The art for my intro, this video's thumbnail and title card was done by artist Azuma Yasuo. The Westworld lofi themes heard in this video are from a fantastic musician named Jembei. You can find Azuma's Patreon and all respective links for both creators in the description!
even a player character is kind of an NPC to a degree, let me explain my point. so none of the words the player character is our own, maybe one day with AI this will happen, but in most games even the player is partially an NPC simply because of the limited dialogue choices. maybe in the future the player will be able to say anything they want while the NPC's powered by AI guide them to the story path, but this might bring more choices to the story, and that's what i want to see in the future of gaming.
what you describe in this video is already being done through a mod in skyrim, i forgot that it's called, but it uses a combination of generative AI and a text to speech program that has been trained to the lore of the game and is your follower, but her responses are based on what the player says. my other comment sort of goes into this detail, but it's essentially what you speak of in this video, sadly i don't see anyone in the AAA gaming industry attempting anything like this, it's always the modding community that attempt things like this, they are the critical components to the future in technological progress when it comes to gaming. now the mod is free, but to get it to work it does cost some money because the AI generative service that is a work in progress is still a work in progress, it's funny but games such as skyrim are perfect playgrounds for players who want to experiment on a new idea, and sometimes these ideas revolutionize the way the game can be played and keep it relevant with the rest of the gaming industry. now if these mod authors had a few billion dollars backing their efforts, they might have something that is seen in every new game and that future will happen once it's good enough.
How is Elizabeth good? She's a non gameplay element that talks at you, occasionally throwing you items. If there were mechanics in place where she could be captured or have health you have to manage she'd be much more effective.
The biggest obstacle to this would be the narrative. Because stories are about the choices of the main characters, and If NPCs and side characters are gonna make choices, optimally that means you're gonna have several other main characters. So as a result, infinite branches of stories will be created based on the actions of npcs and the writers will have to make them all as interesting as a linear main story. And also their choices can overwrite yours so it'll be really hard to manage multiple character arcs, endings, midpoints and personal conflicts with specific opposing characters and keep them interesting in any way possible. We just need a few genious writers who can pull off such an enormous, complex task and also very capable programmers who can make those npcs work well.
Also the lack of a main quest could be something complicated unless you have so many different base stories and naratives to go off of to begin with. No publisher is going to fund this easily and who knows how well this would be crowded funded in addition to asking how many branching action and storylines do you want. This just feels like perfection the game and a pain in the ass- not to say it can't be don't, but this requires so much passion and interactivity. the only thing I can see coming close to this would be some type of sandbox game where the quests are bare bones, put it's like an immersive sim plus, where you could call a group of enemies and convince the remaining to split the reward with you or something or basically and mmo or online game where basically every place is the pc and we all make individual choices that affect one another. (i.e what ashes of creation and star citizen are trying to do).
@gon720 you're totally right. It might be possible in games that don't lean heavily on quests and are more about free interactions that the player has with the world and its npcs. The closest example that i can think of is the stalker series. Maybe the first step should be to make characters that will do what they want without the need for a player interaction. Like factions that will attack eachother and the consequences that their actions will have in the world. Different characters will align with opposing factions and will have their own belief. So, the story will move forward, whether the player wants to intervene or not. But if he does, it can change thr course of the story and the game world.
@@SuSTR7 Kind of reminds me how Mount & Blade: Warband functions. With no set outcome, the game does make you feel as if the world is up for grabs, and who will be in control is not known.
Interesting you mention The Sims, I remember it having a 'Free Will' option that enables Sims to move and to perform certain actions without being directed by the player. (Eating, cleaning and even interacting with each other) What found interesting was the relationship accept of things, Sims grow friendships or destroy them to the point of fighting each other, all without player interaction. I wonder what an RPG with comradery, betrayal , dynamic factions, allegiances be like?
Speaking of unusual NPC... In someone's review of Stalker2, during conversation with NPC, he got bored of players questions, and walked away. Most probably a bug, but it was hilarious nevertheless.
Ironic, since the biggest draw in those games was the A-Life system, which currently does not work in STALKER 2 (which is why I have not bought it yet). But yeah, that was probably a bug.
i could be remembering wrong, but i think in triangle strategy the npcs can make decisions which supersede yours if your charisma/presence isn't high enough and the group you've formed feels strongly enough in one direction counter to yours
If I'm not misunderstanding you, you are advocating for two things: 1) Dynamic NPC-to-NPC interaction based on programmed goals. 2) NPC-to-NPC interactions influencing how they interact with players. What you're essentially describing has existed for decades in 4X strategy games.
DX, the way you’re able to convey the human element in the creation of games while expressing the importance of the technology behind these games is very unique and poignant. Awesome videos.
Stalker anomaly has a great npcs, I remember playing as a Monolith, the most hated faction, enemies with everyone except for 1 non playable group "zombies". I hired 2 guys to travel with me and I tried to take out a pretty large loner base, but with my team and equipment I was no match keep dying, I didn't even had enough ammo. But I managed herd a bunch of zombies to their direction and another 2 groups of monolith to help me. and after few attempt managed to take out that base, by using the zombies as a human shield. It was great.
I think there are different stages of NPC intelligence and agency. Personally I'd love to have free conversations with NPCs (talking about life and stuff) and to have them fulfill complex tasks (having the local baker join me in war against goblins). It would be cool if every NPC had their own personal life outside the main story (like the king going fishing every weekend). In Ghost of Tsushima, after clearing an enemy base, the locals will start moving in and repairing the buildings. Unfortunately they never fully repair them. In order to make a world feel alive, you need to make the game world feel dynamic. Buildings/forests/bridges need to be destroyed and restored.
I want to make a comment on this. But there is so much to unpack here. And a lot of what you're saying is wrong. This video gives off the vibe that you only play AAA games. And what you're asking for is present in indie games. Because the AAA market likes to tell narratives. And you cannot have a narrative with NPCs that operate like this. What you're asking for has already been achieved with procedural generation, in the simulation genre, In indie games. Dwarf Fortress. Kenchi. Mount and Blade. All have NPCs that create emergent storytelling. But unfortunately, you'd have to use your imagination like gamers did back in the days of Ultima. But if you're a person that only plays AAA games, this will not appeal to you. I've attempted to make this comment at least six times and it always ended up to be a very very long thing, And I don't want to write all of this stuff just to be ignored. Honestly, I'd say check out this game called the Wayward Realms. It's helmed by ex-OG Fallout staff and ex-staff of Bethesda during the Daggerfall days. They are trying to make a spiritual successor to Daggerfall. Their main selling point is storytelling through procedural generation. The game has no main story. It is built on the Unreal Engine (By the way, what you said about the Unreal Engine is incorrect.) An Epic Games gave them a grant to help them develop the game. So that when they make breakthroughs in procedural generation They can give that information to Epic and Epic will make it easier to accomplish in the Unreal Engine. There is so much I want to say about this video and no time to do it. But I feel pressured to comment because I don't want to get lost in the sauce when everyone else starts commenting. And I just become one of many I miss watching your videos. I've been a fan of your channel since the RWBY days and SAO. As a person that loves gaming and is trying to make a game myself and has been all over the gaming landscape, this video really rubs me the wrong way.
I disagree that you can't have a narrative with NPCs that operate like this. It'd be difficult, but not impossible. NPCs that partially function off a system like this already exist. One example would be Johnny Silverhand and Cyberpunk's friendship system. With that said, there'd be significant roadblocks and unless the dev is actually dedicated to making this system then there's just no reason to make it. I really want to check out Wayward Realms, I'd heard of it before and it sounds actually systemically unique. Thanks for commenting!
@@DXFromYTBut that's how most good RPGs already function. It's not a new concept. NPCs have their personalities and respond to your actions/dialogue choices by raising or lowering a visible or invisible affinity meter which then unlocks or locks you out of certain dialogue choices or quests. That's literally the best you can do in a scripted narrative and there is no other way to really solve it unless you incorporate some kind of generative AI.
@@amysteriousviewer3772 Sure, though I think Johnny is a bit more nuanced because the options are less player centric from a narrative perspective. And that's what I'd like to see more of, though I think creating this illusion using the conventional systems and changing nothing about how the narrative is approached fundamentally would be challenging.
