Here is a video showing how Party IA is on nwn2. They stop walking without any reason, refuse to attack the enemy...
I have had henchmen refuse to attack in NWN too. Except without party control, there was no solution to that issue, as no command would get them to attack; they would just stand there and do nothing.
Simple order "attack nearest", used in tons of different mods, tons of modules and worked fine.
Great that it works for you, but stating that you didn't encounter this bug isn't very helpful. I have, and the 'attack nearest' didn't work.
Yes, the AI can get stuck sometimes in NWN2 as in NWN, but less with the TonyK AI update. But still, in NWN2 you have a way round it - FPC. In fact the poor AI seems a great argument for FPC.
Because it's an easy encounter. If one of dragons would be replaced with same level wizard he would dispell all your shields and dragon would kill you quite fast.
Scrolls of time stop(since i can't naturally cast tier 9 spells at level 10-15) will give me time to recast my defensive spells. Used this tactic against enemies that can dispel my defenses. Like Mephistopheles and Klauth
You won't cast everything in 9 seconds and after time stop he can dispell you again. Besides, you can't use this tactic when you are a fighter and you have wizard in your party without FPC.
If you don't have to manage your party during encounter it just means it's a trash encounter and it should be removed/changed for something harder. NWN is not diablo, you shouldn't be have to kill legions of low level enemies. Fewer, but more challenging enemies would be perfect.
The same "no party control = diablo" argument.... Seriously. Is Arcanum similar to Diablo? If i play solo, is BG1/2 and IWD1/2 similar to Diablo? You have no skill trees, dice rolls, skill checks, etc, etc, etc in nwn1. Is not diablo only because you can't fully control your party at the same way that a solo playthrough of iwd1/iwd2/bg1/bg2 or a normal gameplay of arcanum isn't nothing compared to diablo.
Look to this solo gameplays of IWD. They are playing Diablo because they don't need to micromange his party? Even if the game is completely different from d2?
I guess you don't understand what trash encounter is. Trash encounter is encounter which you can manage without using any skill or tactic, just clicking enemy till he's dead. Like when you're a high level fighter fighting 1st level kobolds. They can't hurt you, yet you have to defeat them to advance plot. These are useless trash encounters.
I guess you don't understand what trash encounter is. Trash encounter is encounter which you can manage without using any skill or tactic, just clicking enemy till he's dead. Like when you're a high level fighter fighting 1st level kobolds. They can't hurt you, yet you have to defeat them to advance plot. These are useless trash encounters.
Then i agree but wanna add "enemies that you can defeat using the same tactic over and over again".
This might also be something that would need to be disabled in all current PWs. Think about how it could negatively effect RP, metagaming, 1 person (with party of 6) spawning and killing everthing in an area where other players are trying to grind or share resources. Are these problems in NWN2? How do you script for persistent locations, quests, variables and similar scenarios for a whole party? Would current PWs have to change entire persistent systems to adapt? If PWs had to disable it, would it hurt their future player count if it couldn't adapt? Would it be compatible with all current modules on vault or break them? I don't think this would be as simple as some make it out to be (ie "just have it as an option") since the game has been going for so long without FPC. At least thinking about it from a scripting perspective with current content.
I would like it to be clear to everyone that this request was not designed for the use of the PW modules but only for the SP part.
This function is completely optional and you are not forced to use it.
D & D is a main group game, it's you and other adventurers who embark on an adventure, too clean when it comes to gaming D & D this aspect is seen with evil eye and creates many discomforts-misunderstandings-Rage on many users.
NWN AI and bad control through the lines of dialogue talking to the pet-pet or henchman are bad, even the orders given with the rotation menu system do not work properly for me, this must be Fizato or improved.
Ok the NWN2 AI always has problems but is slightly better than NWN1 at least, at least you do not have to talk to the followers each time and tell them:
"Change your melee weapons at a distance" or "stay close to me, get away from there" and all the character card panel, at least through modding since I read and can fix the problem, but we do not always talk as if this is a bad thing.
