Controllable NPCs (Just a thought)

G

Gunslinger

Mildly Dipped
Let's face it, the AI in Fallout 1&2 for your allies (NPCs) are sub par. Waaaay sub par. Some examples, you ask? *Deep breath* Here we go:

Clipping- I've experienced times when Ian would get caught in doorways or trapped in a hex whenever I enter a new area.
Inventory- Biggest gripe. Either not using proper inventory or not using inventory AT ALL! This includes armor, weapons, etc.
Presettings- I go bugshit having to change Cassidy's AI presetting back to "Custom" every once and a while.
Combat- Sometimes, your NPCs will rush into a horder of Deathclaws, obscuring your vital burst fire. Or sometimes, they won't fight at all since they aren't facing the enemy. Or sometimes, they WILL fight and choose every opportunity to fight, even with weakened HP. And, my most hated trip, your NPCs will chase down a extremely weakened enemy while there's still a fresh group of baddies mowing YOU down with their assault rifles.

Now I know, many of these shortcomings have been fixed in Fallout 2. Armor can be worn by allies and you can preset their reactions. But some specific NPCs are still hindered (like Marcus not being able to wear armor). And there's still much room for improvement, either improving the AI or giving the main character control of the NPCs altogether.

I'm opting for the controllable NPCs. It would be entirely worth it for the developers to code controllable NPCs versus coding in a moderate AI. The NPCs in Fallout 1 were added at the last minute, making their controls and performances very linear, i.e. you had to talk to them everytime you wanted to change their inventory. It would be alot better if certain screens were devoted for NPC inventory, such as the one found in Fallout Tactics (just about the only thing I liked in FOT).

Controllable NPCs would greatly improve the experience of the player. With controlled NPCs you can avoid wasting precious AP points and coordinate attacks for optimal damage. You can set up a decent formation so that your melee bruiser won't block your machine gunner's line of sight. You can have the NPC use their specific skills instead of your main character trying to use their inadequate skill and the NPC taking over al la Fallout 2.

I'm certain there's some of you who disagree with this inclusion. You might argue that the inventory system has certain flaws to prevent balance (Marcus can't wear armor because he's too big and tall; Goris can't wield other weapons because he has claws on his hands). You might say that the linear approach of talking to you NPCs to change their armor or use a different gun has a more personal touch to the game. You might also say that NPC level ups balance out their strengths, making additional control unnecessary. But I find all that repetitive and annoying. With an equipment screen to change NPC inventory, you can avoid all that hassle of merely arming your buddies. And the level ups in Fallout 2, though useful, only made up for the uncoordination of the NPCs. And besides, Interplay can still include an option for AI controlled NPCS, al la Icewind Dale, if that's not your cakewalk.

But hey, controllable NPCs is a good idea from this prospective.
 
"Controllable NPCs" is an oxymoron.

Yes, the NPCs were apparently added at the last minute for Fallout 1, and the AI didn't really do so hot in Fallout 2.

The AI in Arcanum isn't too bad, as with other games that have similar AI like Jagged Alliance 2. With "controllable NPCs", you're removing an aspect of the game that is vital, of being ONE person, but maybe with a few stragglers along with you. You're supposed to be the savior of the world, and those following you are supposed to be secondary or nothing compared to you at best.

It removes the focus of the style in the game, plus it also removes a bit of the immersiveness. The NPCs are supposed to have their own nuances and flaws.

Changing it to "controllable NPCs" makes it one step closer to a particular something, and then you might as well use the Inbred Engine anyways.
 
The thing is Fallout works best as an RPG, you don't need minutely controlled combat to make an RPG fun, combat is not the be all and end all of an RPG. A system like the auto-resolve screen in JA2 would work better for an RPG than controllable NPCs. Not that I'm saying that I'd prefer auto-resolved combat for Fallout anymore than I'd want controllable NPCs. The best thing about them is that they are unpredictable, sure better AI would be nice and things like clipping should be sorted during testing, but since they've already made some improvements to the handling of NPCs in Fallout 2 I'd assume that the NPC AI would be continued to be improved. What I would like to see is the ability to talk to an NPC during combat (either through the existing interface or via hot key commands like SWAT 3) nothing fancy but just to be able to say switch weapons, hold fire, attack the strongest or defend/heal me.

As for the inventory, the inventory screen in FOT sucked bigtime, having to drag an item between your squad mates could really be frustrating. The RPG's inventories were much better, the only thing I'd keep from FOT is using right click to transfer items en masse and double left-clicking to use drugs etc.
 
I would have hated controlable NPCs in Fallout. The game would be WAY too easy without Ian shooting you in the back all the time.
 
I would have to agree strongly with the rest of you - I would not like to see controlable npc's. In baldurs gate you have them controlled. I don't care if they die... However, in Fallout 1, I always had to cover Dogmeat and Ian... They were like true... companions...
 
If you want your NPC's to have their own thoughts and motivs and not just be pack mules, controlable ones are out of the question.
 