I think the biggest chance we have of NPCs changing in some significant way this generation is in Ken Levine's new game Judas. Elizabeth is kind of the figurehead NPC of this video at least in occurrence and the thumbnail (lol). When Levine was making BioShock Infinite it was already late into development when he realized he was upset that the player could get to know Elizabeth but Elizabeth could never know the player. Since then he's spent the last 11 years developing an NPC system that is supposedly supposed to allow player actions to drastically change the narrative and NPC relations. I have very high hopes for Judas and I think if anyone with a big budget is going to make a groundbreaking mechanic it's going to be Ken Levine, again. Hopefully when it comes out it's good and gets the attention it deserves. Maybe you'll even make a video about it.
14:35 "Isn't the work worth the wait?" you ask. No, it isn't. I hear what you are saying, and having NPCs with this unreal magic-like livel of self-awareness would indeed be revolutionary for the gaming experience... but my dude, AAA games already take over half a decade to make. I personally don't need another half decade to be put on top of that. I'm not saying I want quantity over quality with games just being released like clockwork, but I already feel that 5 years is an insane amount of time for development of a single title. SantaMonica declined from making a third norse God of War game partially because they were burned out from having made two games that took a combined 10 years of their lives to make. So no, I don't want a game that has incredible life-like AI if it takes 10 or 20 years to make. Plus, while you say that even the cooperative AI in games like F.E.A.R. and FarCry are merely an illusion; NPCs programmed to act like they are cooperating... this illusion is good enough for me. Videogames are a simulation afterall. It's not real. It's a stageplay programmed to FEEL real. While I agree that the AI in some games need improvement and that the NPCs in some games need work, I don't need them to be on the meta level of self-concious that you are describing. It's an interesting thought for sure, but not something I would want realized. If the story is good and well-told, that's all I care about. I don't need self-concious NPC, I want NPCs that act convincingly.
ICO is interesting NPC with how the whole game you actively hold a button an actively run around scared that you will lose her but then she grabs your hand before carrying you to safety and that experience inspired many games like Last Of Us to be made you only win because she was given reason by your gameplay to care for you enough to preserve your life
Have you seen the movie from a few years ago called "Free Guy" starring Ryan Reynolds? That movie explores the idea of an NPC having generative AI as he interacts with a female player with a certain programming to embody the traits that player loves because he is programmed by her boyfriend who basically made a love letter in an algorithm. It's a pretty sappy and cheesy flick but it does have a smart and thoughtful theme that gamers everywhere would most likely appreciate.
This perspective is completely unrealistic. You might think you want this kind of game, but let’s be honest-do you really want a game where you’re not the main character? A game where NPCs exclude you from the plot due to factors beyond your knowledge or control? It would feel like arbitrarily hiding content from the player. No matter the reasons behind the NPCs' decisions, from the player's perspective, they would mostly seem random. We all once dreamed of VR and imagined how amazing it would be to step into virtual worlds. Now that it’s here, many of us don’t use it because of motion sickness and the inconvenience of having to get off the couch. This concept would likely end up the same: a fascinating idea in theory but too stressful and unfulfilling for most players in practice. In fact, there’s already been a game that attempted something similar: Alien: Isolation. Many players found the intelligent AI, which hunted the player dynamically rather than following set patterns, far too terrifying to handle.
Yes, I'd love a game where I'm not the main character. No, VR grows in popularity each year despite the problems you've mentioned. And Alien: Isolation is getting a sequel so...
I think some randomness (or I should say guided randomness, NPCs would still act in coherent way with their character, but not in a totally predictable way) can be implemented quite easily but only if it's superficial, the more we want it to interact with the rest of the game, the main quest, your ability to progress and so on, the more exponentially out of whack everything else becomes, you'd have to either make the game itself diverge into multiple still engaging and well paced paths, which at that point makes me think it's better to not have "free will" in NPCs at all, but create certain choices they can make, some chosen at random, some influenced by the player, but all precurated by the designers, or your game has to be quite free flow in every aspect, so it necessarily becomes a procedural generated sandbox or sandbox like experience.
Imagine rdr2’s honor system. The more negative your score goes, the more your infamy rises and different npc’s choose to help or hurt you once they hear about you. Imagine Angelo Bronte wanting to give you a job, or maybe it could be something sinister like deciding to kill Jack when he kidnaps him, or maybe do something to traumatize him to get back you. Then Jack has some insane trauma backstory that changes his entire life and interactions in the game Or this could even be used to create an infinitely replayable game. A game that has little to no narrative structure and is completely driven by the willingness of the npc to go along with whatever you’re trying to do, but at that point it would just be a simulation that would require the development of a completely singular AI which is most definitely a horrible idea
Even though something like a direct ChatGPT implementation for NPC dialog is not the future, it is apparent to me that technologies similar or derivative of it will be a backbone for not just the dialog but the generation of beats, sequences, acts and stories(general narrative).
By the nature of fiction, the artificial nature of video games, all npc’s are scripted regardless of their ability of choice, whether we use AI or not. There is no REAL way to give them choice, but we can think of more ways to give the illusion of choice, like background events that fake experience and memory, and pseudo-random chances. An example I think of is a side character you can save in life is strange 1, based on multiple events of dialogue that give the illusion you convince her of her choices, but we can complicate these processes to the nth degree to make a more convincing illusion
Another idea we can do is make the way dialogue works more complicated. Real conversations aren’t ABABAB like in games. Good movies and books have adapted their dialogue to this, imagine some how we can make mechanical/diagetic dialogue that feels like a real conversation
I adore that scene from LiS 1, it's one of the most tense moments in a game for me. It seems that the challenge right now is that NPC choice is internalized by writers who make those decisions for the characters.
i'm sorry, but how did you make an entire video about NPC's being able to make choices, interact with eachother without the player's input, and disobey the player without mentioning the middle earth games and their nemisis system
While generative AI isn't the answer to NPCs, real AI would be. It would be like a tabletop role-playing game where there is a game master. Bioware (and probably others as well) was started as a RPG company because the founders were tabletop role-playing game players. The game designer was the game master, but the world limitations were put in place because they can't compensate for every possible choice. We've all played games where a cut scene has your character do something you'd never have had them do. That happens in video games because they need to force the game in a specific direction. The unintentional brilliance of Skyrim is how easy it is to go do your own thing and ignore the main quest, but the main quest never fails or goes away because of your neglect. With an AI game master you could have things actually getting worse in the world because no one did anything to save the world.
I like the aspiration to create more independent NPCs with their own agencies. However, your explanations for why NPCs are the way they are today are so surface level it clearly shows your lack of deeper knowledge of game development and game design.
I have to disagree with your disagreement with the current conventions regarding on NPCs operate. This video seems like one of those "whoa wouldn't it be nice if all games had 100 difficulty options, 15 versions of different voice acting styles for every known language, and every playthrough sends players actually gold bars as rewards?" Well, no. We don't need NPCs in the ways you're describing, we don't need merchants interrupting conversations with more important characters, we don't need characters taking major decisions from players, and we don't need some drastic overhaul of how NPCs are done in the majority of games. This is not the literal least of our concerns but it's not that far. I'd much rather RPG devs send their time trying to improve their stories, remove inconsistencies, design interesting quests and stories, rather than experimenting with novel NPC designs when that's never really been a huge source of complaint from the majority of players.
the latest Unreal Engine 5 update could be the big leap and key for better NPCs. There's this new tech that Epic introduce in Unreal 5, where a voice actors facial expression can just be instantly captured, no need to painstakingly animate faces for every npc that needs it, that way we can still have that human touch without sacrificing time/budget
Im very glad you pointed out that we don't need generative AI for more realistic NPC AI. Niel druckmann could do with having that hit into his thick skull after his concerning interview comment about being interested in using gen AI in NPC's for future games
If its a linear story then you can't have NPCs acting differently. So any story would have to be procedurally generated like Dwarf Fortress. Most gamers demand predictability. Which is why they love those loyalty / morality meters with quantifiable numbers that perfectly predicts how they will react. If NPCs can make decisions on their own then that means how they perceive you is unpredictable and how they react is unpredictable. And because player's can't 100% understand the NPCs motive, and cannot 100% control the outcome, most will just completely give up and just treat the system as if it is just random. Or assume the game devs are lying and that the NPCs are random. And really, how can you prove otherwise? . If NPCs can act independently without a loyalty / morality meter to explicitly quantify their state of mind many gamers will instantly start crying and assume that the game devs are out to get them. "What, Bob won't help me just because I killed his wife. Man, I hate that this game makes NPCs act randomly." . And if NPCs can do stuff on their own then that means that the ability of the player to affect the world is lessened. If the NPCs are going to save the world without the player's help... why bother? Or if the NPCs are going to doom the world no matter what the player does.... why bother? . And achievement hunters and people who do multiple playthroughs will be annoyed that they do not get to go down specific paths because NPCs are not 100% predictable. I still remember in Dead Rising how I wanted to save every NPC but one NPC convinced others to go look for food and they all died and my run was completely ruined and several hours were wasted. But it was a scripted event and on my next run I could plan around it. But if NPCs just do whatever they want then its impossible to plan around. Especially for those ultra try hard super-difficulty games. . As stated, the whole point of the game would have to 100% revolve around these new types of NPCs. The most relevant games to the discussion would be Watch Dog Legion and Shadow of Mordor where NPCs are "promoted" from random nobodies to important power players.
