Procedural NPCs

[Zombra]

Sure, you will get a lot of boring NPCs through a procedural system.

Attach enough variables to the system and nearly every NPC could be a multifaceted personality. Randomize quite a bit and you might get to the point where it's tough to tell procedural NPCs from the authored ones...

No argument here! But to me complex and boring aren't mutually exclusive ... in fact, as I explained above with Ogre Battle, complex authored characters are often MORE boring than shallow, random sketches but I digress. And I do agree that the more variables, the better. But just a few is fine too!

[Drool]

If Christine had been Chris, maybe I would have liked him, maybe I wouldn't have. If Ralf had been Smitty the Bear-Baiter, maybe I would have liked him, maybe I wouldn't have.

By being different every time, you wouldn't even remember their name. They'd be "NPC downtown" and "NPC being tortured". Anything interesting about them would be bled out. Mort's boring enough as is, I can only imagine how forgettable he'd be if he stopped being "gambling city slicker" and became "NPC #5: Needles Police Station".

The prospect of seeing all the same exact NPCs again just doesn't entice me that much when most of them are dull.

And making them randomly generated non-entities will improve that? It will make them less of a collection of statistics? You found a connection with Christine because of who she was. Her abilities, her attitude. All of which the game was able to get across in a single line of text. That's an effective character. She stuck out in my memory too. If she was different every time I played, she'd be forgettable. Perhaps you don't see it because you've only done one playthrough, but I've played it hundreds of times. Having Christine vying with a couple dozen other versions would dilute them all.

So you do seek variation from playthrough to playthrough, but you want that variation to be totally predetermined based on your decisions, not based on any variety in the game itself?

Generally. I still play games with plenty of randomness, like Desktop Dungeons, but that randomness is frequently a source of frustration rather than excitement. Getting Meat Boy as the boss pretty much means "scrap the game and try again". I prefer to succeed or fail based on my ability, not on how generous Fate is feeling.

How about Skyrim? Elder Scrolls is certainly a beloved and popular franchise. Tons of randomness (or at least "proceduralness") in Skyrim.

Very little, actually. The NPCs certainly aren't random. And would it be improved if Lydia was sometimes Leon?

End bosses in dungeons completely change based on the level and skill set of the PC.

That's not random, that's scaling.

I suppose there are "decision paths" that would lead to similar playthroughs every time, particularly if you stick doggedly to major prescripted quest lines, but for the most part I think you couldn't play that game the same way twice if you tried.

Every major quest-line will be identical each playthrough. The Radiant system adds some randomness, but it's still pretty narrow, and generally just a source of frustration, especially the Thieves Guild side jobs when you're trying to finish off the last city and they keep giving you cities you've already done.

But the main quests will always be the same. Assassinating the emperor will always be the same; finding the Staff of Magnus will always be the same; capturing Odahviing will be the same. The majority of significant changes between playthroughs will be based on the player's actions, not randomness.

Sure, then you have games like Mario World

Which are still wildly popular. Along with their cousins in the Megaman, Castlevania, Zelda, and Metroid worlds.

Wasteland is your favorite movie and you love watching it over and over again. Which is fine! I'm not knocking that mindset.

Referring to Wasteland as a "movie" certainly implies that you're mocking both it and me. The most generous interpretation would be that it's a backhanded compliment as opposed to outright dismissal.

But in games I'd rather have a little mystery, especially if I've played it through before, and I'm not the only one.

I prefer to improve by learning how the games works and being able to play it better and more efficiently. If I want an all new experience, I'll play a new game or replay it with a completely different set-up. Like my New Vegas playthrough with a character who had a 1 Intelligence.

[nathanknaack]

By being different every time, you wouldn't even remember their name.

The story about "Lemon" above would seem to entirely contradict this statement. Sure, you might also remember Mort just as well, but if that NPC were something unique to your game, why would that make it any less memorable?