For me the best ia I've found so far in a roleplaying game in the ones I've played the most in these 14-15 years of gaming and the AI of "DragonAge: Origins" at least you have a check we say precisely on skill- spells how and when to use them ... I do not say to compose DA: O but at least to take a cue from more modern games for a correct use and fix of the game AI.
"OPTION" means that it is a choice "CHOICE" = "OPTIONS" is not difficult it seems that you are climbing useless on the glass ... but it's just me to see that this is ridiculous, if the FPC can be optional does not mean because there must be must all use it obligatorily ... and this is creating unnecessary confusion and inconvenience...
Aside from the common "stop liking what I don't like", people argue against optional features they are either uninterested in or are against because developer resources are not infinite, and they'd rather those resources be invested elsewhere. I haven't scrolled through all the posts, but that's usually why debates rage on over things that can seem no-brainers. Suggestion makers and debaters also, while being important for gauging player interest and pointing out problems, often don't take have a good handle on what it would take to implement them or what the final result might really look like in one game vs another, so different voices may "measure" that potential investment to be greater or smaller than others (and thus more "worth it" or not).
Collectively speaking, we often accidentally lowball the things we really want, while having no problem pointing out all the potential costs and pitfalls of something we don't :P Making something optional can't really eliminate those factors altogether to "win", you know?
Aside from the common "stop liking what I don't like", people argue against optional features they are either uninterested in or are against because developer resources are not infinite, and they'd rather those resources be invested elsewhere. I haven't scrolled through all the posts, but that's usually why debates rage on over things that can seem no-brainers. Suggestion makers and debaters also, while being important for gauging player interest and pointing out problems, often don't take have a good handle on what it would take to implement them or what the final result might really look like in one game vs another, so different voices may "measure" that potential investment to be greater or smaller than others (and thus more "worth it" or not).
Collectively speaking, we often accidentally lowball the things we really want, while having no problem pointing out all the potential costs and pitfalls of something we don't :P Making something optional can't really eliminate those factors altogether to "win", you know?
As far as I know, no one at Beamdog has said that their reason for not implementing FPC is that it would be too difficult or require too much time or resources. The only direct response to this issue that I'm aware of is Trent saying he doesn't want to add FPC because he thinks it would somehow go against the spirit of NWN1, despite the fact that NWN1's singleplayer custom module scene is huge, and it's quite possible that singleplayer is where most current NWN1 players are. So it kind of looks like they're simply dismissing a large portion of their audience. So far, Beamdog's stance on FPC appears to be more akin to Todd Howard saying he doesn't want to hire a really good writer for the next Elder Scrolls game because having a compelling plot and deep, interesting characters would go against the spirit of The Elder Scrolls as a series with bad writing and empty NPCs that you only play for mods and mindless dungeon crawling.
Now, if it turns out that technical or time/resource issues are the real problem, maybe there's some room to negotiate. If Beamdog can't implement FPC themselves, how about opening up the code so the community can do it? I'm guessing that that would be easier.
Aside from the common "stop liking what I don't like", people argue against optional features they are either uninterested in or are against because developer resources are not infinite, and they'd rather those resources be invested elsewhere. I haven't scrolled through all the posts, but that's usually why debates rage on over things that can seem no-brainers. Suggestion makers and debaters also, while being important for gauging player interest and pointing out problems, often don't take have a good handle on what it would take to implement them or what the final result might really look like in one game vs another, so different voices may "measure" that potential investment to be greater or smaller than others (and thus more "worth it" or not).
Collectively speaking, we often accidentally lowball the things we really want, while having no problem pointing out all the potential costs and pitfalls of something we don't :P Making something optional can't really eliminate those factors altogether to "win", you know?
