oblivion

The others were

The Elder Scrolls III: Morrowind

The Elder Scrolls II: Daggerfall

The Elder Scrolls: Arena

Okay, you can carry on now.

Heh - no problem - but I don't follow.  My understanding is that in the NPC behavior AI in Oblivion will be completely unlike its predecessors in the series.

[Raguel]

He's just saying it's Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion, as opposed to Morrowind:Oblivion.

I didn't know that the ai would be that cool. I might buy it now. ;)

As far as AI goes, I'd love to play a game where the npcs had their own agenda. Seed the mmorpg promises those things but from what I understand they don't even have npcs up yet in their beta so who knows how far we are from that dream. 

[schild]

I'm fairly certain the AI won't be near as good as they're making it out to be. Either way, I'd prefer progression in combat AI before Social AI. Also, moving this to gaming.

[Raguel]

Well if the game in question is primarily about combat then I'd agree. Depending on the game though, social AI can make the game more interesting, because you never know when you're going to get stabbed in the back, metaphorically speaking.

[schild]

Do you have to fight bosses at all during the game? Is the end boss combat based? Combat AI plz. I don't care how social the game is, crap combat makes an angry schild.

[Righ]

I'll buy it if the quests and whatnot are 3/4 as good as Morrowind, and the palatte isn't 256 shades of shite. The AI will not impress me - I already know it'll be no more than another simple parameter to work around, and will most likely be annoying in game terms.

[Kail]

If Morrowind makes the splash that some expect with the NPCs in its new version - I wonder if this might herald a new era in the way games are developed.

I suspect not.  My plummetting faith in Bethesda aside, we've seen these kinds of things before.  Look at Fable, for instance.  People in that game have schedules; they go to work, they come home, they hang out at the bar, et cetera.  If you're a great noble hero, they'll applaud in the streets, if you're an evil villain, they'll cower before you.  If you run through a town and slaughter half the people, the next time you pass through, the people will remember that.  Market prices fluctuate based on how safe the roads are for traders, as a result of your actions.  And so on.

And, ultimately, very few people cared about all that.  They complained that the game was too short, or the loading times too long, or the maps were too small.  The game has some nice AI, but it's a fairly subtle effect, so people don't notice it very much.  They DO notice when their XBox pauses for thirty seconds to load a twenty foot hallway, though. 

If a game is going to revolutionize the way NPCs are handled, it's going to have to be a game in which the NPC AI is VERY prominent and VERY well done.  Everything I've heard about Oblivion sounds like it's going to be Morrowind II, and putting better AI under that hood is not going to change an awful lot.  The player is still highly limited in his interactions with NPCs and the world, there is still a scripted story to follow, and most of the AI you're going to be interacting with is going to be on the other end of your sword.  I don't think it's going to make a much larger impression than Morrowind, even if they manage to pull off everything they promise.

[Paelos]

I'll admit I'd love to play a game like WoW, but where they replace the asshat players with NPCs that were shinier asshats.

[Fabricated]

If the AI in Oblivion works as well as they promise the only thing that'll be said of it by people who haven't played the previous game is that, "The world feels pretty alive, that's kinda cool". That's a nice reaction, but was it worth the work? Pearls before swine as it were.

[jpark]

I remember looking at the boards and reading Fallout posts and how the fans replaying the game were trying to figure out at what exact moment the city Necropolis fell into ruin.

It's that kind of instinct - to explore your world - even influence it in more subtle ways - that could be supported by more sophisticated NPC AI.  So I am still inclined to think this could be a new direction for gaming - if that market need is really there.

Right now most games take the museum approach to NPCs - they stand there waiting for the PC.  It's little wonder then that part of the popularity of MMORPGs may come from the presence of other players that make the world feel "alive".

[Sky]

It'll be so nice they have AI equal to what Garriot was doing in the 80s. Even more recent titles like Gothic have had NPC scheduling, it's not like it's something new. I prefer NPC scheduling, it makes the world much nicer, it's way too bizarre to have static npcs and takes me right out of the game.

