Details emerge on Bethesda's Creation Engine

[taltamir]

If I program that anything with hands can pick up a wand and then choose to use it based off of their intelligence, their magic craft skill and their mana. Then that is as close as I can get to an AI. The opposite end of the spectrum is telling a specific monster to pick up a specific wand and use it specifically at a given time, which would be a script. Scripts got their name because they are often written in SCRIPTS and not directly into code. IE: I might know how to script several events in NWN using the editor but I did not code the AI by which dictates how all monsters act in general.

And I am saying that what you call an AI IS made via scripts. If I program that anything with hands can pick up a wand and then choose to use it based off of their intelligence, their magic craft skill and their mana. Then I would have coded it using scripts.

No it isn't that simple. Good voice acting at the cost of what?. Everything in the game goes into the budget and time schedule for the game. If I have to drop the ability to jump so you can get voice acting, then it isn't necessarily a good choice.

Game budgets vary to a huge extent. Certainly there is cost/return analysis... but bad voice acting is more expensive AND worse than no voice acting at all.
Video games should just be voiceless UNLESS they have a massive budget, in which case the voice acting should be top notch (and does not involve a choice between it and anything else).

Many modern indie games realize that and produce amazing games with no voice acting, they budget it.

And Mass Effect has terrible game play in comparison to Baldur's Gate. It is an incredibly easy game

All the "difficulty" in baldur gate was fake difficulty http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/FakeDifficulty

combat is a passing glance at best

Yet is still superior to BG's clunky AD&D blech.

the worlds - while a good attempt - were incredibly barren with only the expansion (something to do with the moon) being of any interest.

I totally agree, but this has absolutely nothing to do with GAMEPLAY.

ME1 was superior to BG in voice acting, a little inferior in character composition (interesting, fun characters that you care about), and better at character development (they didn't really DO or SAY or go anywhere in BG... although they didn't really do much in ME1 either, there are games where this is awesomely done though).
ME1 was not a perfect game, and it had drawbacks. Likewise BG1 was not a perfect game and had drawbacks too...

one of the biggest drawbacks of BG1 was its poor gameplay... that some modern games managed even poorer gameplay doesn't make it's gameplay good.
Modern games also usually have poorer voices (since bad voices are inferior to no voices), poorer characterization (in most games, if asked if you care about the character's well being, you will reply "I don't give a <insert profanity>"), poorer character development, poorer world building, poorer plot (overall story), poorer plot development (its execution), and poorer QA (average modern game is too buggy to complete out the door, never goes beyond "barely playable" bug levels).

I am not saying that BG1 is not superior to a huge majority of modern games, but thats not because it had some magic awesome DoublePlusGood gameplay. It was because it was superior in other aspects.
And its not ALL modern games it is superior to, there are plenty of gems. And like all things in life, they tend to be imperfect, each with its advantages and disadvantages.

 

[namtran512]

And I am saying that what you call an AI IS made via scripts. If I program that anything with hands can pick up a wand and then choose to use it based off of their intelligence, their magic craft skill and their mana. Then I would have coded it using scripts.



Game budgets vary to a huge extent. Certainly there is cost/return analysis... but bad voice acting is more expensive AND worse than no voice acting at all.
Video games should just be voiceless UNLESS they have a massive budget, in which case the voice acting should be top notch (and does not involve a choice between it and anything else).

Many modern indie games realize that and produce amazing games with no voice acting, they budget it.


All the "difficulty" in baldur gate was fake difficulty http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/FakeDifficulty


Yet is still superior to BG's clunky AD&D blech.


I totally agree, but this has absolutely nothing to do with GAMEPLAY.

ME1 was superior to BG in voice acting, a little inferior in character composition (interesting, fun characters that you care about), and better at character development (they didn't really DO or SAY or go anywhere in BG... although they didn't really do much in ME1 either, there are games where this is awesomely done though).
ME1 was not a perfect game, and it had drawbacks. Likewise BG1 was not a perfect game and had drawbacks too...

one of the biggest drawbacks of BG1 was its poor gameplay... that some modern games managed even poorer gameplay doesn't make it's gameplay good.
Modern games also usually have poorer voices (since bad voices are inferior to no voices), poorer characterization (in most games, if asked if you care about the character's well being, you will reply "I don't give a <insert profanity>"), poorer character development, poorer world building, poorer plot (overall story), poorer plot development (its execution).
But its not ALL modern games, there are plenty of gems. And like all things in life, they tend to be imperfect, each with its advantages and disadvantages.

I am not saying that BG1 is not superior to a huge majority of modern games, but thats not because it had some magic awesome DoublePlusGood gameplay. It was because it was superior in other aspects.

Oh don't get me wrong, I know there were things wrong with Baldurs Gate 1, Baldurs Gate 2, Fallout 2, etc.


But you know it is bad when a game from the 90s is basically stomping all over the quality of a modern day game today.


Mass Effect 1 is one of the few exceptions. ME 2 went in the completely wrong direction IMO.


BTW Baldurs Gate 1 and Baldurs Gate 2 had voice acting, and it was plenty good.

 

[taltamir]

Oh don't get me wrong, I know there were things wrong with Baldurs Gate 1, Baldurs Gate 2, Fallout 2, etc.

But you know it is bad when a game from the 90s is basically stomping all over the quality of a modern day game today.

Mass Effect 1 is one of the few exceptions. ME 2 went in the completely wrong direction IMO.

I totally agree with that post on all points
BG is stomping all over modern games. (for that matter, so are other classics)
ME is one of the few exceptions (and while not being stomped on, I doubt there would be any consensus on which is better )
And ME2 went in the wrong direction (it took one step forward and two steps back... about what I expected from EA)

I honestly can't understand why modern games can't take the good from classics like BG and fix the flaws. Instead they just get worse and worse, dumping good and replacing it with bad.

Well, actually I can see why. EA, activision and the other gaming mega-corps are run by businessmen who don't actually play games, nor care about them. This is why true improvement in modern times is usually found in the indie scene... where they have not the budget for fancy graphics nor voice acting. But those aren't good BECAUSE the low end graphics and lack of voices, they are good despite that.
Just an FYI, I am not saying corporations are bad... I am saying that if a corporation wishes to produce quality work it needs to foster and entice creative talent, give them some slack, and make sure they are giving creative control to people who actually produce good results.

 

[Dorkenstein]

I didn't read any of the argument stuff, all I wanted to say was that Baldur's Gate (and most of the Infinity Engine games) slap the piss out of Oblivion. I'm still really excited to see more about Skyrim.