If you put controllable NPCs in fallout then you would get Tactics :? , no I wouldn't like that...
 
Controllable NPC isn't NPC, NPC means none player character or something like that. that's why Rosh called it
"Controllable NPCs" is an oxymoron.
Click to expand...
...
 
Jacen said:
Then what would be the OFFICIAL term that should be used for this, CPC??? :P
Click to expand...
it certanly should be cNPC. It is a non player character, ie. not you, that is controlable :)

I think the misunderstandind came from game developer, they introduced cNPC's but someone should prevented them...by jail, exile or drowning :)
 
If you control them, they go under the development and game term (CRPG/RPG terms here, not just D&D definitions), and they are part of your regular party, they are either Player Characters or Party Characters.
 
"Controllable NPCs" would not be a good turn for Fallout. Better would be this:

The IPLY team should reduce the number of possible NPCs, so to increase the lone wanderer feel of the game. However, their functionality should be increased, so as you can instruct them to use THEIR skills in place of your when necessary. In battle, their AI should be increased so that they may move in formation, avoid areas where burst fire is likely, not obstruct your view, etc.

I also feel that they should not be able to have their combat settings modified. I do think that you should be allowed to tell them certain things, like "Don't burst if you're gonna hit your allies" and such, but their choice of targets and drug use should be based on their specific character's personality. This would make it more an RPG and less a run of the mill game.

In addition, they should level up in the same manner as PCs. However, the AI should choose what it does with Perks and skillpoints. In addition, they will be given their own sprites and their appearance should change with the armor they are using.

It's true that this will take a lot of work, and only the good ppl at Troika could pull it off, but this IS a wishlist, not a realists list.
 
I want to see party members like Planescape Torment. They weren't just mules or "car trunks", they had more personality and actually had an impact on the story of the game. Like Morte, for example. Much personality there.

But, come on! NPC=Non-Player-Character. You, the player, cannot control a Non-Player-Character. Do you want a copy of Baldur's Gate as Fallout 3? I can tell you, and so can many others, NO.

I want more active NPCs. NPCs that talk to YOU, and don't wait to be spoken to. More personality.
 
NPCs with their own agenda that come and go as they please would be good, especially if you take too long to help them out in their quests. Or Just up and say right thanks for helping me do x I'm leaving now and take off with half your inventory.

It would be nice if they resented being asked to carry all your junk, and if you tried to strip them clean before ditching them or help yourself to the items they had when joining you, they'd take offence and get hostile.
 
Goris, in Fallout 2, ran off when he realized the rest of the Deathclaws in Vault 13 were being massacred. And he ran away at the most annoying of times. That was pretty neato.

In Arcanum, your NPCs would be embarrassed with you if you ran around Tarant naked. And they'd resent the things you'd do to them such as taking Magnus's ring and killing innnocents.
 
Funny you should mention that since one of the biggest laughs about the Inbred Engine games is how you could have one of the good "NPCs" go off and kill a good person, and they'll do it, but will bitch you out and possibly leave afterwards.

So what then would be the logical fix for that? Something that doesn't allow you to have them just go and do things/kill those they might not like to, and the implementation would have to be quite thorough to avoid the player having an "NPC" take a potshot at an innocent bystander in the middle of combat.

Oh, wait...that's making them think for themselves, and I thought the whole point of this thread was to have them controlled by the player.

Ran yourself into a bit of a contradiction, eh? :)
 
No, I was only stating the level of independance the NPCs had in former games by Tim Cain in regards to character immersion. I still stand by the "controllable" NPCs.
 
Gunslinger said:
No, I was only stating the level of independance the NPCs had in former games by Tim Cain in regards to character immersion. I still stand by the "controllable" NPCs.
Click to expand...

Then by that merit, you stand to discard the the independence and immersion in favor of a shallow game mechanic. There is no middle ground.

Oh, yes, brilliant. That will go over like a fart in a confessional with most of the fans.
 
Rosh, I know you may wince at this example but in Baldur's Gate 2, you could still control your NPCs and they would still have side quests, talk to you, betray you, everything that a rounded charcter would do, etc. In Neverwinter Nights, you could control your one NPC to a degree and, in my opinion, those NPCs were one of the most well-rounded interactions (with their plethora of side quests and pertinent level ups).

Now, let me just expand my first comment. I'm not saying that the NPCs should be like those in Fallout Tactics in which you control every single one for every single action. And I never I wished for *direct* control of your NPCs. Falling back to the Baldur's Gate 2 example, your NPCs still could still act independantly with their scripts but you could move them aside or have them run away in crucial situations. Additionally, the NPC control wouldn't have to be a direct control so that they lack all personality and character. In Arcanum, you could direct your NPCs to attack, defend, run away, get out of the way, or lay off by just right clicking on their portraits. In a first person game I just purchased recently, Devastation, you could give your followers simple commands with just one button. In the lastest Rainbow Six game, you can have your squadmates perform useful actions while still staying on the same in-game screen.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top