Now you speak my language!
Imagine how cool it could be, just imagine it.. You can't, can you? Because it would be too cool to imagine.. Oh yes...
Imagine how cool it could be, just imagine it.. You can't, can you? Because it would be too cool to imagine.. Oh yes...
That's a cool idea.. But companions and hirelings doesn't have to be mutually exclusive.
What I meant is I prefer fully fleshed out, greatly characterized NPC embedded into the story and directed by CDPR than some AI controlled companions.
Why?
1. It's hard to develop a good, believable AI that won't get in the way and actually ADD VALUE to the gameplay(why would I need errand boys or fire support that doesn't even hit anyone during firefights, because you know, let's leave the sense of "accomplishment" to the player)
2. In their effort to make those so called companions "valuable" developers have to give them some abilities and these are usually generic stuff like:
- shoot/fight/use special abilities
- dialogue options with the player character
Bam, I'm done, that's how it usually ends up. Impressive stuff, huh? And that starts to make those characters generic, because no matter how many dialogue options we have with them, they will still be under the constraints of AI rather than being freely guided by developer's creativity.
Even if you add here some other mechanics like providing money, doing jobs etc the main question is why would I need that? What does it bring to the gameplay to have a bot we can talk to from time to time if we're bored?
A following comparison might help illustrate what I mean a little better:
In Dragon Age:Origins I have my whole team out there, I can control them in fights etc and still awesomely written, characteristic NPCs like Iorveth or Roche bring more life and value to my game.
Why?
1. It's hard to develop a good, believable AI that won't get in the way and actually ADD VALUE to the gameplay(why would I need errand boys or fire support that doesn't even hit anyone during firefights, because you know, let's leave the sense of "accomplishment" to the player)
2. In their effort to make those so called companions "valuable" developers have to give them some abilities and these are usually generic stuff like:
- shoot/fight/use special abilities
- dialogue options with the player character
Bam, I'm done, that's how it usually ends up. Impressive stuff, huh? And that starts to make those characters generic, because no matter how many dialogue options we have with them, they will still be under the constraints of AI rather than being freely guided by developer's creativity.
Even if you add here some other mechanics like providing money, doing jobs etc the main question is why would I need that? What does it bring to the gameplay to have a bot we can talk to from time to time if we're bored?
A following comparison might help illustrate what I mean a little better:
In Dragon Age:Origins I have my whole team out there, I can control them in fights etc and still awesomely written, characteristic NPCs like Iorveth or Roche bring more life and value to my game.
So.. You are basically saying, since you don't want or need them, they are useless and nobody should have them... And what you are saying, whats coming out of your keyboard actually makes sense to you... I want them and i need them.. And i'm sure many do.. I shouldn't have to convince you for it.. If there are companions in the game, you can easily ignore and not use them, but there are no companions in the game, i wont be able to have fun and ignore.. You can always take out things but adding them is a different matter... And your other argument, Iorveth and Roche were main characters.. To give a companion to Gerald, you don't really have to take those two out.. If Gerald had a companion, only two things would be different, there would be a recruitable character that would comment on Gerald's actions throughout the game and maybe the game would have a side quest or two based on that character.. That's all.. And that would only serve to enrich someones gaming experience without harming the experience of the people who doesn't want any companions around.
At least I gave you some arguments why they are useless for me. I also asked a couple of times what kind of value do recruitable characters bring, gameplay or story wise, but so far no answer besides "because I want them".
I can't see how having someone to comment on my actions is of any value that would rationalize spending development time on AI and additional mechanics related to AI controlled NPCs acting as companions rather then spending that very same time development time developing NPC characters and their quest/storylines.
Dandelion made a great job of commenting on my actions and he was barely present during gameplay sections of the game. And guess what - I still felt he is my friend, that we are close, I didn't need him to DO anything for me. That's because of the characterization of his, and many other characters.
What I mean is that my character should have friends, lovers or people close to him/her, but that doesn't mean they have to be AI or player controlled and centered around my character. Those roles will be filled perfectly by NPCs that have their own lives, motivations and backstories and don't end up as my errand boys or blind wingmen, failing to hit a target in a firefight.
Wow, you oversimplified something i've oversimplified so much that it doesn't make any sense anymore.. Dandelion didn't made a good job of commenting on your actions and you know why? Because he never did.. He never commented over your actions not even once.. He was only telling a story like, "Our lovely Gerald did this and that" (presumably in a tavern somewhere). He never ever gone to Gerald saying "Gerald, what the fuck is wrong with you, why the hell did you do all that". So your argument are wrong from the base.. My argument is your character wants to be alone, but my character wants to build a team and commit crimes "for the greater good" while still having "their own lives, motivations and backstories", why shouldn't we have both? Why your idea of fun should ruin mine, if mine wouldn't even remotely effect yours...
And how is that valuable from gameplay perspective? Or any perspective, for that matter?
That's a great way to prove your argument and move the discussion forward!That was an example.. Use your imagination..
I guess that would be the best.. We don't even know what they are planning now, do we? I hope they will give a bit more information on E3..
Most certainly need companions. Id like to see them take a page from the Fallout universe and give the comps their own quests, back story, possible hidden agendas and what not. Ya know.... give em life.
Unless you can control them, the AI will be of minimal help, which puts us right back at whether we want this to be a ' your party ventures forth' or 'you venture forth' type of game. The former seems far too DnD to me, and not only that, it would take massive resources to do right. To sum up, companions seems about as fitting for CP 2077 as in Dark Souls. Which is not at all.
