i had an idea once, i called it the "Fog" premise/concept

you start in a complete fog (or dark). any people you meet, you do not see them, you bump into them. you do not know where you are. and to top it all, you do not speak their language.

the character progression was not in terms of dexterity etc. but in the areas of seeing through fog and understanding language. like second level, you see half a meter, understand every 10th word, third level, you see a meter, understand every fifth word.

but, no takers, so probably, not doable....

I agree a gazillion percent.
Give or take a percent or two.

Quote: Original post by Borkhan
JBourrie

is it really possible to construct a program that intricate? not that i doubt you, but still...to have a game where even a minor part is not predictable at all, would be an uberjoy...

That would be an uberjoy, but unrealistic to develop. To make a game like what I described above would require some restraint. That's why Fable and Elder Scrolls didn't succeed in creating the "active world" idea... they tried for too much. The trick would be to use systems like what I described above in ways that minimize the margin of error: the results of each action need to make reasonable sense even in the exceptional cases.

The problem is one of design. I don't think there is nearly enough time spent on real honest-to-god game design. We have hundreds of pages in documentation that describes the content of the game, but very little in the design of how it all fits together into something that doesn't suck. An interactive story can't be made in that way, it would fail miserably.

Also, an interactive story that is completely AI driven (like Oblivion tried to do) will become random and unorganized. It really is a balance between AI and tight scripting. This being said, the tech for a systems like this is actually quite simple compared to the crazy Radiant AI of Elder Scrolls (which is why I want to get the demo off the ground to prove it [grin]).

My goal is to try and get people to realize that the RPG that everybody wants but nobody knows how to make is possible if you just show a little restraint and spend alot of time on design.

This thread contains a really big post about using a combat strategy AI to create another type of dynamic story

[Edited by - JBourrie on December 3, 2006 2:26:56 PM]

Quote: Original post by Todemu
I agree a gazillion percent.
Give or take a percent or two.

you mean my game idea? buhuuuuuuuuuu :-((((

Quote: Original post by JBourrie

Quote: Original post by Borkhan
JBourrie

is it really possible to construct a program that intricate? not that i doubt you, but still...to have a game where even a minor part is not predictable at all, would be an uberjoy...

That would be an uberjoy, but unrealistic to develop. To make a game like what I described above would require some restraint. That's why Fable and Elder Scrolls didn't succeed in creating the "active world" idea... they tried for too much. The trick would be to use systems like what I described above in ways that minimize the margin of error: the results of each action need to make reasonable sense even in the exceptional cases.

I would beg to differ about the elder scrolls and fable not succeeding.. it had nothing to do with the fact that "they tried too hard" to create and fully dynamic and immersive world but more to do with the fact that fable's story sucked (the gameplay and the world was awesome.. its just the actual narrative was so short & weak that it couldn't sustain the game after you got bored of chicken punting..) and Oblivion just screwed up but being technically unfinished and for some reason the developers decided to take most of the features that made morrowind so great and screw them up royal..

I would say both games exhibit a world where the AI for NPCs is very dynamic and very autonomous, the problem is that instead of constraining the world and starting small like you suggested (so that they could put together a very thorough design) they jumped into the "dynamic world" idea with two feet trying to tackle it with the scope you'd get from a final fantasy sized epic..

EDIT:

On the real tho,
I really like your idea of a totally autonomous world though.. for a small-scale game design I bet it could work really well.. (without the need for an excessive amount of testing to iron out the bugs..)

Though whole idea from a technical standpoint would provide such an interesting experience and wouldn't be too difficult to implement provided the dynamics of the world weren't too obsessive.. For example, alot of the commplexity in the AI for games such as oblivion would probably come from the NPCs ability to interact with there surroundings in such a dynamic world (real-time seasons and day/night cycles affecting character/enemy/entity behaviour etc, processing the social elements of character thought, perception and communication patterns, combat and path finding in such a large-scale, procedural world..) I'm not suprised the AI in the end felt rather unfinished (on an individual NPC level)..

Your idea got me thinking about possibilities for execution..:

imagine a game where your an alien and you crash land in a field on an earth-like planet just outside a small town.. there..! thats it..! thats about as much narrative the player is given..

it would then be upto the player to "roleplay" and decide exactly how to form his own quest/adventure into this strange new world.. maybe the player could be an evil alien and terrorise the local village on a rampage od death.. or maybe the player will take a trip to the local tourist information to find out a little about the town and the world (if he/she cares at all).. or maybe the player will decide that he can't be bothered on this planet so he goes on a quest to find parts to ultimately repair his ship and fly away..

Now this may sound like "branching story lines" but what if everything isn't done through cut scenes and scripted events of the NPCs directing the player but the player "discovering" how to progress towards his goals through logically deducing the next "reasonable step" and trying it out.. The designer could strategically place key items in strategic locations (e.g. the player decides to fix his ship, ships computer says it needs nuclear material, player goes off to the local powerplant and steals it.. or goes into the local inet cafe and orders from ebay..), information in places the player would reasonably look for it(player wants to find the way to some water.. goes into the tourist info and gets directions to the local bath-house..) and then as a contingency allow for mutliple paths to the same goal (for stupid players who get frustrated easily)..
The point is with enough options smuggled implicitly into the design the player wouldn't feel tied to a single over bearing storyline.. More like the player would be free to decide "hmm.. what if i could do this..?" and then get a pleasant suprise when they find out that such a progression path is subtley available to them.. even if play through a single progression path led to a quick ending (player decided to run a rampage.. NPC calls military.. military sanctions off the town and murders the player to take him away for dissection..) the fullfillment of "doing it yourself" could be an interesting one and encourage the player to jump straight back into the "world of possibilities" to try something else (maybe completely unrelated) out..

At the very least it would make for an interesting experiment..

Just a thought NEways..

[Edited by - ArchangelMorph on December 6, 2006 6:32:14 PM]

Not to mention back breaking hard since the player seemingly as an unlimit amount of paths to choose throughout the game.. Thinking too hard is what you guys do best =p

But I'd have to say I haven't played enough games with character developement to even comment on it, but that seems like th emost important issue to me. The player should feel he/she is the character, should be able to sympethize and feel their simulated emotions. I'm trying to accomplish this myself by creating a game from a villain's POV where the player has to think that whatever choice he made, whether it's stabbing a poor old lady or mass killing small children, is completely logical and must be done. VERY HARD SHIZ! But I'm tired of acting like the completely nice and all outgoing American good doer with elite sportsmanship everytime I lose a Pokemanz match. I want my character to be damn pissed cause I'm sure as hell are after losing to the Elite Four for the 16th time.

Now, what I like to do in my games is show diversity. In each area, bring a different race, not orcs and mongols and crap cuz there's no way those kind of races can live miles apart. But human types with different views, oppresions, ecomonic struggles or prosperities. From there, the character can start to choose what path he wants to stroll on by letting himself be influenced by the AI.