Enjoyed the vid! I was expecting a bit about Monolith's Nemesis System which leaped NPC interaction pretty significantly only for no other game to use it because of a patent. Levine's new game Judas is also gonna incorporate a similar system. It's not gonna solve these old design problems you mentioned, but they're a step in the right direction. Also enjoyed your 'next gen gameplay' vid and agree!
Been thinking this for so many years. Devs solely focus on graphics improvements when they should be focusing on making the AI better and more believable. But since that doesn't translate to screenshots and trailers, it doesn't sell easily. Dragon's Dogma had the right idea, by breathing some more life into your NPC companions.
The beauty and the irony in you using "Westworld" as a perfect example of NPC's with agency is that Jonathan Nolan who created Westworld, directed the Fallout TV show which is based off the games. I'm sure you get to this as I'm only 10 minutes in, but I think you're right *because* of this fact. Jonathan Nolan loves video games. He played Fallout 3 for, I think he said, two or three years, so he's dedicated to that type of storytelling. He already has an appreciation for that medium.
@@DXFromYT you can tell! The passion is there and it really reads! Fallout made my jaw drop as I felt like I was walking with the characters into a world I've only played in during video games!
Ever heard of oblivion’s radiant ai the cantina did a video called what Is Wrong With Oblivion's NPCs? There npc who does there own things the problem with them is NPCs would steal things (like food) when they ran out. So when they got caught, they often didn't have enough money to pay the fine so the guards just murdered them.
To replicate consciousness or sentience in NPC in a game is not a small feat. It is very difficult to remove complete bias from the AI that is being written. You may argue that let the game write its own self replicating code with different parameters, for that also you need a game AI which will have some bias. Plus there is a problem of: if the new code that is generated corrupts the games files then it will ruin the game for so many people, which again has to be contained which will require programmer intervention/ parameters/ rules.
(Disclaimer, I haven't finished watching the video, I'm at 13:33) This reminds me a lot of Ken Levine's Narrative Lego approach. He did a talk on that at (i think) GDC like a decade ago. It is really fascinating!
Gothic I & II had good NPCs. The programing of choices that the player has and the nice implementations of NPC characters that seam to be making own choices was incredible. and that was the year 2001. I thinks we don't have to improve NPCs, I think we have to improve writing, character design and story telling
AI is based on machine learning, machine learning is used to train AI. You could train those AI NPCs by letting them observe human players (macine learning).
This exists already. It's called multiplayer. 😅 Sorry... But in all seriousness though, I don't see how this can at all be possible in a primarily story driven game. Sure, you can have the illusion of this in the sims or other open world simulator games. But you could never set a story with any depth in it that would require more than the Playable Character to complete. By setting a story you are in fact setting the direction of the game and everything would need to flow in that direction. You also need a world space for this to take place in and it can't be infinitely modular to whatever might happen. There is no way around AI for something like this, and you'd need certain characters to show up or be somewhere whenever shit goes down. They can't call in sick to a game you paid for. It's a nice dream I guess, but it is still a dream since story driven games just don't work this way.
RPG games sometimes have this mechanic built in. Who is old enough to remember Arcanum: Of Steamworks and Magick Obscura? Depending on your actions, race, clothing, etc NPCs won't have anything to do with you, will treat you with disinterest, or will court your favor.
You are correct about a lot of what your saying here but you are 100% wrong about NPCs being create the same way across all Unreal Engine games that is wildly inaccurate
I realized after I'd done the voice over that my statement could be taken to mean literal blueprints used in UE, which is, as you said, completely untrue.
@@DXFromYT All good pretty much everything else you say in the video is completely true. I will say if a person is creative enough with blueprints and the behavior tree you would be shocked what you can do. You might agree with this I think right now to get NPCs who truly feel real might be more of a design issue rather than a tech issue. Its generally possible right now just figuring out how to be able to weave many different outcomes into a narrative is the hardest part
Honestly I feel like Elizabeth is a bad example of a good NPC because it completely destroys your immersion when is she gets completely ignored by the guys ordered to capture her even when she's right in front of them or just runs past them
I'm reminded of android deviancy in Detroit: Become Human! This is a fascinating and thoughtful proposal. However, it does feel like it's advocating for gameplay chaos. Do I want an NPC to do to me what Delores did to the Man in Black and disrupt everything when I'm just trying to beat a game? Not really, lol. It basically comes down to personal preference, but what you're asking for essentially falls into role-playing territory, and while that might be more immersive in some cases, I don't think it would or should work for all games that have npcs. Just from a practical standpoint of the medium, we should consider there is sort of a language to games that a user must understand in order to anticipate what they want. Rules, if you will. I know, I know, "Screw the rules!" but I'd argue gaming from its inception, from puzzles, to fights, to real time strategy, is about figuring out patterns. Now, gamers can make entire careers out of speed running, or competing for sport, and the skill and success of that comes with some required level of predictability. And for some players there's comfort in that. Especially when this is meant to be escapism. When a game doesn't do what a player understands it should be doing, it can lead to frustration. In any case, where I would like to see this is in open-world games. One of the things that blew me away about Fallout 3 were the npc day/night cycles, where they can literally open and close their shops and go to bed, if you just follow one around. Red Dead Redemption 2 also featured a dynamic nature system where animals actually hunted other animals. That kind of stuff is awesome. Great essay. Some nice food for thought👍
Oh for sure, I think it would be best suited for RPGs. After so many games, I think I'm ready to embrace some gameplay chaos. The lack of control was really entertaining in Baldur's Gate 3.
Boy, you're in for a ride, what are you describing is emergent gameplay, this is heavily present in sandbox games, in order of peak emergent gameplay: Dwarf Fortress Rimworld Cataclsym DDA (and/or Bright Nights) Elona (and Elin) S.T.A.L.K.E.R (especially with GAMMA) Starsector Kenshi Crusader's King I highly recommend Stalker Gamma and Kenshi.
16:20 You are wrong here. There already are *existing year-old* mods for games allowing context-aware conversation with NPCs. Check out Herika for Skyrim or AI mod for Bannerlord. Imagine what dedicated professional teams could do given what part-time modders already achieved.
Herika doesn't do what I'm describing here and comes with her own set of challenges. Namely not all of her features being possible in an offline environment. I'm sure gamers would love having to be online to power their NPCs...
We need more than one or two AI types, AI should have personality, they could make a dozen models for the same enemy Enemy one is bold, likely to run head long into danger without thinking Enemy two could be a tactician, likely to flank rather than engage in head on fight Enemy three could be a coward that is more likely to run away than stay and fight Enemy four could be defensive, won't run but won't be the one initiating attacks Enemy five could be the commander, if he's with other NPC's then he organizes them and provides buffs to morale that would for example make the coward stay and fight Enemy six could be a wild card, a mix of defensive, aggressive, and tactical And each one of these could be randomly applied to ALL the enemy NPC's in the game Instead, you have one AI type with several paramanters (if you're lucky) to make them not ALWAYS act the same, but, still pretty much the same as the last 700 guys that you just mowed down 12 minutes ago I mean, just look at the first F.E.A.R., that AI isn't complex by any means but the NPC's feel like they have agency, THEY can control the pacing of the fight, THEY can make decisions to hide or push, THEY communicate and work as a unit, all of that makes the enemies believable and intense as you never know what angle they might come from to attack you. I think developers/writers are too worried about giving NPC's agency becuause what if the event they want to happen DOESN'T happen because an AI wasn't where it was supposed to be? Personally I think that's amazing, like S.T.A.L.K.E.R. A-life, sure it can end up harming the user experience if a critical AI character is killed while the player is on the other side of the game world, but the fact that it can happen to basically anyone makes the world feel more alive, no invincible NPC's that have to be alive to move the story along.
