If we want realistic NPCs, that are hard to differentiate from another human player, then why do NPCs almost always (I''m one exception ) have a base class that is significantly smaller than the PC''s. Shouldn''t NPCs and PCs derive from the same class so as to make them indifferentiable? Similarly, shouldn''t NPCs be able to have romances, have babies, die of old age, be struck by disease or sadness, and genereally exhibit beliefs and desires akin to our own? Of course they should. Now go and read about Belief Desire Intention (BDI) architectures NPCs will be inherited from the basic Entity class. They will be fully independent, and carry out their own lives oblivious to the world around them ... that is, until you set them on fire ...

BDI architecture...never heard of it and i will look it up, thanks for the keyword search! 8)

I would like to comment on your NPC object structure being smaller then the PC structure. Mainly i dont disagree that in the past this was true and it was true for a reason...GRAPHICS. Something had to evolve first from this explosion in cpu speed and gig memory...and the logical place to start is with FLASHY new graphics. Now that this trend is somewhat peaking the trend will now shift to more intelligent games. So, yes, npc''s have been held back..but the time for a new dawn is apon us...smart games...muhaha!! (ok i dont know for sure but its my opinion at least)

aka John M.
Never give up. Never surrender!

Actually, the way we''re designing Goblin, NPCs are treated no differently than PCs within the basic engine. The basic engine is not concerned with things such as control, it only enforces the laws of the universe. As such, any kind of sentient entity simply performs actions, and this is what the engine notices. Exactly WHAT performs these actions is irrelevant, it can be an AI or it can be a player.
That should leave miles of room for the AI developers to have a field day with the engine.


People might not remember what you said, or what you did, but they will always remember how you made them feel.
Mad Keith the V.

Yes, MadKeithV, that''s the way to do it. In a MMO game with lots of talking you could quiz players after they''d played a while about who was controlled by a player or AI and see if any of your AI has passed the Turing test

It has been too long in coming, but this is the way we have to go. Until NPCs can do everything that PCs can do, the RP of RPGs can never be true.

In my design, the PC & NPC structures are virtually identical, allowing the NPCs to join guilds, level up, take on jobs (providing their skill level is adequate) etc. etc.

In this way, the NPCs are as every bit "real people" as the players themselves, at least in the generic sense.

Honestly.. you''ve got things a bit mixed up. NPCs don''t define an RPG.. especially not an MMORPG. In my MMORPG designs, i plan on phasing out the NPCs as much as is possible, and allowing the players to run things on their own. True, the bad guys will be NPCs, unless you make the game open to people playing goblins. The only problem with that: you''d have to restrict the other''s world view of things. The goblins might know where the human settlement is.. but if the humans knew where the goblins were (assuming they''re bad guys in this RPG), then you''d have a lot of people hunting them down, right? Thus, you''d get some moron who merely makes a goblin character to give away their position.. and then you ruin the RPG.
In terms of the AI.. well, people choose to cut corners due to the intense programming routines associated with it. I''ve been building up my generic AI routines for almost two years now, when i first got interested in it. Admittedly, most of it''s not in code form, it is all written down.
What the system should work down to is a realistic blend of true AI and a streamlined program. True AI is by far not streamlined, as looking at any human''s decisions and reasons would go to show you. You can boil it all down to a pretty good idea of how things go, but that is only real to a certain degree. You do have to have some random element in it.. and we all know a computer can''t be random, thus it''s not true AI, right? Well.. as far as I can tell, people aren''t random, either. If you''re asked to provide a random series of numbers, your logical side goes to work analyzing the situation.. and tries to come up with good numbers. It''s really the mind of a child that gives truely random numbers, and those who act childish. They don''t have any real reason to think about why you''d want such numbers, and they don''t try to think of what number would be "best". Even the most basic random function doesn''t care about what''s best.. so you tell me just how random a computer will be vs a person. A computer also doesn''t remember what numbers it''s picked before.. so it wouldn''t be concerned with that, either.