UO tried to use Ultima's scheduling originally (heh), but guess what? Players whined about it.

NOLF2 had a nice AI programming with the npcs having goals that react to the world state, they notice a light on and go check it out. If their thirst threshold is wanting, they might make a cup of coffee before they shut off the light, etc. Made for some decent dynamic interactions, but the game world was too limited to really capitalize on the feature.

The thief series has always had nice AI, but it wasn't scheduled, just patterns with a nice alarm AI laid on top.

I'm appalled at the state of AI in gaming, it's atrocious. It's one of my very favorite features in any game that has taken the time to make it special.

[HaemishM]

If Morrowind makes the splash that some expect with the NPCs in its new version - I wonder if this might herald a new era in the way games are developed.

I suspect not.  My plummetting faith in Bethesda aside, we've seen these kinds of things before.  Look at Fable, for instance.  People in that game have schedules; they go to work, they come home, they hang out at the bar, et cetera.  If you're a great noble hero, they'll applaud in the streets, if you're an evil villain, they'll cower before you.  If you run through a town and slaughter half the people, the next time you pass through, the people will remember that.  Market prices fluctuate based on how safe the roads are for traders, as a result of your actions.  And so on.

And, ultimately, very few people cared about all that.  They complained that the game was too short, or the loading times too long, or the maps were too small.  The game has some nice AI, but it's a fairly subtle effect, so people don't notice it very much.  They DO notice when their XBox pauses for thirty seconds to load a twenty foot hallway, though. 

I think few people cared about the AI bits in Fable because the AI didn't really engage them. They didn't come to the player, the player had to go to the NPC's and then just about all he was rewarded with was a "Hi, Arseface!" and other bits of dialogue. Unless the player hit a scripted spot, they were never just approached by an NPC and asked to do something. I mean, if a player saves a village from destruction, shouldn't the next time he comes to the town, NPC's come up and offer to feed him, a key to the city, or another mission? Not just standing there (or walking around) with a little "!" over their head waiting to be triggered, but actually engaging the player.

The Fable AI was decent, but it was too subtle.

[Kail]

It's that kind of instinct - to explore your world - even influence it in more subtle ways - that could be supported by more sophisticated NPC AI.  So I am still inclined to think this could be a new direction for gaming - if that market need is really there.

I agree with you a million percent on that.  What I'm quibbling about is the idea that Oblivion (or any other game I'm aware of) is heading in this direction.  What I'm hearing about Oblivion (and I may well be misinformed) is that it's going down a similar road to Fable.  You've got THE STORY to Oblivion, where character X does Y independant of any AI calculations, but with maybe a few branching plot points.  And then underneath all that, you've got the AI which can do some interesting, dynamic things.  The problem is that the big things, the flow of the story, is not determined by the AI, it's still going to be scripted.  And so will most of the rest of the things in the world.  You're not going to be able to just leave off the heroing business and run a blacksmithing shop, you're not going to be able to head down to the tavern and chat about those cursed Jabberwockies that have ruined this year's harvest.  You're still going to be extremely limited in what you can do and so the AI is still going to be extremely limited in what it can react to you doing.

I'd argue that if someone were to develop AI Jesus, they'd basically have to do it in the form of a virtual world.  No pre-set storyline, at all.  Let the player do whatever he wants, and then let the AI react to that.  Make the AI actually responsible for running the world.  Then, you'd have NPCs that really mattered.  When I punch the king in the stomach, have the AI respond in a way that would be appropriate for the situation, not in a way that was scripted eight months ago by the designers.  But I don't see this in Oblivion.