I don't really get what you mean by NPCs having choice. The only way for them to not respond to player inputs is to have them behave on a real-time basis, and most likely an invisible one at that. That may be more realistic and engaging, but also takes away from player freedom and possibly the enjoyment of the game. In the end, the world has to react to your actions or inactions because mechanically, a video game does revolve around the PC. On the other hand, giving more options for NPCs to react to your choices is always interesting but also requires a lot of narrative, animation, art, voice work and playtesting to pull off. It mounts up exponentially. Though I do agree that NPCs interacting with each other gives games a whole new dimension of immersion, especially if they are not only driven by direct player input, i.e. quests.
He doesn't really even have suggestions. He says all NPCs are illusions but why does that matter when the illusion mostly works? Everything in games is an illusion, everything in fiction is an illusion. That's just how it works.
Looks like (in order of appearance) Bioshock Infinite, GTA 5, Starfield, The Witcher, Cyberpunk 2077, Halo, Vampire Masquerades, Bioshock Infinite, Balder's Gate 3.
Even in Westworld, the unfolding of Androids having agency and how that specifically plays out is, guess what, prewritten. It sounds like you want a chaotic sandbox game, which is great, and can be its own genre. However, games with very strong stories need prewritten order, no matter how complex the story, otherwise you sacrifice the story for NPC agency. In the chaotic sandbox NPC agency style game with no main quest, every time you’ll play it theoretically will be a new/different story, and none of the players who played the game can connect on how great that shared story was. You can’t have both a focused story that we all can connect with AND NPCs who have agency.
It isn't scripted. Ford specifically says that the hosts always reached self awareness before he was forced to wipe them. Season 2 also shows us that with Ford and Akecheta's interaction. What was scripted were Maeve's actions that were meant to get her out of the park but even then, she doesn't listen to those and that jump starts her free will. Maeve snapping at MIB was explicitly not scripted either. Do you mean that Ford planned everything when he re-added the reveries?
@@DXFromYTI’m saying the writers of the show ultimately wrote that. And the point still remains that you can’t have both a focused consistent story that we all can connect with AND an ever new always changing experience at the same time. You have to choose one, which is fine for a chaotic sandbox style game with no main story if that’s what one might want to play. Games with a main quest/story is what draws a lot of players.
Why are you a genius? My God, this is gold. This is also great advice and philosophy for non-interactive fiction but also life. ...Without getting carried away: in approaching game development this way, it's good grounding for people and promotion of overall empathy. It's great that people might be forced to think about other perspectives in the realm of creativity. Also, you have my respect for the encouragement of it being a matter of human approach (especially since generative AI just follows rules it makes up to simulate human biases anyway, without having human nuance and thinking ability).
Preface: I might be nitpicking here on a very specific part of your essay, and thus whatever bias might be there in my comment. That said, I think the premise of NPC "action" and "choice", and using the Sims to further work on that point, is a bit misleading. To jump straight to the point, I think you are misinterpreting the "emergent storytelling" aspect of the Sims, and other simulation games, with intelligent NPCs. The designers of the sims have a good talk on GDC about this. What I'm trying to say is, the "actions" or "choices" you think the NPCs make in the Sims are just your brain making the stories that they have choices. But just like in high fantasy games, it's just dice roll. Note: I have to jump on a meeting but this is a great video. Subscribed! Cheers.
This essay isn't really about intelligent NPCs, as I think their "choices" would still have to be completely illusory as they are in The Sims. Could I get a link to that GDC talk? It sounds very interesting!
@DXFromYT fair enough. I did nitpick earlier as I was in a bit of a rush. I have to say though, I do agree that the technology is there to create very emergent NPC behaviour. And yes, genAI is not going to help much. It will help in some aspect but right now, when used in a game, it's still very "machine-like" in a sense that it's uncanny. I myself have written prototypes to simulate human relationships, so I know it is not impossible. Or, you go the other way and use a sandbox approach to how NPCs behave, like in Rimworld.
@@neilmarkcorre5524 It's definitely a design problem and not a technical one, at least today. I really can't wait to see how creatives tackle this, can you speak on your implementation?
Keep in mind that 'better NPCs' like the ones in BG3 are much more expensive. So if you are also one of those people who wants more 'AA' games you are being a hypocrite. Can't have both. BTW games like Outer Worlds and Avowed are basically AA nowadays and they are not as successful as AAA RPGs.
@DashMatin And the cost. We shit ourselves over a $10 increase. If a game took 2-3x the development time, would anybody pay 2-3x the price. Would a developer want to take the chance that a game that took 20 years to make might fail?
The art for my intro, this video's thumbnail and title card was done by artist Azuma Yasuo. The Westworld lofi themes heard in this video are from a fantastic musician named Jembei. You can find Azuma's Patreon and all respective links for both creators in the description!
Do put Lucia or jason character as animation intro
even a player character is kind of an NPC to a degree, let me explain my point.
so none of the words the player character is our own, maybe one day with AI this will happen, but in most games even the player is partially an NPC simply because of the limited dialogue choices.
maybe in the future the player will be able to say anything they want while the NPC's powered by AI guide them to the story path, but this might bring more choices to the story, and that's what i want to see in the future of gaming.
what you describe in this video is already being done through a mod in skyrim, i forgot that it's called, but it uses a combination of generative AI and a text to speech program that has been trained to the lore of the game and is your follower, but her responses are based on what the player says.
my other comment sort of goes into this detail, but it's essentially what you speak of in this video, sadly i don't see anyone in the AAA gaming industry attempting anything like this, it's always the modding community that attempt things like this, they are the critical components to the future in technological progress when it comes to gaming.
now the mod is free, but to get it to work it does cost some money because the AI generative service that is a work in progress is still a work in progress, it's funny but games such as skyrim are perfect playgrounds for players who want to experiment on a new idea, and sometimes these ideas revolutionize the way the game can be played and keep it relevant with the rest of the gaming industry.
now if these mod authors had a few billion dollars backing their efforts, they might have something that is seen in every new game and that future will happen once it's good enough.
If every non player character was as good as Elizabeth from BioShock Infinite in their roles some great games could be even better.
Agreed, and I may be mad late for saying this, but I feel that people would even like the NPCs more than the MC
If everyone is special then no1 is special. Just food for thought.
@@heavyartillery-qm5hu Not saying everyone has to be. I just want everyone's roles to feel well thought out.
How is Elizabeth good? She's a non gameplay element that talks at you, occasionally throwing you items. If there were mechanics in place where she could be captured or have health you have to manage she'd be much more effective.
Elizabeth having health would have been terrible and a chore. They did the right thing by not making the player have to manage her during gameplay.
The biggest obstacle to this would be the narrative. Because stories are about the choices of the main characters, and If NPCs and side characters are gonna make choices, optimally that means you're gonna have several other main characters. So as a result, infinite branches of stories will be created based on the actions of npcs and the writers will have to make them all as interesting as a linear main story. And also their choices can overwrite yours so it'll be really hard to manage multiple character arcs, endings, midpoints and personal conflicts with specific opposing characters and keep them interesting in any way possible. We just need a few genious writers who can pull off such an enormous, complex task and also very capable programmers who can make those npcs work well.
Also the lack of a main quest could be something complicated unless you have so many different base stories and naratives to go off of to begin with. No publisher is going to fund this easily and who knows how well this would be crowded funded in addition to asking how many branching action and storylines do you want. This just feels like perfection the game and a pain in the ass- not to say it can't be don't, but this requires so much passion and interactivity.
the only thing I can see coming close to this would be some type of sandbox game where the quests are bare bones, put it's like an immersive sim plus, where you could call a group of enemies and convince the remaining to split the reward with you or something or basically and mmo or online game where basically every place is the pc and we all make individual choices that affect one another. (i.e what ashes of creation and star citizen are trying to do).
@gon720 you're totally right. It might be possible in games that don't lean heavily on quests and are more about free interactions that the player has with the world and its npcs. The closest example that i can think of is the stalker series.