They'd be "NPC downtown" and "NPC being tortured". Anything interesting about them would be bled out. Mort's boring enough as is, I can only imagine how forgettable he'd be if he stopped being "gambling city slicker" and became "NPC #5: Needles Police Station".

I'm still trying to figure out if this is a complete lack of imagination on your part or just your heels dug in to back up your assertion that procedural content wouldn't add anything to the game. Obviously the NPC would have a real name generated for it.

Guess what, you know what Christina was in the original design document of Wasteland 1? I absolutely, without a doubt promise you she was just called "NPC in downtown Needles" until they got around to giving her a name, stats, and gear. The exact same thing goes for just about all the other NPCs. Mort, Ralf, Vax, Mad Dog Fargo, Metal Maniac, etc.

And making them randomly generated non-entities will improve that? It will make them less of a collection of statistics? You found a connection with Christine because of who she was. Her abilities, her attitude. All of which the game was able to get across in a single line of text.

A procedural NPC system could easily create characters just as, perhaps even more interesting than this. Once again, "procedural" does not mean "totally randomize every number and slap on a name made from random letters."

That's an effective character. She stuck out in my memory too.

I hate to have to point this out, but I think this is almost entirely the nostalgia talking in your previous statement.

And would it be improved if Lydia was sometimes Leon?

You are once again reinforcing two misconceptions of what procedural NPCs are:

A) They are not meant to replace important, storyline NPCs that are woven into the plot. Lydia would not be a procedural NPC.

B) Even if that character was a procedural NPC, the changes made to the character would be much more than just name and gender. Ideally, enough would change so that it would be a totally different person every time, with an appearance, skill set, and personality type heavily weighted by the environment and situation in which they're found.

Wasteland is your favorite movie and you love watching it over and over again. Which is fine! I'm not knocking that mindset.

Referring to Wasteland as a "movie" certainly implies that you're mocking both it and me. The most generous interpretation would be that it's a backhanded compliment as opposed to outright dismissal.

Stop being so sensitive.

I prefer to improve by learning how the games works and being able to play it better and more efficiently.

Okay, this is perhaps the most illuminating statement anyone has made in this thread. You seem to enjoy repeatedly playing games to improve your efficiency. I don't know about anyone else here, but that couldn't be further from how I play games. I think I understand why you're so opposed to procedural content now, Drool: You're the type of person who wants to master a game, who wants to know with absolute certainty that it's going to be the same every time so you can perfect your technique. To you, having anything randomized is like turning baseball into Calvinball; if the rules change from moment to moment, you're just wandering around wondering what's going to happen next.

[Zombra]

By being different every time, you wouldn't even remember their name.

If I played through the game 3 times a week, maybe not. Not everyone is you

[Zombra]

So you do seek variation from playthrough to playthrough, but you want that variation to be totally predetermined based on your decisions, not based on any variety in the game itself?

Generally. I still play games with plenty of randomness, like Desktop Dungeons, but that randomness is frequently a source of frustration rather than excitement. Getting Meat Boy as the boss pretty much means "scrap the game and try again". I prefer to succeed or fail based on my ability, not on how generous Fate is feeling.

Sure, then you have games like Mario World

Which are still wildly popular. Along with their cousins in the Megaman, Castlevania, Zelda, and Metroid worlds.

I prefer to improve by learning how the games works and being able to play it better and more efficiently.

Okay, this is perhaps the most illuminating statement anyone has made in this thread. You seem to enjoy repeatedly playing games to improve your efficiency. I don't know about anyone else here, but that couldn't be further from how I play games. I think I understand why you're so opposed to procedural content now, Drool: You're the type of person who wants to master a game, who wants to know with absolute certainty that it's going to be the same every time so you can perfect your technique.