As far as I know, no one at Beamdog has said that their reason for not implementing FPC is that it would be too difficult or require too much time or resources. The only direct response to this issue that I'm aware of is Trent saying he doesn't want to add FPC because he thinks it would somehow go against the spirit of NWN1, despite the fact that NWN1's singleplayer custom module scene is huge, and it's quite possible that singleplayer is where most current NWN1 players are. So it kind of looks like they're simply dismissing a large portion of their audience. So far, Beamdog's stance on FPC appears to be more akin to Todd Howard saying he doesn't want to hire a really good writer for the next Elder Scrolls game because having a compelling plot and deep, interesting characters would go against the spirit of The Elder Scrolls as a series with bad writing and empty NPCs that you only play for mods and mindless dungeon crawling.
Now, if it turns out that technical or time/resource issues are the real problem, maybe there's some room to negotiate. If Beamdog can't implement FPC themselves, how about opening up the code so the community can do it? I'm guessing that that would be easier.
Nice post.
I really don't see the problem - you pretty much nailed it with the bottom of your post (just put that at the top)
Now, if it turns out that technical or time/resource issues are the real problem, maybe there's some room to negotiate. If Beamdog can't implement FPC themselves, how about opening up the code so the community can do it? I'm guessing that that would be easier.
Doesn't this pretty much clear up and solve all dispute here?
I wonder, if they did open up the code to allow the community to add full party control, and it became as popular as we imagine (or as logic dictates) it would, would Beamdog end up implementing an official version.
It kind of reminds me of the early days on NWN, where bioware insisted the camera could not drop below 45 degrees. Then someone hacked it, everyone started using the hack, and soon after they officially implemented the ability to move the camera lower.
Aside from the common "stop liking what I don't like", people argue against optional features they are either uninterested in or are against because developer resources are not infinite, and they'd rather those resources be invested elsewhere. I haven't scrolled through all the posts, but that's usually why debates rage on over things that can seem no-brainers. Suggestion makers and debaters also, while being important for gauging player interest and pointing out problems, often don't take have a good handle on what it would take to implement them or what the final result might really look like in one game vs another, so different voices may "measure" that potential investment to be greater or smaller than others (and thus more "worth it" or not).
Collectively speaking, we often accidentally lowball the things we really want, while having no problem pointing out all the potential costs and pitfalls of something we don't :P Making something optional can't really eliminate those factors altogether to "win", you know?
As far as I know, no one at Beamdog has said that their reason for not implementing FPC is that it would be too difficult or require too much time or resources. The only direct response to this issue that I'm aware of is Trent saying he doesn't want to add FPC because he thinks it would somehow go against the spirit of NWN1, despite the fact that NWN1's singleplayer custom module scene is huge, and it's quite possible that singleplayer is where most current NWN1 players are. So it kind of looks like they're simply dismissing a large portion of their audience. So far, Beamdog's stance on FPC appears to be more akin to Todd Howard saying he doesn't want to hire a really good writer for the next Elder Scrolls game because having a compelling plot and deep, interesting characters would go against the spirit of The Elder Scrolls as a series with bad writing and empty NPCs that you only play for mods and mindless dungeon crawling.
Now, if it turns out that technical or time/resource issues are the real problem, maybe there's some room to negotiate. If Beamdog can't implement FPC themselves, how about opening up the code so the community can do it? I'm guessing that that would be easier.
Nice post.
I really don't see the problem - you pretty much nailed it with the bottom of your post (just put that at the top)
Now, if it turns out that technical or time/resource issues are the real problem, maybe there's some room to negotiate. If Beamdog can't implement FPC themselves, how about opening up the code so the community can do it? I'm guessing that that would be easier.
Doesn't this pretty much clear up and solve all dispute here?
So far, Beamdog's stance on FPC appears to be more akin to Todd Howard saying he doesn't want to hire a really good writer for the next Elder Scrolls game because having a compelling plot and deep, interesting characters would go against the spirit of The Elder Scrolls as a series with bad writing and empty NPCs that you only play for mods and mindless dungeon crawling.
Sounds more like sneery Codex condescension. Because of course we all know better what the original producer intended and can prove it with detailed forensic work.
As far as I know, no one at Beamdog has said that their reason for not implementing FPC is that it would be too difficult or require too much time or resources.