Anyways.. most computer companies just don''t give the programmers enough time to come up with good AI. Everything''s rushed, and really good AI takes a lot of time to work out. In fact, if you''ve only got one AI routine in the whole of the game.. then you''ve got a problem already.
Oh, and the biggest AI problem: they know everything. Ever played goldeneye? Ever watched the AI run to the biggest and best weapon regardless of what level you''re playing against (easy, medium, hard)? Somehow.. i find that grossly wrong, and easy to correct. Oh well.

J

The point is a lot of us here who making RPGs are focussing on the AI of the NPCs. We do not plan on making MMORPGs since while they are fun, they do not have much in the way of a story.

If you remember some of the older threads both in here and the AI forums you may grasp what I'm getting at. My point was intended for those people who are regulars around here and remember all the old NPC & RPG topics that were very common a few months back (look for NPC AI).

[Partly edited by MKV - The war is over ]

"NPCs will be inherited from the basic Entity class. They will be fully independent, and carry out their own lives oblivious to the world around them ... that is, until you set them on fire ..."
"When you are willing to do that which others are ashamed to do, therein lies an advantage."

Edited by - MadKeithV on January 11, 2001 3:29:31 AM

LOL.. yeah, a long time ago, i suppose you could say, i was a regular here.
Although.. the i''m not saying either thread should be closed.. merely that the moderator can''t pick and choose how he moderates.. he has to be fair. If he''s going to close mine, when it HAS a purpose, then he should close the goblin one. If he''s not, then he shouldn''t close mine.. he should do as he did to the goblin one.
And believe it or not, I''m the one that got landfish started on the whole goblin genocide thing.. lol.

As for single player games.. the only lack i see there is in the computing department. I know too many people who barely make minimum system requirements on games today. Perhaps it''s the insane graphics that cause this. But if your game doesn''t have insane graphics, how well do you think it''ll do?
So on top of graphically intense, you want to add on AI intensity.. which will eat up clock cycles like never before. Graphics cards today are taking a big burden off of the processor, so it''s true that you''ve possibly got a lot of room to play with. But to assume that is to assume a lot. If you target high-end only machines, then you lose consumers. If you target the low-end people, you have to drop some code, etc, in order to make it run at a decent frame rate.
So, to get both, you really need an MMO style setting. The player''s machine does all the graphics, your end does all the complex AI.. that''s why i was focusing on that, since it allows you to make the absolute best AI there is.

Now, i''m not ruling out the possiblity of a single-player game in which people can connect to your online server and have it run complex AI code for a single-player game.. that would be pretty cool. You could play the game with a low-end machine, single player, and still have the benefits of the awesome AI.

And yes, we''d all like to find a streamlined AI which acts in a realiably realistic manor. If you make it.. copyright it asap And start calling people.. you''ll make a good bit of money. LOL.

And i personally believe that a GOOD MMORPG DOES have a story, it''s just that players write the story along with the developers.. and sometimes the players throw the developers for a twist. Example being Lord Nasher in UO. If you don''t know.. he was giving a speech online in the game, a couple months after the game was brought online, and, well.. some powermaxxed character.. killed Lord Nasher. LOL. It was kind of a slap in the face for the game developers.

J

Despite the problems, the possibility of excellent AI in RPGs is very interesting.

Imagine a player character killing some poor peasant (probably out of boredom). Obviously, being dead, he can''t earn any money for his wife and kid. So what do they do? Does the wife try to find work? Does the kid? Do they resort to thievery? Or beggary? What would the town guard do about them? Would they harbor a grudge against the character? Probably. What would happen when the character returns to the town...?

Forget graphics. AI is what''s needed.

About the differences between the NPC class and the PC class... If the NPC is to be as complex as described above, with relationships and jobs, wouldn''t the NPC class have to hold more information then the Player''s character class? Even if the AI is counted as a seperate entity, the NPC would soemewhere have to store all the information on its social links to other NPC''s, with the player, all that information is not recorded in the game - the player knows how they feel towards certain NPC''s but the NPC has to store somewhere it''s social conection to the player, as well as any other NPC''s in the game. Maybe someone was thinking of it in a different way, but if your NPC''s are to be as complex as described then this is how I see it at it''s most basic form. I think storing the social interactions with other NPC''s would be one of the most difficult parts of creating a realistic NPC.