Category Archives: Bethesda Softworks

Opinion – Procedural Generation and You!

Coding this piece

The coming release of No Man’s Sky has put procedural generation at the forefront of gaming once again.  The developer, lacking the resources of a larger team, turned to procedural generation to create game assets via an algorithm rather than devoting a person to create a specific asset.  As a result, they claim that everyone on earth could play the game for the rest of their lives and still not see all the content the game has.  Procedural generation (PG) allows the creation of entire universes, but it has its limitations.  The technique fairs poorly where gaming cannot be boiled down to simple math.

The oldest and most common use of PG is the creation of environments and maps.  Probably the oldest examples of this are 4x games where land tiles could be randomly shuffled to create new battlegrounds with relatively little effort.  The developers learned to establish certain parameters (landmasses could only be so small or not to put deserts next to tundra) that improved the enjoyment of the map.  Modern games employ a more sophisticated version of the same strategy.  Minecraft creates biomes and underground caverns based off of the dictates of its algorithm.  The billions of planets in No Man’s Sky does the same basic tile swapping, but on a galactic scale.  PG works on these particular assets because they can be accurately modelled mathematically.  Each object has a predictable relationship with every other object making PG a matter of ensuring that the objects interact in the right way.  Establish enough of these interactions the developer can create worlds that feel both unique and cohesive.

Yet this fails totally when coming up with procedurally generated stories and quests.  PG content along these lines is generally predictable and unconvincing.  Quests ask for pointless tasks like “collect 10 rhino spleens” and rarely lead anywhere.  The most prominent and recent example of this is Fallout 4 during its quests to rebuild the wasteland by establishing small towns in the ruins.  Quest giving NPC Preston Garvey starts by asking the player to clear out settlement sites for repopulation.  Once that’s done, he asks the player to go back to those same places over and over to defend against yet another mutant horde/ghoul assault/scurvy outbreak for the millionth time.  The quests were obviously the result of a formula that never had any endpoint.  While developer BethesdaSoft’s attempted to create procedural content for their game, they ended up with a poor feature that was mostly mocked by its users.

PG content of this kind fails because stories don’t breakdown into easily manageable chunks.  A computer can’t randomly rearrange sections of a story to create a cohesive whole.  Each piece of a story must necessarily build on its predecessor in a way that seems like a natural evolution of the characters and the setting.  Character A attacks Character B’s hometown for loot.  Character B seeks revenge and, in so doing, must make moral sacrifices that ultimately put them on the path to attack towns like Character A.  These relationships are much harder to describe and far more limiting then saying that a tile can be next to three different types of tiles but not next to the fourth.  They can’t be broken down into component parts with their own set of discreetly defined principles.  As a result, PG stories and quests that follow the same model as their environmental generation brethren often look hollow and predictable.  Fallout 4’s quests of “[town] is under attack by [threat].  Go kill [number from 3 to 10] of [threat] to bring peace to the land!” never satisfies because it tries to breakdown the narrative into pieces in the same way it does so for environments.

It doesn’t help that stories are also more demanding of their game.  By their very nature, environments are generated before any of the action starts.  They don’t need to draw on any existing assets beyond the algorithm that crafts them.  Stories must reflect and use the environment that they’re in.  Taking an extreme example, consider Fallout 3’s town of Megaton.  At a pivotal moment in the game, the player can either defuse the atomic bomb at the center of town or set it off and become the hero of the nearby Tenpenny Towers.  To make this quest work, PG would have to establish all of the characters, create a town with a nuclear bomb at its center, create the various story beats, identify the save/destroy decision, and ensure that the resulting actions did not remove vital parts of the main story.  It would also have to ensure that all other story interactions wouldn’t conflict with what happened in Megaton.  That’s a lot to align and all the harder for an AI that can only understand story structures and themes through the coding of a programmer.  PG stories are clearly a step beyond PG environments.

Given the woeful state of procedurally generated narratives, it’s tempting to write them off as impossible.  I would caution against that.  It took environmental PG 25 years to get to its current state.  I imagine the old 4x creators would have considered galaxy shaping algorithms impossible, yet now we have them.  The sophistication isn’t there yet, but we’re far from having done all we can to explore this space.