There are several good reasons why Beamdog can't or won't go on the record and say this. On the other hand, I've no such constraints, so:
Full Party Control is immensely difficult to do in NWN.
There.
I would personally love it, as that opens up the engine as a platform for making many new types of games, but some of the suggestions here (like the BG style parties) are just not feasible. You could make each party member possessable like familiars, or add additional henchman commands, etc.. that might be enough for some, but that's not really FPC.
As for opening it up for modders - there is nothing BD could do to make this easy for modders. The architecture simply does not support it. If anyone has an actual idea how to do this (and I don't mean drawings, I mean actual changes to the game logic and network code), I'm very interested. Otherwise, it seems like a dream, and maybe you should focus on more achievable party control enhancements.
Sounds more like sneery Codex condescension. Because of course we all know better what the original producer intended and can prove it with detailed forensic work.
We know what Trent thinks of this because he said it himself. I'm not putting words in his mouth. He said he doesn't want FPC because he personally thinks it goes against the spirit of NWN. However, for many of us who play singleplayer modules, the lack of FPC is nothing but a flaw of the game, much like the writing is a flaw in Elder Scrolls games. TES would only be improved by adding good writing, and NWN would only be improved by adding FPC as an option for those who want it. It's absurd to be ideologically opposed to improving the game.
Also, I don't post on the Codex, though I've read a few threads there and I agree that a lot of them have bad attitudes.
There are several good reasons why Beamdog can't or won't go on the record and say this.
Like what? I can't think of any good reasons why they shouldn't be upfront about it. I can think of some bad reasons, but I want to give them the benefit of the doubt.
Full Party Control is immensely difficult to do in NWN.
There.
I would personally love it, as that opens up the engine as a platform for making many new types of games, but some of the suggestions here (like the BG style parties) are just not feasible. You could make each party member possessable like familiars, or add additional henchman commands, etc.. that might be enough for some, but that's not really FPC.
As for opening it up for modders - there is nothing BD could do to make this easy for modders. The architecture simply does not support it. If anyone has an actual idea how to do this (and I don't mean drawings, I mean actual changes to the game logic and network code), I'm very interested. Otherwise, it seems like a dream, and maybe you should focus on more achievable party control enhancements.
How do you know this?
And even if you're correct, they should tell us that. They should be honest and say "We're sorry, but we can't do it" instead of "We refuse to do it because we think singleplayer FPC would be playing the game wrong and we think you should be playing multiplayer instead."
I have not read the whole thread after the first page, but I just want to add my 2 cents.
For what its worth, if full party control isn't in the game I am unlikely to buy it Unless, of course, there are some excellent mods that change things up!
I hope they make a NWN2:EE. I'd definitely buy that one!
I have not read the whole thread after the first page, but I just want to add my 2 cents.
For what its worth, if full party control isn't in the game I am unlikely to buy it Unless, of course, there are some excellent mods that change things up!
I hope they make a NWN2:EE. I'd definitely buy that one!
I want FPC myself and think not having it is a flawed systems for reasons I'll not bother getting into (the argument has already become redundant and circular) but I will say that you do yourself a disservice to avoid buying it merely over this one issue/missing feature.
Its probably one of the top things I'm hoping for but even without it this is one hell of a great game and the community modules makes it almost infinity re-playable.
I have not read the whole thread after the first page, but I just want to add my 2 cents.
For what its worth, if full party control isn't in the game I am unlikely to buy it Unless, of course, there are some excellent mods that change things up!
I hope they make a NWN2:EE. I'd definitely buy that one!
I want FPC myself and think not having it is a flawed systems for reasons I'll not bother getting into (the argument has already become redundant and circular) but I will say that you do yourself a disservice to avoid buying it merely over this one issue/missing feature.
Its probably one of the top things I'm hoping for but even without it this is one hell of a great game and the community modules makes it almost infinity re-playable.
I agree with this. Though to be fair I’ve been frustrated enough by henchmen behavior to have quit playing several otherwise excellent single player modules.
Which is a shame because they were interesting and well written henchmen otherwise.