Maybe the first step should be to make characters that will do what they want without the need for a player interaction. Like factions that will attack eachother and the consequences that their actions will have in the world. Different characters will align with opposing factions and will have their own belief. So, the story will move forward, whether the player wants to intervene or not. But if he does, it can change thr course of the story and the game world.
@@SuSTR7 Kind of reminds me how Mount & Blade: Warband functions. With no set outcome, the game does make you feel as if the world is up for grabs, and who will be in control is not known.
That’s actually a good thing to me, given how much time people spend for video games nowadays
Plus I've already played that game, it's called life.
Interesting you mention The Sims, I remember it having a 'Free Will' option that enables Sims to move and to perform certain actions without being directed by the player. (Eating, cleaning and even interacting with each other)
What found interesting was the relationship accept of things, Sims grow friendships or destroy them to the point of fighting each other, all without player interaction.
I wonder what an RPG with comradery, betrayal , dynamic factions, allegiances be like?
I play The Sims 4 and you can still do this. Its in the Gameplay options 💜
this is ck3, you are describing crusader kings III
Sounds like what Miitopia did
Speaking of unusual NPC... In someone's review of Stalker2, during conversation with NPC, he got bored of players questions, and walked away. Most probably a bug, but it was hilarious nevertheless.
...a fellow DJPeachCobbler fan, I see...
@bamfyu not really sure who you are referring to, but ok
@Yeong-ua Did that bug happen to another youtuber as well? I thought you were referring to his review of Stalker 2.
@bamfyu I stumbled upon the review of a youtuber who's name I forgot. So it could be a person you are referring to. Idk.
Ironic, since the biggest draw in those games was the A-Life system, which currently does not work in STALKER 2 (which is why I have not bought it yet). But yeah, that was probably a bug.
i could be remembering wrong, but i think in triangle strategy the npcs can make decisions which supersede yours if your charisma/presence isn't high enough and the group you've formed feels strongly enough in one direction counter to yours
Good thumbnail
Bro these thumbnails lmao
desperate
@@CygnusX-11 *Cultured.
Boobies
If I'm not misunderstanding you, you are advocating for two things:
1) Dynamic NPC-to-NPC interaction based on programmed goals.
2) NPC-to-NPC interactions influencing how they interact with players.
What you're essentially describing has existed for decades in 4X strategy games.
DX, the way you’re able to convey the human element in the creation of games while expressing the importance of the technology behind these games is very unique and poignant. Awesome videos.
Thank you so much!
It is exactly what amazes me!
Stalker anomaly has a great npcs, I remember playing as a Monolith, the most hated faction, enemies with everyone except for 1 non playable group "zombies". I hired 2 guys to travel with me and I tried to take out a pretty large loner base, but with my team and equipment I was no match keep dying, I didn't even had enough ammo. But I managed herd a bunch of zombies to their direction and another 2 groups of monolith to help me. and after few attempt managed to take out that base, by using the zombies as a human shield. It was great.
I think there are different stages of NPC intelligence and agency. Personally I'd love to have free conversations with NPCs (talking about life and stuff) and to have them fulfill complex tasks (having the local baker join me in war against goblins). It would be cool if every NPC had their own personal life outside the main story (like the king going fishing every weekend).
In Ghost of Tsushima, after clearing an enemy base, the locals will start moving in and repairing the buildings. Unfortunately they never fully repair them. In order to make a world feel alive, you need to make the game world feel dynamic. Buildings/forests/bridges need to be destroyed and restored.
I imagine a take turn RPG, but instead of fighting, it's a conversation.
I'm pretty sure something like this exists, but I can't remember what it's called.
So Old World Blues?
It won't work.
They ramble on forever.
Or you mean legate lanius, or the Master of og Fallout
That's basically Disco Elysium
I want to make a comment on this. But there is so much to unpack here. And a lot of what you're saying is wrong.
This video gives off the vibe that you only play AAA games. And what you're asking for is present in indie games. Because the AAA market likes to tell narratives. And you cannot have a narrative with NPCs that operate like this.
What you're asking for has already been achieved with procedural generation, in the simulation genre, In indie games. Dwarf Fortress. Kenchi. Mount and Blade. All have NPCs that create emergent storytelling. But unfortunately, you'd have to use your imagination like gamers did back in the days of Ultima. But if you're a person that only plays AAA games, this will not appeal to you.
I've attempted to make this comment at least six times and it always ended up to be a very very long thing, And I don't want to write all of this stuff just to be ignored. Honestly, I'd say check out this game called the Wayward Realms. It's helmed by ex-OG Fallout staff and ex-staff of Bethesda during the Daggerfall days. They are trying to make a spiritual successor to Daggerfall. Their main selling point is storytelling through procedural generation. The game has no main story. It is built on the Unreal Engine (By the way, what you said about the Unreal Engine is incorrect.) An Epic Games gave them a grant to help them develop the game. So that when they make breakthroughs in procedural generation They can give that information to Epic and Epic will make it easier to accomplish in the Unreal Engine. There is so much I want to say about this video and no time to do it. But I feel pressured to comment because I don't want to get lost in the sauce when everyone else starts commenting. And I just become one of many
I miss watching your videos. I've been a fan of your channel since the RWBY days and SAO. As a person that loves gaming and is trying to make a game myself and has been all over the gaming landscape, this video really rubs me the wrong way.
I disagree that you can't have a narrative with NPCs that operate like this. It'd be difficult, but not impossible. NPCs that partially function off a system like this already exist. One example would be Johnny Silverhand and Cyberpunk's friendship system. With that said, there'd be significant roadblocks and unless the dev is actually dedicated to making this system then there's just no reason to make it. I really want to check out Wayward Realms, I'd heard of it before and it sounds actually systemically unique. Thanks for commenting!
@@DXFromYTBut that's how most good RPGs already function. It's not a new concept. NPCs have their personalities and respond to your actions/dialogue choices by raising or lowering a visible or invisible affinity meter which then unlocks or locks you out of certain dialogue choices or quests. That's literally the best you can do in a scripted narrative and there is no other way to really solve it unless you incorporate some kind of generative AI.
@@amysteriousviewer3772 Sure, though I think Johnny is a bit more nuanced because the options are less player centric from a narrative perspective. And that's what I'd like to see more of, though I think creating this illusion using the conventional systems and changing nothing about how the narrative is approached fundamentally would be challenging.
*Imagine giving a StarCraft AI control of a single character.*
You didn't talk about the nemesis system.
Elizabeth the best Companion AI
Imagine she can always Converse with you when speaking through microphone
Awesome Video, DX. I subscribed to your channel after you were on the GI podcast and have enjoyed your video essays since then.
Thanks so much! Glad you've enjoyed the content. Love my GI bros.
I think the biggest chance we have of NPCs changing in some significant way this generation is in Ken Levine's new game Judas. Elizabeth is kind of the figurehead NPC of this video at least in occurrence and the thumbnail (lol). When Levine was making BioShock Infinite it was already late into development when he realized he was upset that the player could get to know Elizabeth but Elizabeth could never know the player. Since then he's spent the last 11 years developing an NPC system that is supposedly supposed to allow player actions to drastically change the narrative and NPC relations. I have very high hopes for Judas and I think if anyone with a big budget is going to make a groundbreaking mechanic it's going to be Ken Levine, again. Hopefully when it comes out it's good and gets the attention it deserves. Maybe you'll even make a video about it.
14:35 "Isn't the work worth the wait?" you ask. No, it isn't. I hear what you are saying, and having NPCs with this unreal magic-like livel of self-awareness would indeed be revolutionary for the gaming experience... but my dude, AAA games already take over half a decade to make. I personally don't need another half decade to be put on top of that. I'm not saying I want quantity over quality with games just being released like clockwork, but I already feel that 5 years is an insane amount of time for development of a single title. SantaMonica declined from making a third norse God of War game partially because they were burned out from having made two games that took a combined 10 years of their lives to make.
So no, I don't want a game that has incredible life-like AI if it takes 10 or 20 years to make. Plus, while you say that even the cooperative AI in games like F.E.A.R. and FarCry are merely an illusion; NPCs programmed to act like they are cooperating... this illusion is good enough for me. Videogames are a simulation afterall. It's not real. It's a stageplay programmed to FEEL real. While I agree that the AI in some games need improvement and that the NPCs in some games need work, I don't need them to be on the meta level of self-concious that you are describing.
