In this video? Scripted or dynamic?

[Cyber-Couch]

http://www.gametrailers.com/player.php?id=13583&type=mov&pl=game

Are the scenes in that video scripted or could they dynamically occur?

[Rapture_Tourist]

Hmm, I dont know what you mean...its a complete CGI Trailer with no ingame scene.

But of course a meeting with a Big Daddy and a Little Sister can end in a battle, it depends on how you like to treat the little girl.

[jackinthebox]

Rapture_Tourist is right: it's completely CGI (to attract everybody's attention). it just shows what happens to your character if you start attacking a little sister (big daddy will turn you inside out)... ;)

[Necros]

I was always wondering, if this video was created using UnrealEngine3. Because Tim Sweeney said that many games will use the engine not only to create the game but to create cinematics too, to save money. I think, with the right tools, UE3 could be used to create that awsome trailer. :)
(Winning the Best Trailer of 2006 award at GameTrailers.com was no surprise. :cool: :D)

[vrap]

It's 100% pre-rendered CGI, but they've used art from the game - albeit higher-resolution versions of the assets.

[a rabid chicken]

I think it's more than "art" from the game. I think it's the same models and stuff as well, just higher resolution, as you said.

[vrap]

That's exactly what I meant :)


Interestingly, the thread title brought back to my mind a concern I've had since the 15 minute E3 video, which I thought the thread was about. There's basically one fear I have about the game, and that of whether it would be able to deliver on its promises. Because the video, despite being so long, did not give any indication of that.*

Let me start again. I'm not one to doubt Ken and Irrational where game innovation is concerned, I have no doubt they will deliver something that will be profound, regardless of whether it's exactly what they say it was going to be. I do think they will pull it off. But there still is always that worry, that some of the things they say will be awesome, may not quite turn out to be. This is a legitimate worry we will always have about a game we're eagerly anticipating, so I'm being a little redundant in voicing it - but I only say this because despite having seen so many screenshots and a long video demonstration, we still have not seen real illustration of some of BioShock's most talked-about features.
For example, the dynamic and unscripted behaviour of the AI is something we've not seen; all the encounters in the videos could have easily been scripted, and at some points it seems to suggest that very possibility.

Now, granted, the feature that I've mentioned is by it's very nature difficult to show off, unless you made more than one video of the same thing to show how different the scene would play each time. However this fact doesn't help the game much at all; the truth is that we actually couldn't tell what makes BioShock very different from other shooters in that respect, firstly because it's pretty difficult to demonstrate some of game design mechanics and secondly because they've not even shown situations where we could make a good judgement.

[edit]
*exaggeration :o I mean specifically only certain features.

[Gabby_Hayes]

Intelligence is hard enough to equate in real life.

Trying to catch the computer in the act of branching on a decision hierarchy vs playing an interactive pre-programmed skit seems nearly impossible without heavy play.

Thank you for the insightful angle of looking at this quandary vrap. :)

Perhaps it's the ecosystem in play that's the one feature that's most easily absorbed.

[a rabid chicken]

Everything in the E3 demo is scripted, but how could it not be? It's a demo. For example, if they had dynamically moving enemies and such it wouldn't work. "Ummm, now, we have these creatures called big daddies, and, umm, let's just wait around here for a little bit and hope one shows up." (15 minutes later) "Weeellllll, it looks like we're not gonna get one to show up, so, next up, hacking!" I might not quite understand your question perfectly, but in the Hunting the Big Daddy video we will see various AIs being turned against each other with plasmids. What AI interactions are you expecting that wouldn't be more or less scripted? Are you talking about the dynamic movement of AIs such as the big daddies and little sisters? In the Hunting the Big Daddy vide they move towards a splicer killed by the player to get Adam, but this is scripted for the sake of the demo. They will do things like this in the final game, but I don't think having them wander about, talking to each other is such a difficult thing to execute, so I wouldn't doubt them. If a game developer says, "We're going to have really smart combat AI that is better than any game you've seen before!" it's very easy to doubt them because combat AI is all about the execution, not the concept. The AI in BioShock is all about the concept rather than the execution, so I wouldn't worry too much.

[vrap]

As I said, it's a two-faced problem - not actually having a good way to demonstrate the features is as much the issue as the possible absence of them, which is the point I was making in light of the thread title. Again, I have faith in Irrational, I guess you can call this worry "irrational".

[Uponemandus]

Everything in the E3 demo is scripted, but how could it not be? It's a demo. For example, if they had dynamically moving enemies and such it wouldn't work. "Ummm, now, we have these creatures called big daddies, and, umm, let's just wait around here for a little bit and hope one shows up." (15 minutes later) "Weeellllll, it looks like we're not gonna get one to show up, so, next up, hacking!" I might not quite understand your question perfectly, but in the Hunting the Big Daddy video we will see various AIs being turned against each other with plasmids. What AI interactions are you expecting that wouldn't be more or less scripted? Are you talking about the dynamic movement of AIs such as the big daddies and little sisters? In the Hunting the Big Daddy vide they move towards a splicer killed by the player to get Adam, but this is scripted for the sake of the demo. They will do things like this in the final game, but I don't think having them wander about, talking to each other is such a difficult thing to execute, so I wouldn't doubt them. If a game developer says, "We're going to have really smart combat AI that is better than any game you've seen before!" it's very easy to doubt them because combat AI is all about the execution, not the concept. The AI in BioShock is all about the concept rather than the execution, so I wouldn't worry too much.

I think you guys need to clarify what you expect in terms of scripts versus dynamic behavior. From what I understand, all entities have fairly simple scripted motivations, but they execute them in a dynamic manner. The big daddies go out in the levels to call the little sisters from their vents. Their only motivation is to escort and protect the little sisters, make sure they get home safe, then go look for the next. The little sisters only want to find corpses and take resources from them- but if threatened, they run to the big daddies, who first try to put them out of danger, then retaliate. Where they go together might be entirely dynamic. The big daddy's route to find little sisters might be entirely dynamic, but then again, vents might also be placed in central, logical locations throughout the levels.

Splicers want to attack the little sisters, but are afraid of the big daddies. Dynamically, they may decide to attack a little sister if the Big Daddy is distracted or wounded. Splicers want to kill you, and perhaps some follow minor scripts relating to what they used to do before they were turned monstrous. Where they wander might be entirely dynamic. Their shift between patrolling and whatever used to preoccupy them might be dynamic. They try to heal themselves when hurt. They will use weapons in their possession, and can potentially use any plasmid. It's unknown if they will avail themselves to weapons and plasmids lying out in the world.

Security bots are called to in response to an alert. They try to kill whatever they designated as an intruder.

You need Adam. You have to fight the Big Daddies to get to the little sisters. You need ammunition and eve to defend yourself. All splicers hate you and want to kill you. All security systems that are activated are initially turned against you. The big daddies and little sisters are by default neutral to you, provided you don't get too close.

That's what kind of behavior we should expect, given what we know so far. Taken seperately, it's pretty limited. The fun part, and what sounds like the 'emergent' part is how it all interrelates- especially how the player chooses to exploit all these behavioral rules, given what tools are available to him at the time. I think this is what Irrational have been hyping- the relation between the player, the world, and the AIs- they haven't been hyping any particular, isolated AI aspect as being the greatest ever.

If you doubt Irrational's AI capability, try playing Swat 4- I just bought it yesterday and am fairly impressed with the squadmates. There's a one level demo on all the major download sites, and it has randomized enemy and civilian locations so it's got pretty good replay value.

[ThunderBuns]

I wish the AI and animations were really this dynamic...sigh. I wonder how long it will be until this kind of gameplay will be a reality.