I agree with PL1 here, I understand completely if FPC is too expensive and complicated of a fix that would also probably break modules, but they should be upfront about that if so. They have hit two of my big three desires for NWN:EE, namely new content and updated graphics, so i'm certainly not complaining if I can't get this last one.
Also, if implementing FPC were simply impossible or infeasible, one would think they wouldn't want to give people false hope by putting it on the Trello board.
Why not just mark henchmen as a familiar and allow the player to possess them?
Or go one step further and allow for a cut down DM possession of flagged NPC's to afford full inventory management.
It may not be the most fancy feature rich fix in the world but it would be a nice QoL solution that could possibly be implemented in a single patch cycle as a copy/paste/edit job.
for me, npc AI has always been about getting the game into an RTS feel. Dungeon Siege, Gauntlet the arcade game... was enjoyable. I would enjoy controlling a party of high AI npcs in my team - each of them knowing the right formation, the right spell and attack.
but im not too fussed with nwn not having great npc AI. otherwise combat may become somewhat like Gauntlet the arcade game ---- too formulaic--- what i think bad AI encourages nwn players to do is go multiplayer. And that is the major purpose of nwn -- i know i see many players play single payer, or play on their own even in an rpg mod public server.
But the key, the beauty of nwn has always been multiplayer. Imagine an ongoing massive WoW style Realms vs Realms conflict raging forever in nwn. Perpetual Team PvP. And NWN can have DMs spawning and creating massive dynamic events and conflicts all the time. Not even WoW can do this. WoW's engine can't cope. But NWN's can. Maybe that is my dream? A massive 128 player RvR team pvp NWN mod with 20 Dms inside spawning wars and creating havoc as players struggle to survive?
for me, npc AI has always been about getting the game into an RTS feel. Dungeon Siege, Gauntlet the arcade game... was enjoyable. I would enjoy controlling a party of high AI npcs in my team - each of them knowing the right formation, the right spell and attack.
but im not too fussed with nwn not having great npc AI. otherwise combat may become somewhat like Gauntlet the arcade game ---- too formulaic--- what i think bad AI encourages nwn players to do is go multiplayer. And that is the major purpose of nwn -- i know i see many players play single payer, or play on their own even in an rpg mod public server.
But the key, the beauty of nwn has always been multiplayer. Imagine an ongoing massive WoW style Realms vs Realms conflict raging forever in nwn. Perpetual Team PvP. And NWN can have DMs spawning and creating massive dynamic events and conflicts all the time. Not even WoW can do this. WoW's engine can't cope. But NWN's can. Maybe that is my dream? A massive 128 player RvR team pvp NWN mod with 20 Dms inside spawning wars and creating havoc as players struggle to survive?
The problem with your premise is that the vast majority on NWN players are single player. I like multi player, but your dream and my lifestyle don't really add up. I'll load up a game for half hour, maybe an hour when I've got some free time in the evening or on a weekend, but it isn't that often and never set times. For many of us multiplayer just isn't an option in real life.
Nobody needs to be 'encouraged' to do something they don't have time for. And honestly I don't think that's a valid assumption anyway. The AI is nearly 20 years old. And even current gaming AI isn't sufficient for all of the variables this game can throw at you.
There are loads of single player modules with well written but frustratingly dumb NPCs. Being able to control them would make the tactical side of those games, well... tactical.
for me, npc AI has always been about getting the game into an RTS feel. Dungeon Siege, Gauntlet the arcade game... was enjoyable. I would enjoy controlling a party of high AI npcs in my team - each of them knowing the right formation, the right spell and attack.
It's kind of ironic for you to say that, because actual RTS games give you full direct control over every unit. Yes, they have AI, but if you want to control them directly, you can.
but im not too fussed with nwn not having great npc AI. otherwise combat may become somewhat like Gauntlet the arcade game ---- too formulaic--- what i think bad AI encourages nwn players to do is go multiplayer. And that is the major purpose of nwn -- i know i see many players play single payer, or play on their own even in an rpg mod public server.