Your main assumption is AI will suck no matter what.. Which is wrong.. Either you didn't play many games that AI was adequate enough or you didn't play many games at all.. I'm not sure which... Your whole argument is "AI would be a minimal help for hirelings so Cyberpunk is not a fitting game for companions".. Which is almost like the argument, "a tank engine wouldn't fit a car, so people shouldn't drive cars".. You don't even know what can CDPR do for/with companion AI's, yet you assume it will be terrible... You don't even know what type of AI CDPR capable of creating.. None of us know that. You just claim, out of nowhere, it will suck no matter what.. There are many, many games where companion AI was good enough but that doesn't matter now, does it?.. Lets delete all the enemies and make this game Cybersims instead! After all enemy AI may or may not be not satisfactory.. We are making games based on AI, right?.... Right....
No. Wars, the AI will suck no matter what because they always have. There is no game extant with good support-AI for companions. We can pretend CDPR will somehow miraculously develop one at minimal resource cost, but we can also pretend they will put the ability to command corporations and Nomad packs in the game. Very unlikely. The AI for Bioshock Infiinite, for example, took a lot of effort for Levine's crew, effort he had to force them into because they kept wanting to drop it as not being worth the effort.
And in the end, that AI was no sufficient for anything other than very general support and staying out of your way. She did not act like a human player would and in a complex RPG like CP2077 will be, would be an immersion breaker of the first water.
CDPR is trying to do a lot - we're basing our predictions for their AI on their previous efforts. Which is quite reasonable.
And in the end, that AI was no sufficient for anything other than very general support and staying out of your way. She did not act like a human player would and in a complex RPG like CP2077 will be, would be an immersion breaker of the first water.
CDPR is trying to do a lot - we're basing our predictions for their AI on their previous efforts. Which is quite reasonable.
I don't recall where I read an article on a game that had to dumb down there AI because it was too good.. I read this a few years ago I just can't recall I would link it.
There basic argument for amazing intelligent AI was that humans couldn't beat them in the test.. So they lowered the AI's capacity to function at a reasonable level..
For CDPR problem is finding balance and good scripting. But I'm on your side on how reasonable CDPR will make there AI. An AI too good takes time and resources... But can make it boring for players who can't beat a better thinking script working within the game mechanics. How long can you take a beating before you give up?
They're not true AI anyhow.. just VI scripted stuff..
I would kill for a companion like Elizabeth in BioShock Infinite, she was, how I can out it - COMPLETE!
Although she was not a combatant, throwing out stuff when required that too limited so it isn't silly, scavenging, she doing random stuff and fiddling around, dialogues dam I was in love with her! Best part not to worry to baby sit her.
Triss in TW2 seemed to be in that direction but there was hardly anything of that sort and besides Geralt is a one man army.
Would love to see a dynamic father-daughter relationship with Ciri in TW3 and with our character and a companion in CP77. Would be more awesome if the companion was specific to our customized character class/gender/selection.
Although she was not a combatant, throwing out stuff when required that too limited so it isn't silly, scavenging, she doing random stuff and fiddling around, dialogues dam I was in love with her! Best part not to worry to baby sit her.
Triss in TW2 seemed to be in that direction but there was hardly anything of that sort and besides Geralt is a one man army.
Would love to see a dynamic father-daughter relationship with Ciri in TW3 and with our character and a companion in CP77. Would be more awesome if the companion was specific to our customized character class/gender/selection.
I'd really like to have companions. They're really nice to have around if we get too long combat grinds so they distract you and give their input on things. Also they shouldn't be immortal, but they should still be useful in combat.
And of course they should be optional. Companions missions in many games are often the best ones also. There should also be some sort of requirements for some companions (reputation, job completed, person killed / saved) before you could have chance to "recruit" them.
And the most important things for me: companion input /support in conversations and consequences. Companions would of course take part in conversations and if they are good enough could help you persuade/intimidate etc. Companions also should have reputation system according their interests and moral clock (not black and white) that would change according you choices and actions. Perhaps you could become best friends /lovers or perhaps depending the situation your companion would attack you or just leave if the reputation would drop low enough.
Also in Dragon Age you could tweak the AI combat by yourself. I didn't play around with it that much so can't tell how great it actually was. Other than SWAT 3 I can't recall AI that was really horrible, but even in that game it was because you couldn't save and after they walked infront of you bullet fire they would take you down :S
And as pointless as companions were in Skyrim they were useful in the end when I just released'em in to caves and walked behind them looting the bodies
Sorry about this post running all over the place but I just read 10 pages of this topic so had lot of thoughts in my mind
And of course they should be optional. Companions missions in many games are often the best ones also. There should also be some sort of requirements for some companions (reputation, job completed, person killed / saved) before you could have chance to "recruit" them.
And the most important things for me: companion input /support in conversations and consequences. Companions would of course take part in conversations and if they are good enough could help you persuade/intimidate etc. Companions also should have reputation system according their interests and moral clock (not black and white) that would change according you choices and actions. Perhaps you could become best friends /lovers or perhaps depending the situation your companion would attack you or just leave if the reputation would drop low enough.
Also in Dragon Age you could tweak the AI combat by yourself. I didn't play around with it that much so can't tell how great it actually was. Other than SWAT 3 I can't recall AI that was really horrible, but even in that game it was because you couldn't save and after they walked infront of you bullet fire they would take you down :S
And as pointless as companions were in Skyrim they were useful in the end when I just released'em in to caves and walked behind them looting the bodies
Sorry about this post running all over the place but I just read 10 pages of this topic so had lot of thoughts in my mind