[WayAbvPar]

I think a social AI will sell more games than a combat AI. Why? Because people don't like it when the NPCs turn the tables on them and use all the same tricks a player can. I was playing EVE last night and got wtfpwned by some pirates who used a mostly PC tactic (warp scrambling) to keep me from escaping, then proceeded to kick the shit out of me. It kind of sucked, but it was cool at the same time. The gamers here (hardcore experienced types) can appreciate that, but Joe Public is going to think it is too hard.

No matter what happens, I will buy Oblivion, likely be fascinated by it, play it for 2 weeks straight, then 'take a break' and never play it again. Seems to be my modus operandi lately. 

[Murgos]

I'm not sure what Oblivion is doing for the purely social aspects of thier AI.  They have mentioned that NPC's will gather and talk about events that have occured/are occuring which can lead to new quest information.  That NPC's do have thier own schedules and will go to bed when tired, eat when hungry (so maybe you will find more NPC's at the taverns at lunch/dinner time?) and other such things that no one has really tried to do since the Ultimas.

How much the world is really affected by that, I have no clue.

One of the preview movies does show an assault on one of the Oblivion gates with the NPC warriors reacting dynamically to the PC, turning the look you in the face and say something.   This sort of thing which helps A LOT for immersion.

I have been a big fan of the series since Arena so I'm going a little fanbois over this one.

[Ironwood]

Me too.  I love me some Elder Scrolls.  Except that 3d battlespire one.  It was awful.

[Murgos]

http://pc.ign.com/articles/686/686663p1.html

IGN: There's been a lot of speculation of the Radiant A.I. system, can you give any specifics as to what it's so far allowed NPCs to do? For instance, have you ever been surprised by an NPC's actions?

Gavin Carter: NPCs will engage in a whole host of activities. They converse with each other with dynamically generated conversations. You'll see them practicing their skills all over the world. Fighters Guild NPCs will fight against fully Havok-enabled practice targets. Mages Guild NPCs will mix potions and practice their summons and other spells in the guildhall. Other NPCs will go shopping, till their fields, pray at churches and shrines, hunt deer, drink in the pubs, and plenty more.

Radiant AI is a system that gives our NPCs a certain level of autonomy, and any level of autonomy is potentially dangerous. As I'm fond of pointing out, I can't seem to maintain a two-person household in the Sims without someone eventually setting themselves on fire. So overall we tend to play our cards somewhat conservatively in this area, to avoid the NPCs going wacky and slaughtering whole villages or anything. Yet they still manage to surprise us every once in a while. Just the other day I was fighting the "boss" of a particular dungeon -- a nasty orc warrior in heavy armor. As he was tearing me to pieces, he shouted degrading epithets at me. "I'll pick my teeth with your spine, puny elf!" He proved the victor, and in the moments before the load menu came up, he knelt to loot my corpse while muttering with disdain, "Annoying creature." I love it when small random events like that add up into something that fits the character so perfectly.

[Ironwood]

 No, seriously don't do that to me.

It sounds fucking great and I know I'll end up dissapointed in some fashion.

(Though I really liked Morrowind.  Lots.)

[Wasted]

My only concern with the radiant ai is that if I dick around too long in the game will the NPC's win it for me?

[Ironwood]

I really worry how the hard the game's going to be when the Orcs are owning the designers.

[Sky]

Gothic was cool for that. If a human npc knocked you out, often they'd just grab your gold and weapon and let you live. You could then return the favor later and get your stuff back.

Even though it's stuff that's been in other games before, it's a welcome addition to TES. I just wish they'd bring back the huge dungeons...and that I wouldn't need a new pc to play it!

[Yegolev]

Me too.  I love me some Elder Scrolls.  Except that 3d battlespire one.  It was awful.

Ssshhh.  Let's not bring that up.  Elder Scrolls with combat focus?  I didn't play it.  Remember the rule of not listening to people who don't like your game, please.

Oblivion sounds awesome.  Save often and in different slots, though.

[Ironwood]

It's a deep personal wound for me.

My wife, knowing my love of the Elder Scrolls, purchased me it in the hope that my eyes would light up and I'd love her more and more the more I played it.