But the key, the beauty of nwn has always been multiplayer. Imagine an ongoing massive WoW style Realms vs Realms conflict raging forever in nwn. Perpetual Team PvP. And NWN can have DMs spawning and creating massive dynamic events and conflicts all the time. Not even WoW can do this. WoW's engine can't cope. But NWN's can. Maybe that is my dream? A massive 128 player RvR team pvp NWN mod with 20 Dms inside spawning wars and creating havoc as players struggle to survive?
And here we see one of my big problems with this debate - the apparent desire to convince singleplayer gamers that they're playing the game wrong and that they should be playing multiplayer instead. Here you're even outright saying that you hope the bad AI will convince people to play multiplayer, as if the bad AI is a feature that's intended to coerce us into playing the game "the right way". Meanwhile, no one on my side of the argument is saying that we want FPC because we think it'll force multiplayer fans to play singleplayer. Speaking for myself, the bad AI in NWN has never made me want to play multiplayer, because I'm not particularly interested in multiplayer for any game. All it does is make me frustrated that the game isn't meeting its full potential of being a great RPG for both singleplayer and multiplayer. And if you want to have a good time playing some multiplayer D&D with other people, do you really want to be surrounded by people who are only there grudgingly because it's the only way to have party members who aren't complete idiots? Doesn't sound very conducive to good fun.
I don't think having FPC would necessarily make combat formulaic. If anything, it would give module creators a lot more room to design unique and challenging encounters, because they know the player has the tools they need to deal with more complicated stuff. And in any case, it's still much better than feeling like combat is largely out of your control and your success is less about making the right decisions and more about hoping that the AI doesn't screw up too badly.
I'm sorry, but I just don't consider "Subpar singleplayer is an essential feature of NWN" to be a legitimate argument.
Comments
Are these problems in NWN2?
How do you script for persistent locations, quests, variables and similar scenarios for a whole party? Would current PWs have to change entire persistent systems to adapt? If PWs had to disable it, would it hurt their future player count if it couldn't adapt? Would it be compatible with all current modules on vault or break them?
I don't think this would be as simple as some make it out to be (ie "just have it as an option") since the game has been going for so long without FPC. At least thinking about it from a scripting perspective with current content.
D & D is a main group game, it's you and other adventurers who embark on an adventure, too clean when it comes to gaming D & D this aspect is seen with evil eye and creates many discomforts-misunderstandings-Rage on many users.
NWN AI and bad control through the lines of dialogue talking to the pet-pet or henchman are bad, even the orders given with the rotation menu system do not work properly for me, this must be Fizato or improved.
Ok the NWN2 AI always has problems but is slightly better than NWN1 at least, at least you do not have to talk to the followers each time and tell them:
"Change your melee weapons at a distance" or "stay close to me, get away from there" and all the character card panel, at least through modding since I read and can fix the problem, but we do not always talk as if this is a bad thing.
This function is completely optional and not mandatory in all the action RPG (not all but yes ... and optional)
But other people in this thread are arguing whether this should be an option because it isn’t what they want
As my old Magic Eightball used to say.
Collectively speaking, we often accidentally lowball the things we really want, while having no problem pointing out all the potential costs and pitfalls of something we don't :P Making something optional can't really eliminate those factors altogether to "win", you know?
Now, if it turns out that technical or time/resource issues are the real problem, maybe there's some room to negotiate. If Beamdog can't implement FPC themselves, how about opening up the code so the community can do it? I'm guessing that that would be easier.
I really don't see the problem - you pretty much nailed it with the bottom of your post (just put that at the top)
It kind of reminds me of the early days on NWN, where bioware insisted the camera could not drop below 45 degrees. Then someone hacked it, everyone started using the hack, and soon after they officially implemented the ability to move the camera lower.
I really don't see the problem - you pretty much nailed it with the bottom of your post (just put that at the top) Doesn't this pretty much clear up and solve all dispute here?
Full Party Control is immensely difficult to do in NWN.