It's an interesting thought for sure, but not something I would want realized. If the story is good and well-told, that's all I care about. I don't need self-concious NPC, I want NPCs that act convincingly.
That's not what I said and this comment supposes it would take an additional half decade to implement this.
ICO is interesting NPC with how the whole game you actively hold a button an actively run around scared that you will lose her but then she grabs your hand before carrying you to safety and that experience inspired many games like Last Of Us to be made
you only win because she was given reason by your gameplay to care for you enough to preserve your life
Have you seen the movie from a few years ago called "Free Guy" starring Ryan Reynolds? That movie explores the idea of an NPC having generative AI as he interacts with a female player with a certain programming to embody the traits that player loves because he is programmed by her boyfriend who basically made a love letter in an algorithm. It's a pretty sappy and cheesy flick but it does have a smart and thoughtful theme that gamers everywhere would most likely appreciate.
My man DX ACTIVE active
This perspective is completely unrealistic. You might think you want this kind of game, but let’s be honest-do you really want a game where you’re not the main character? A game where NPCs exclude you from the plot due to factors beyond your knowledge or control? It would feel like arbitrarily hiding content from the player. No matter the reasons behind the NPCs' decisions, from the player's perspective, they would mostly seem random.
We all once dreamed of VR and imagined how amazing it would be to step into virtual worlds. Now that it’s here, many of us don’t use it because of motion sickness and the inconvenience of having to get off the couch. This concept would likely end up the same: a fascinating idea in theory but too stressful and unfulfilling for most players in practice.
In fact, there’s already been a game that attempted something similar: Alien: Isolation. Many players found the intelligent AI, which hunted the player dynamically rather than following set patterns, far too terrifying to handle.
Yes, I'd love a game where I'm not the main character. No, VR grows in popularity each year despite the problems you've mentioned. And Alien: Isolation is getting a sequel so...
Yeah it be something like oblivion npc who bought all the gear from a seller leaving you without one
It's why games like Kenshi where unless you know your stuff, you will be treated like an absolute bum, while beloved, are kinda niche.
I think some randomness (or I should say guided randomness, NPCs would still act in coherent way with their character, but not in a totally predictable way) can be implemented quite easily but only if it's superficial, the more we want it to interact with the rest of the game, the main quest, your ability to progress and so on, the more exponentially out of whack everything else becomes, you'd have to either make the game itself diverge into multiple still engaging and well paced paths, which at that point makes me think it's better to not have "free will" in NPCs at all, but create certain choices they can make, some chosen at random, some influenced by the player, but all precurated by the designers, or your game has to be quite free flow in every aspect, so it necessarily becomes a procedural generated sandbox or sandbox like experience.
Imagine rdr2’s honor system. The more negative your score goes, the more your infamy rises and different npc’s choose to help or hurt you once they hear about you. Imagine Angelo Bronte wanting to give you a job, or maybe it could be something sinister like deciding to kill Jack when he kidnaps him, or maybe do something to traumatize him to get back you. Then Jack has some insane trauma backstory that changes his entire life and interactions in the game
Or this could even be used to create an infinitely replayable game. A game that has little to no narrative structure and is completely driven by the willingness of the npc to go along with whatever you’re trying to do, but at that point it would just be a simulation that would require the development of a completely singular AI which is most definitely a horrible idea
You know it's a good day when DX uploads
Starfield has generic NPCs impose themselves in dialogues between the PC and other NPCs. Clearly next level!
Even though something like a direct ChatGPT implementation for NPC dialog is not the future, it is apparent to me that technologies similar or derivative of it will be a backbone for not just the dialog but the generation of beats, sequences, acts and stories(general narrative).
By the nature of fiction, the artificial nature of video games, all npc’s are scripted regardless of their ability of choice, whether we use AI or not. There is no REAL way to give them choice, but we can think of more ways to give the illusion of choice, like background events that fake experience and memory, and pseudo-random chances. An example I think of is a side character you can save in life is strange 1, based on multiple events of dialogue that give the illusion you convince her of her choices, but we can complicate these processes to the nth degree to make a more convincing illusion
Just trying to start a little brainstorm here ^^
Another idea we can do is make the way dialogue works more complicated. Real conversations aren’t ABABAB like in games. Good movies and books have adapted their dialogue to this, imagine some how we can make mechanical/diagetic dialogue that feels like a real conversation
I adore that scene from LiS 1, it's one of the most tense moments in a game for me. It seems that the challenge right now is that NPC choice is internalized by writers who make those decisions for the characters.
@@DXFromYT thank you for the reply!! Hopefully we figure out a way to make our favorite characters seem all the more real!!
"AaaaLLL we are saaaaying, is give NPC's a chaaance!"
i'm sorry, but how did you make an entire video about NPC's being able to make choices, interact with eachother without the player's input, and disobey the player without mentioning the middle earth games and their nemisis system
While generative AI isn't the answer to NPCs, real AI would be. It would be like a tabletop role-playing game where there is a game master. Bioware (and probably others as well) was started as a RPG company because the founders were tabletop role-playing game players. The game designer was the game master, but the world limitations were put in place because they can't compensate for every possible choice. We've all played games where a cut scene has your character do something you'd never have had them do. That happens in video games because they need to force the game in a specific direction. The unintentional brilliance of Skyrim is how easy it is to go do your own thing and ignore the main quest, but the main quest never fails or goes away because of your neglect. With an AI game master you could have things actually getting worse in the world because no one did anything to save the world.
I like the aspiration to create more independent NPCs with their own agencies. However, your explanations for why NPCs are the way they are today are so surface level it clearly shows your lack of deeper knowledge of game development and game design.
You're free to enlighten us with your insight at any time 👍
I have to disagree with your disagreement with the current conventions regarding on NPCs operate. This video seems like one of those "whoa wouldn't it be nice if all games had 100 difficulty options, 15 versions of different voice acting styles for every known language, and every playthrough sends players actually gold bars as rewards?"
Well, no. We don't need NPCs in the ways you're describing, we don't need merchants interrupting conversations with more important characters, we don't need characters taking major decisions from players, and we don't need some drastic overhaul of how NPCs are done in the majority of games. This is not the literal least of our concerns but it's not that far. I'd much rather RPG devs send their time trying to improve their stories, remove inconsistencies, design interesting quests and stories, rather than experimenting with novel NPC designs when that's never really been a huge source of complaint from the majority of players.
Luddite.
the latest Unreal Engine 5 update could be the big leap and key for better NPCs. There's this new tech that Epic introduce in Unreal 5, where a voice actors facial expression can just be instantly captured, no need to painstakingly animate faces for every npc that needs it, that way we can still have that human touch without sacrificing time/budget
Im very glad you pointed out that we don't need generative AI for more realistic NPC AI.
Niel druckmann could do with having that hit into his thick skull after his concerning interview comment about being interested in using gen AI in NPC's for future games
If its a linear story then you can't have NPCs acting differently. So any story would have to be procedurally generated like Dwarf Fortress.
Most gamers demand predictability. Which is why they love those loyalty / morality meters with quantifiable numbers that perfectly predicts how they will react. If NPCs can make decisions on their own then that means how they perceive you is unpredictable and how they react is unpredictable. And because player's can't 100% understand the NPCs motive, and cannot 100% control the outcome, most will just completely give up and just treat the system as if it is just random.
Or assume the game devs are lying and that the NPCs are random. And really, how can you prove otherwise?
.
If NPCs can act independently without a loyalty / morality meter to explicitly quantify their state of mind many gamers will instantly start crying and assume that the game devs are out to get them. "What, Bob won't help me just because I killed his wife. Man, I hate that this game makes NPCs act randomly."
.
And if NPCs can do stuff on their own then that means that the ability of the player to affect the world is lessened. If the NPCs are going to save the world without the player's help... why bother? Or if the NPCs are going to doom the world no matter what the player does.... why bother?
.
And achievement hunters and people who do multiple playthroughs will be annoyed that they do not get to go down specific paths because NPCs are not 100% predictable. I still remember in Dead Rising how I wanted to save every NPC but one NPC convinced others to go look for food and they all died and my run was completely ruined and several hours were wasted. But it was a scripted event and on my next run I could plan around it. But if NPCs just do whatever they want then its impossible to plan around. Especially for those ultra try hard super-difficulty games.
.
As stated, the whole point of the game would have to 100% revolve around these new types of NPCs.