Leave a comment

Filed under Bethesda Softworks, Opinion, video games

Opinion – Mud Crabs are OP

Fear the mud crab.

Calibrating the difficulty of an open world game is hard. Most games present a wide variety of scenarios and, unlike linear games, open world developers can’t decide the order the player faces them. The one thing the developers have going for them is the consistency of player power. Most open world protagonists have a narrow band of strength that the player can either drop to or achieve. Developers need only target that band to ensure the player can beat the level…unless it’s an open world RPG. Including RPG elements add player input into the protagonist’s abilities thereby widening the power band considerably and making difficulty setting much more… well, difficult. The premiere open world RPG maker, Bethesda Softworks, and the premiere open world RPG series, the Elder Scrolls, is instructive to understanding this problem.

Morrowind

Morrowind takes the simplest approach to difficulty by keeping it static throughout the game. The attributes of monsters stay the same, regardless of the player’s achievements. This creates de facto limitations on the open world by forcing players toward content they can beat and preventing them from going places where they lack the skills to overcome. It also creates a very real sense of achievement, provided the player is willing to power through the opening slog. Enemies that were powerful in the beginning become progressively less so as the player increases their skills. The player has a clear sense of their power relative to the world and it’s hard to deny the feeling of success when they finally beat X creature that was so difficult in the early game. Once the player levels beyond the most powerful creatures, the game becomes easy and the challenge is gone. Morrowind takes a brute force approach to difficulty which increases the sense of achievement, but at the cost of approachability.

Oblivion

Responding to criticisms of Morrowind’s static difficulty, Bethesda Softworks added variable difficulty to its successor, Oblivion. Every ten skill levels, the player gained a character level which provided bonuses based on the skill levels used to achieve the player level. Monsters and gear in Oblivion scale based on the character level which should provide a consistent challenge across the game. In theory, this dispenses with Morrowind’s punishingly difficult zones by ensuring each monster is within reach of the player. Unfortunately, that’s not how the idea worked in practice and it’s questionable whether the goal was worth achieving in the first place. Character levels (and, therefore, monster levels) increased without regard to the player’s lethality. The character level could increase five times without the player boosting their combat skills. This means that combat difficulty is tied to a system that could, potentially, not reflect combat ability. If they player spends a couple of levels working on their sparkling personality, they face a significant combat difficulty spike without the means to deal with it. Alternatively, if they focused exclusively on kill power, fights become laughably easy and the vaunted difficulty scaling fails to achieve one of its major goals. The game does have a difficulty slider, but having to constantly adjust it breaks immersion.

One of the major issues with the Oblivion method is that its fundamental goal is questionable. The static approach to difficulty, while brutal, provides a very real sense of achievement. The player knows they’re getting stronger because they can defeat monsters they couldn’t before. If Oblivion had achieved its aim of consistent difficulty, the player would never have that feeling because their opponents would always provide a similar challenge. As it stands, the character leveling ensures that monster challenge feels arbitrary by the constantly changing the difficulty based on player choices. It’s hard to feel accomplished by beating a giant when the player knows they could have leveled differently (or avoided leveling all together) and drastically changed the achievement.

Skyrim

For Skyrim, Bethesda Softworks found an interesting solution by combining the two methods. Skyrim merges the world leveling of Oblivion, but restricts those levels within region set bands. Monsters level up with the player, but areas have minimum and maximum difficulty levels that restrict monster growth and decline.   A giant in one region will never go below level X(let’s use 15 as an example) meaning that a level 1 player will likely die if they fight it. It remains at level 15 until the player surpasses level 15 and the starts leveling with the player until it hits its region’s level cap. Rather than difficulty scaling, Skyrim difficulty smooths. The goal isn’t to provide a consistent level of challenge, but rather to ensure regions exist at the player’s level while still providing monsters for the player to measure their power against. Furthermore, Skyrim’s method ensures that the game’s challenge will remain for the duration of a region thereby minimizing the times a quest is either too easy or hard. Skyrim provides both Morrowind’s sense of achievement and Oblivion’s (attempted) difficulty consistently. It’s the best of both worlds.

1 Comment

Filed under Bethesda Softworks, Elder Scrolls, Morrowind, Oblivion, Opinion, Skyrim