She realised she'd made a mistake when she had to talk me down off the ledge.  Such a shame.

[Kail]

Radiant AI is a system that gives our NPCs a certain level of autonomy, and any level of autonomy is potentially dangerous. (snip...) So overall we tend to play our cards somewhat conservatively in this area, to avoid the NPCs going wacky and slaughtering whole villages or anything. Yet they still manage to surprise us every once in a while.

This is exactly what I'm talking about.  If you want to have a realistic, complex AI system, it is going to do things you don't expect.  That's the whole point of game AI.  To say "we're going to play our cards conservatively so it doesn't interfere with the story we've already written" is to relegate that AI far, far into the background.  So before your NPCs stood around town for no reason, and now with this stunning new AI they will go to the bar when they get thirsty.  Before, they were billboards, with all their actions scripted beforehand, but NOW, with the NEW GREAT AI, they're MOVING billboards.  They still can't do anything relevant to the game (because that might taint the precious storyline), so they play the same role that NPCs have played since Final Fantasy 1.

[Murgos]

While you have a point I have to disagree.  The moving billboard thing is a pain and is exactly why most games don't do it BUT for improvement to be made in the genre there needs to be at least someone trying to make it work.  If no one is even trying it will never improve, these are problems to be solved, not insurmountable barriers.  The Elder Scrolls series has always pushed the envelop in trying to offer a compelete experience and they really have learned A LOT through the iterative experience.  As far as I can tell they have been trying to find that perfect mix between huge expansive gameworld and tight interesting gameplay since Arena and each game has gotten closer to this goal than anyone else at the time they released it.  Morrowind was very close, hopefully Oblivion will be even closer.

[Sky]

Kail wants a pure sandbox. Which sounds great, but besides being a long way off from a programming standpoint, it probably wouldn't work out the way you'd want. A game world is far too complex to let the npcs develop the story from your actions alone, and then there's the sticky part about having to have a backstory so you have a reason why everyone is where they are when the game begins. Sounds like you don't have to concrete an idea, anyway. Just griping about things without a solution isn't usefully cynical commentary, it's just bitching.

As for having AI do things you don't expect, that's precisely where Thief:Deadly Shadows falls apart, turning into some medieval keystone cops about halfway through the game. There's interesting things you don't expect, and then there's sheer lunacy that detracts from gameplay, which is what I'm sure the Bethesda folks allude to.

[jpark]

As for having AI do things you don't expect, that's precisely where Thief:Deadly Shadows falls apart, turning into some medieval keystone cops about halfway through the game. There's interesting things you don't expect, and then there's sheer lunacy that detracts from gameplay, which is what I'm sure the Bethesda folks allude to.

I would be interested to hear a few stories on that point - could be good.

Certainly with NPC AI it will increase the re-playability of a favorite game dramatically.  I am talking about the small story arcs and the chance to dig deeper into the interactions among NPCs.

[Murgos]

What Sky is referring to is things like that NPC practicing his archery misses and hits a guard.  The guard attacks the NPC another NPC attacks the guard and then you get a general melee until everyone is dead and then the game is pretty much over until you reset.

[Kail]

The Elder Scrolls series has always pushed the envelop in trying to offer a compelete experience and they really have learned A LOT through the iterative experience.

I don't see them getting better with any consistency, though.  I mean, let's take NPC AI, for example.  In Daggerfall, you ask an NPC where a building is, they'll say "Oh, it's a bit northeast of here" or something, depending on where they are relative to it.  You ask an NPC in Morrowind where a building is, they'll give you the whole "go to the east site of the river and find the merchant square, it's on the north side, on the second floor, next to the mages guild" speech, even when they're standing close enough to the entrance that they can reach out and touch it.  That's a step back, not a step forward.