The most relevant games to the discussion would be Watch Dog Legion and Shadow of Mordor where NPCs are "promoted" from random nobodies to important power players.
Enjoyed the vid! I was expecting a bit about Monolith's Nemesis System which leaped NPC interaction pretty significantly only for no other game to use it because of a patent. Levine's new game Judas is also gonna incorporate a similar system. It's not gonna solve these old design problems you mentioned, but they're a step in the right direction. Also enjoyed your 'next gen gameplay' vid and agree!
@@JorisWeerts1 Thanks! I cannot wait to play Judas.
Been thinking this for so many years. Devs solely focus on graphics improvements when they should be focusing on making the AI better and more believable. But since that doesn't translate to screenshots and trailers, it doesn't sell easily.
Dragon's Dogma had the right idea, by breathing some more life into your NPC companions.
The beauty and the irony in you using "Westworld" as a perfect example of NPC's with agency is that Jonathan Nolan who created Westworld, directed the Fallout TV show which is based off the games. I'm sure you get to this as I'm only 10 minutes in, but I think you're right *because* of this fact. Jonathan Nolan loves video games. He played Fallout 3 for, I think he said, two or three years, so he's dedicated to that type of storytelling. He already has an appreciation for that medium.
Yes! He loves video games and you can tell!
@@DXFromYT you can tell! The passion is there and it really reads! Fallout made my jaw drop as I felt like I was walking with the characters into a world I've only played in during video games!
character ai ahh npcs would be so fire, I believe games will implement that something like that in the future.
Ever heard of oblivion’s radiant ai the cantina did a video called what Is Wrong With Oblivion's NPCs? There npc who does there own things the problem with them is NPCs would steal things (like food) when they ran out. So when they got caught, they often didn't have enough money to pay the fine so the guards just murdered them.
To replicate consciousness or sentience in NPC in a game is not a small feat. It is very difficult to remove complete bias from the AI that is being written. You may argue that let the game write its own self replicating code with different parameters, for that also you need a game AI which will have some bias. Plus there is a problem of: if the new code that is generated corrupts the games files then it will ruin the game for so many people, which again has to be contained which will require programmer intervention/ parameters/ rules.
I'm just reminded of the early stages of the Radiant AI that Bethesda tinkered with back in Oblivion. It proved too chaotic.
(Disclaimer, I haven't finished watching the video, I'm at 13:33)
This reminds me a lot of Ken Levine's Narrative Lego approach. He did a talk on that at (i think) GDC like a decade ago. It is really fascinating!
I can't wait to play Judas!
@@DXFromYTsame here
Gothic I & II had good NPCs. The programing of choices that the player has and the nice implementations of NPC characters that seam to be making own choices was incredible. and that was the year 2001. I thinks we don't have to improve NPCs, I think we have to improve writing, character design and story telling
In my opinion, Cyberpunk 2077 did NPCs the greatest. The storylines with each side character in that game felt like main story quality writing.
AI is based on machine learning, machine learning is used to train AI. You could train those AI NPCs by letting them observe human players (macine learning).
I think NPC idle behavior will be done like this in the future, but as it pertains to narrative I'm still very doubtful.
@@DXFromYT having actual conversations with NPC's is a pretty huge thing imo. like it's a whole new level of immersion.
This exists already. It's called multiplayer. 😅 Sorry...
But in all seriousness though, I don't see how this can at all be possible in a primarily story driven game. Sure, you can have the illusion of this in the sims or other open world simulator games. But you could never set a story with any depth in it that would require more than the Playable Character to complete. By setting a story you are in fact setting the direction of the game and everything would need to flow in that direction. You also need a world space for this to take place in and it can't be infinitely modular to whatever might happen. There is no way around AI for something like this, and you'd need certain characters to show up or be somewhere whenever shit goes down. They can't call in sick to a game you paid for. It's a nice dream I guess, but it is still a dream since story driven games just don't work this way.
RPG games sometimes have this mechanic built in.
Who is old enough to remember Arcanum: Of Steamworks and Magick Obscura?
Depending on your actions, race, clothing, etc NPCs won't have anything to do with you, will treat you with disinterest, or will court your favor.
I've been meaning to play Arcanum! Been watching a lot of Tim Cain's content and it sounds so fun.
@@DXFromYTAve, True to Tim Cain
Ignoring the "main quest", what do you think about Shadow of Mordor/War?
Or other "God" games like The Sims, such as Dwarf Fortress?
At first you made fun of people for being NPCs.
Now you want the NPCs to be their own main character.
How I hate it, when NPCs give the exact same dialogue, I just finished 5 seconds before, only because I talk to them again.
You are correct about a lot of what your saying here but you are 100% wrong about NPCs being create the same way across all Unreal Engine games that is wildly inaccurate
I realized after I'd done the voice over that my statement could be taken to mean literal blueprints used in UE, which is, as you said, completely untrue.
@@DXFromYT All good pretty much everything else you say in the video is completely true. I will say if a person is creative enough with blueprints and the behavior tree you would be shocked what you can do. You might agree with this I think right now to get NPCs who truly feel real might be more of a design issue rather than a tech issue. Its generally possible right now just figuring out how to be able to weave many different outcomes into a narrative is the hardest part
I agree, it's definitely a design issue!
A lot of what you're looking for is achieved with ease in tabletop roleplaying, tho depending on GM your mileage may vary.
Honestly I feel like Elizabeth is a bad example of a good NPC because it completely destroys your immersion when is she gets completely ignored by the guys ordered to capture her even when she's right in front of them or just runs past them
Now I need this
I'm reminded of android deviancy in Detroit: Become Human! This is a fascinating and thoughtful proposal. However, it does feel like it's advocating for gameplay chaos. Do I want an NPC to do to me what Delores did to the Man in Black and disrupt everything when I'm just trying to beat a game? Not really, lol.
It basically comes down to personal preference, but what you're asking for essentially falls into role-playing territory, and while that might be more immersive in some cases, I don't think it would or should work for all games that have npcs. Just from a practical standpoint of the medium, we should consider there is sort of a language to games that a user must understand in order to anticipate what they want. Rules, if you will. I know, I know, "Screw the rules!" but I'd argue gaming from its inception, from puzzles, to fights, to real time strategy, is about figuring out patterns. Now, gamers can make entire careers out of speed running, or competing for sport, and the skill and success of that comes with some required level of predictability. And for some players there's comfort in that. Especially when this is meant to be escapism. When a game doesn't do what a player understands it should be doing, it can lead to frustration.
In any case, where I would like to see this is in open-world games. One of the things that blew me away about Fallout 3 were the npc day/night cycles, where they can literally open and close their shops and go to bed, if you just follow one around. Red Dead Redemption 2 also featured a dynamic nature system where animals actually hunted other animals. That kind of stuff is awesome. Great essay. Some nice food for thought👍
Oh for sure, I think it would be best suited for RPGs. After so many games, I think I'm ready to embrace some gameplay chaos. The lack of control was really entertaining in Baldur's Gate 3.
WAKE UP BRO DX UPLOADED A NEW VIDEO 🗣🗣
Boy, you're in for a ride, what are you describing is emergent gameplay, this is heavily present in sandbox games, in order of peak emergent gameplay:
Dwarf Fortress
Rimworld
Cataclsym DDA (and/or Bright Nights)
Elona (and Elin)
S.T.A.L.K.E.R (especially with GAMMA)
Starsector
Kenshi
Crusader's King
I highly recommend Stalker Gamma and Kenshi.
Does the undertale NPCs fit in this?
I remember people got so much invested in them,that they got mad a people killing them on gameplays.
Wait till this guy hears about mount and blade
You should look into the goblin tribes ai in Oblivion if you aren't aware of it already. It's kinda like what you are looking for but very rudimentary
Dx are you gonna play Bubsy Paws on Fire Bubsy The Woolies Strike Back and Bubsy in The Purrfect Collection coming out in 2025 ?
16:20 You are wrong here. There already are *existing year-old* mods for games allowing context-aware conversation with NPCs. Check out Herika for Skyrim or AI mod for Bannerlord. Imagine what dedicated professional teams could do given what part-time modders already achieved.
Herika doesn't do what I'm describing here and comes with her own set of challenges. Namely not all of her features being possible in an offline environment. I'm sure gamers would love having to be online to power their NPCs...