There.I would personally love it, as that opens up the engine as a platform for making many new types of games, but some of the suggestions here (like the BG style parties) are just not feasible. You could make each party member possessable like familiars, or add additional henchman commands, etc.. that might be enough for some, but that's not really FPC.
As for opening it up for modders - there is nothing BD could do to make this easy for modders. The architecture simply does not support it. If anyone has an actual idea how to do this (and I don't mean drawings, I mean actual changes to the game logic and network code), I'm very interested. Otherwise, it seems like a dream, and maybe you should focus on more achievable party control enhancements.
Also, I don't post on the Codex, though I've read a few threads there and I agree that a lot of them have bad attitudes.
Like what? I can't think of any good reasons why they shouldn't be upfront about it. I can think of some bad reasons, but I want to give them the benefit of the doubt.
How do you know this?
And even if you're correct, they should tell us that. They should be honest and say "We're sorry, but we can't do it" instead of "We refuse to do it because we think singleplayer FPC would be playing the game wrong and we think you should be playing multiplayer instead."
For what its worth, if full party control isn't in the game I am unlikely to buy it
Unless, of course, there are some excellent mods that change things up!
I hope they make a NWN2:EE. I'd definitely buy that one!
Its probably one of the top things I'm hoping for but even without it this is one hell of a great game and the community modules makes it almost infinity re-playable.
Which is a shame because they were interesting and well written henchmen otherwise.
Or go one step further and allow for a cut down DM possession of flagged NPC's to afford full inventory management.
It may not be the most fancy feature rich fix in the world but it would be a nice QoL solution that could possibly be implemented in a single patch cycle as a copy/paste/edit job.
but im not too fussed with nwn not having great npc AI. otherwise combat may become somewhat like Gauntlet the arcade game ---- too formulaic--- what i think bad AI encourages nwn players to do is go multiplayer. And that is the major purpose of nwn -- i know i see many players play single payer, or play on their own even in an rpg mod public server.
But the key, the beauty of nwn has always been multiplayer. Imagine an ongoing massive WoW style Realms vs Realms conflict raging forever in nwn. Perpetual Team PvP. And NWN can have DMs spawning and creating massive dynamic events and conflicts all the time. Not even WoW can do this. WoW's engine can't cope. But NWN's can. Maybe that is my dream? A massive 128 player RvR team pvp NWN mod with 20 Dms inside spawning wars and creating havoc as players struggle to survive?
Nobody needs to be 'encouraged' to do something they don't have time for. And honestly I don't think that's a valid assumption anyway. The AI is nearly 20 years old. And even current gaming AI isn't sufficient for all of the variables this game can throw at you.
There are loads of single player modules with well written but frustratingly dumb NPCs. Being able to control them would make the tactical side of those games, well... tactical.
And here we see one of my big problems with this debate - the apparent desire to convince singleplayer gamers that they're playing the game wrong and that they should be playing multiplayer instead. Here you're even outright saying that you hope the bad AI will convince people to play multiplayer, as if the bad AI is a feature that's intended to coerce us into playing the game "the right way". Meanwhile, no one on my side of the argument is saying that we want FPC because we think it'll force multiplayer fans to play singleplayer. Speaking for myself, the bad AI in NWN has never made me want to play multiplayer, because I'm not particularly interested in multiplayer for any game. All it does is make me frustrated that the game isn't meeting its full potential of being a great RPG for both singleplayer and multiplayer. And if you want to have a good time playing some multiplayer D&D with other people, do you really want to be surrounded by people who are only there grudgingly because it's the only way to have party members who aren't complete idiots? Doesn't sound very conducive to good fun.
I don't think having FPC would necessarily make combat formulaic. If anything, it would give module creators a lot more room to design unique and challenging encounters, because they know the player has the tools they need to deal with more complicated stuff. And in any case, it's still much better than feeling like combat is largely out of your control and your success is less about making the right decisions and more about hoping that the AI doesn't screw up too badly.
I'm sorry, but I just don't consider "Subpar singleplayer is an essential feature of NWN" to be a legitimate argument.