Yep, we've isolated the major difference between the pros and the cons. Some of us are more X-Com type players who enjoy the unexpected; some are more Mario World players who prefer to master every detail of a static environment. Neither type is right or wrong, but there will be plenty of static details in W2 for the Marios. Let us Xers have some unpredictable stuff as well please

[nathanknaack]

Yep, we've isolated the major difference between the pros and the cons. Some of us are more X-Com type players who enjoy the unexpected; some are more Mario World players who prefer to master every detail of a static environment. Neither type is right or wrong, but there will be plenty of static details in W2 for the Marios. Let us Xers have some unpredictable stuff as well please

Or have we found another feature to attach to an overall difficulty or preference slider in the game's options? I'm just spitballing here, but what if there was an option for "replayability" where stuff would get more procedural and randomized?

[Zombra]

Or have we found another feature to attach to an overall difficulty or preference slider in the game's options? I'm just spitballing here, but what if there was an option for "replayability" where stuff would get more procedural and randomized?

Mmm, my reflex is to resist a plethora of sliders and options. I really think it detracts from the strength of a design. I think procedurally generated NPCs would be a great decision, but I'd kind of rather they did it or they didn't, you know?

[nathanknaack]

I'd kind of rather they did it or they didn't, you know?

Going to get all Yoda on me, eh?

[Drool]

That's an effective character. She stuck out in my memory too.

I hate to have to point this out, but I think this is almost entirely the nostalgia talking in your previous statement.

Yes. I remembered her for 24 years because of nostalgia

[Zombra]

Going to get all Yoda on me, eh?

Oh man, I lolled

[nathanknaack]

That's an effective character. She stuck out in my memory too.

I hate to have to point this out, but I think this is almost entirely the nostalgia talking in your previous statement.

Yes. I remembered her for 24 years because of nostalgia

Uhm, yeah. That's pretty much exactly what nostalgia does to you.

At this point, I'm starting to think you're doing this on purpose for hilarious results, Drool. In several threads now, you seem to reply to my statements (and yes, accusations) with literal expressions that either backup my statements or confirm my accusations. You do this with such amazing accuracy and comedic timing that it can't just be accidental.

Seriously, let's summarize what just happened above:

You: "This character was so simple she stuck out in my mind."
Me: "There's not much to that character; I think it might just be nostalgia."
You: "No way, a condition that causes you to become emotionally attached to something and remember it years later couldn't possibly be the reason I'm emotionally attached and remember her years later."

You should probably start reading your posts before you submit them. You remind me of two of my favorite characters from television: Liz Lemon and Lindsay Bluth.

Liz: "Women are allowed to get angrier than men at double standards."

Lindsay: [reading an article about herself] "Lindsay's a combative, entitled princess"? I should hire someone to kick your ass for that!"

See what I'm talking about, Drool?

[Darkershure]

Would be awesome,if done right. which is very possible to do. Well done "randomized" npcs can be very good, to an extent that you would've guessed they were authored.

Of course there's the other route, where the developer makes each npc from the ground up and places them by hand in the game world. sure, it may turn out a little better and if the team member doing it has the initiative, maybe they'll tack a quest on to the majority of them. but could you imagine filling a world or even a city with the population of just 30-50 by hand(that's names,faces,clothes,property ownership,quest/dialogue,family,items,personality ect.. that would take alot(BIG ALOT) of time. your basically making an mmo at that point and that's just one city...

back in the day, you had to do stuff like that.. placing trees, grass,rocks,npcs,ect by hand. but things have changed exponentially since then.

procedural generation can be as good or bad as the programmer wants it to be. if you just spend a good amount of time programming the code and improving it, you can easily cut the work load and time down to 1/100th and still have plenty of saved time to go through and touch things up by hand if you so wish to or you could always spend the next year and a half doing it by hand, pick your poison I guess .

I think dwarf fortress is a wonderful example of what can be done with it,very little if anything is authored in that game. And the npcs in it are so well detailed, not only physically, but personality wise as well.

[Drool]

You: "No way, a condition that causes you to become emotionally attached to something and remember it years later couldn't possibly be the reason I'm emotionally attached and remember her years later."

If...

Oh, forget it.