We need more than one or two AI types, AI should have personality, they could make a dozen models for the same enemy
Enemy one is bold, likely to run head long into danger without thinking
Enemy two could be a tactician, likely to flank rather than engage in head on fight
Enemy three could be a coward that is more likely to run away than stay and fight
Enemy four could be defensive, won't run but won't be the one initiating attacks
Enemy five could be the commander, if he's with other NPC's then he organizes them and provides buffs to morale that would for example make the coward stay and fight
Enemy six could be a wild card, a mix of defensive, aggressive, and tactical
And each one of these could be randomly applied to ALL the enemy NPC's in the game
Instead, you have one AI type with several paramanters (if you're lucky) to make them not ALWAYS act the same, but, still pretty much the same as the last 700 guys that you just mowed down 12 minutes ago
I mean, just look at the first F.E.A.R., that AI isn't complex by any means but the NPC's feel like they have agency, THEY can control the pacing of the fight, THEY can make decisions to hide or push, THEY communicate and work as a unit, all of that makes the enemies believable and intense as you never know what angle they might come from to attack you.
I think developers/writers are too worried about giving NPC's agency becuause what if the event they want to happen DOESN'T happen because an AI wasn't where it was supposed to be?
Personally I think that's amazing, like S.T.A.L.K.E.R. A-life, sure it can end up harming the user experience if a critical AI character is killed while the player is on the other side of the game world, but the fact that it can happen to basically anyone makes the world feel more alive, no invincible NPC's that have to be alive to move the story along.
I don't really get what you mean by NPCs having choice. The only way for them to not respond to player inputs is to have them behave on a real-time basis, and most likely an invisible one at that. That may be more realistic and engaging, but also takes away from player freedom and possibly the enjoyment of the game. In the end, the world has to react to your actions or inactions because mechanically, a video game does revolve around the PC.
On the other hand, giving more options for NPCs to react to your choices is always interesting but also requires a lot of narrative, animation, art, voice work and playtesting to pull off. It mounts up exponentially.
Though I do agree that NPCs interacting with each other gives games a whole new dimension of immersion, especially if they are not only driven by direct player input, i.e. quests.
I want to see somebody cosplay that Cyberpunk NOC at 3:34 so bad! I always thought she looked bad as hell!
Speaking of Westworld, what do you think about the show getting cancelled?
I'm not entirely sure your suggestions wouldn't fall apart at the seams if actually attempted.
He doesn't really even have suggestions. He says all NPCs are illusions but why does that matter when the illusion mostly works? Everything in games is an illusion, everything in fiction is an illusion. That's just how it works.
if Bubsy he gets his own movie like sonic the hedgehog would you watch and review the movie ?
Amazing video
From which games the clips in the first minute of the video are from?
Off the top of my head: BioShock Infinite, GTAV, Starfield, Cyberpunk 2077, Life is Strange, Vampire: The Masquerade - Bloodlines, Baldur's Gate 3.
Looks like (in order of appearance) Bioshock Infinite, GTA 5, Starfield, The Witcher, Cyberpunk 2077, Halo, Vampire Masquerades, Bioshock Infinite, Balder's Gate 3.
Thanx both of you
Even in Westworld, the unfolding of Androids having agency and how that specifically plays out is, guess what, prewritten. It sounds like you want a chaotic sandbox game, which is great, and can be its own genre. However, games with very strong stories need prewritten order, no matter how complex the story, otherwise you sacrifice the story for NPC agency.
In the chaotic sandbox NPC agency style game with no main quest, every time you’ll play it theoretically will be a new/different story, and none of the players who played the game can connect on how great that shared story was. You can’t have both a focused story that we all can connect with AND NPCs who have agency.
It isn't scripted. Ford specifically says that the hosts always reached self awareness before he was forced to wipe them. Season 2 also shows us that with Ford and Akecheta's interaction. What was scripted were Maeve's actions that were meant to get her out of the park but even then, she doesn't listen to those and that jump starts her free will. Maeve snapping at MIB was explicitly not scripted either. Do you mean that Ford planned everything when he re-added the reveries?
@@DXFromYTI’m saying the writers of the show ultimately wrote that.
And the point still remains that you can’t have both a focused consistent story that we all can connect with AND an ever new always changing experience at the same time. You have to choose one, which is fine for a chaotic sandbox style game with no main story if that’s what one might want to play. Games with a main quest/story is what draws a lot of players.
I'm not really sure what relevance the show being prewritten by people has. Seems like you're just ignoring context.
Conker Live & Reloaded you should do a review of that game Dx
I wish someone would make a video about how pvp multiplayer is kinda holding gaming back. Been saying this for years but I'm sure no one gets it.
Meet Hanako at Embers.
Mmm that thumbnail..
NPCs with their own agency is just rogue AI
Why are you a genius? My God, this is gold. This is also great advice and philosophy for non-interactive fiction but also life. ...Without getting carried away: in approaching game development this way, it's good grounding for people and promotion of overall empathy. It's great that people might be forced to think about other perspectives in the realm of creativity. Also, you have my respect for the encouragement of it being a matter of human approach (especially since generative AI just follows rules it makes up to simulate human biases anyway, without having human nuance and thinking ability).
Bro doesn't know Disco Elysium already exists
Preface: I might be nitpicking here on a very specific part of your essay, and thus whatever bias might be there in my comment.
That said, I think the premise of NPC "action" and "choice", and using the Sims to further work on that point, is a bit misleading.
To jump straight to the point, I think you are misinterpreting the "emergent storytelling" aspect of the Sims, and other simulation games, with intelligent NPCs. The designers of the sims have a good talk on GDC about this.
What I'm trying to say is, the "actions" or "choices" you think the NPCs make in the Sims are just your brain making the stories that they have choices. But just like in high fantasy games, it's just dice roll.
Note: I have to jump on a meeting but this is a great video. Subscribed! Cheers.
This essay isn't really about intelligent NPCs, as I think their "choices" would still have to be completely illusory as they are in The Sims. Could I get a link to that GDC talk? It sounds very interesting!
@DXFromYT fair enough. I did nitpick earlier as I was in a bit of a rush.
I have to say though, I do agree that the technology is there to create very emergent NPC behaviour. And yes, genAI is not going to help much. It will help in some aspect but right now, when used in a game, it's still very "machine-like" in a sense that it's uncanny. I myself have written prototypes to simulate human relationships, so I know it is not impossible. Or, you go the other way and use a sandbox approach to how NPCs behave, like in Rimworld.
@@neilmarkcorre5524 It's definitely a design problem and not a technical one, at least today. I really can't wait to see how creatives tackle this, can you speak on your implementation?
Games I F*cking Hate - Clive Barker's Jericho that's how i found your youtube channel i been a fan ever since
@@MatthewWilke-v3k Thanks so much! I still remember putting that video and the other montage together 🤣
you should try and play kenshi!
I'm gonna have to, it's been recommended a bunch!
We need better NPCs? Then make them.
Very constructive, thanks for the engagement.
Game devs can't copy and paste AI girlfriend mobile apps?
Thanks for the video. You should do détroit : become human as game.;)
Wish more game is lke rimworld AI storyteller
Dx you need to play Duke Nukem Forever its one of the worst games ever its a very difficult game to beat
Ai has been getting worse and worse compared to older games I don’t give a shit about graphics we reached a point where everything
Looks fine
is hegemony a synonym of homogenous?
BIG
Keep in mind that 'better NPCs' like the ones in BG3 are much more expensive. So if you are also one of those people who wants more 'AA' games you are being a hypocrite. Can't have both. BTW games like Outer Worlds and Avowed are basically AA nowadays and they are not as successful as AAA RPGs.
Most people don't know what they're talking about when they say they want more "AA" games.
it would take decades to make them
@DashMatin And the cost. We shit ourselves over a $10 increase. If a game took 2-3x the development time, would anybody pay 2-3x the price. Would a developer want to take the chance that a game that took 20 years to make might fail?
@DashMatin imagine starting out making a game for the ps4 and finally releasing it by the time the ps6 or 7 came out.
Uh... New DX video... 😩😫💦💦
This is one of the more egregious misinterpretations of the first season of Westworld lol
How so?
0:04
Yay!
Dx you need to play Vampire Rain its one of the worst games ever its a very difficult game to beat
@@MatthewWilke-v3k Oh God, I've heard of that one.
Baelin's Route - ua-cam.com/video/PEe-ZeVbTLo/v-deo.htmlsi=jbxGB-6Es659HeGd