Again, I agree that it would be nice if someone tried to make this kind of thing work.  But I seriously doubt it's going to be Oblivion that does it.  Everything I've read about Oblivion has sounded almost exactly like the press for Fable.  NPCs will drink beer if they're at the bar, they'll go hunting, they'll practice their spells at the mages guild, yadda yadda yadda.  What they won't do is anything that impacts you or the world in any relevant way outside of the pre-scripted cutscenes.  That sounds exactly like Fable to me.

Kail wants a pure sandbox. Which sounds great, but besides being a long way off from a programming standpoint, it probably wouldn't work out the way you'd want. A game world is far too complex to let the npcs develop the story from your actions alone, and then there's the sticky part about having to have a backstory so you have a reason why everyone is where they are when the game begins. Sounds like you don't have to concrete an idea, anyway. Just griping about things without a solution isn't usefully cynical commentary, it's just bitching.

I'm not saying I personally want anything.  What I'm saying is that if you're going to make the AI the star of the show, you need to let the AI actually DO SOMETHING.  It's great and everything that the AI eats a sandwich when it's hungry, but those kinds of effects are extremely, exremely subtle, compared to the scripted plot points (e.g. the king deciding to order your execution).  I'm not saying that would be the perfect game (certainly not with today's tech), but if great AI is the game's major selling point and this great AI can't actually do anything, then the game is going to be in trouble.

I'm not trying to bitch about the quality of Oblivion here; it may well turn out to be a good game.  What I am skeptical about is the claim that the AI is going to be the overriding factor, or that it will usher in a new era of gaming (to paraphrase the OP).  Oblivion will sink or swim based on it's graphics, it's controls, it's story.  If they manage to pull off all this stuff they're talking about with the AI, great; it'll be icing on the cake.  But if the game is a buggy jumble of awkward controls tacked on to a generic storyline, the AI is not going to save it.  And if the game is a shining masterpiece of unprecedented scope and beauty, I'll sing it's praises even if the NPCs don't ever get thirsty.

[Murgos]

Excellent job restating your initial post in mind numbing depth.  However, I still disagree for exactly the same reason as before; there needs to be an iterative process because the mechanisms for what you want will not ever spring up from nothing.  There has to be something to get better FROM.

[Alkiera]

I'm less concerned with their AI and more with their advancement system, which blows.  And their magic system, which also blows.  Though there's always the amusing boots of uber jumping deal, which allow you to jump across all of Morrowind in a single bound...  however, they are very short duration, be sure to activate them again before you hit the ground, as the skill buff won't last the entire flight.

I'd prefer something a little more useful, less able to be goofy with.

Alkiera

[Sky]

if great AI is the game's major selling point

It's not. Being the 4th iteration of a great series is. Their AI needed work, grabbing sandwiches > standing around. Maybe next time around they can get to something more directly interactive with the plot. It sounds rather like Gothic, though, and Gothic's scheduling really added a lot of depth to the game. Sure, some of it was subtle, so what? Subtle touches are what seperates the great games from the good ones.

I'm less concerned with their AI and more with their advancement system, which blows.  And their magic system, which also blows.  Though there's always the amusing boots of uber jumping deal, which allow you to jump across all of Morrowind in a single bound...  however, they are very short duration, be sure to activate them again before you hit the ground, as the skill buff won't last the entire flight.

I'd prefer something a little more useful, less able to be goofy with.

Not sure what you mean here. Usage-based skill advancement with a light class architecture, I think it's pretty great.

Also, I thought the magic system was cool beans. You want a spell? Make it, just be sure you have the mana to cast it. And that's without delving into the editor to make funky stuff on the cheap.

[Yegolev]

The most important difference between TES IV and Fable is that Molyneux isn't involved.  Say what you will about Bethesda, but they didn't make Black & White 2.  Or Fable, which suck-suck-sucked.  Bethesda has had its issues but you can't fault them for trying their damndest to make the best iteration they can of an ideal game world.  They also created TESCS which is an incredible tool, really, with which we discovered most people have really crappy RPG design ideas.