boards.4channel.org
www.dexerto.com
It's also a fact that nobody forces you to play any games. If a game has a female protagonist and you don't like it then make the choice to not play the game.
It's ok for people to look forward to games with female lead characters, even if they happen to be GTA.
Chick would be cool.
Hope she'll be fucked up and horny.
Just like you fully savor when leftist idiots are raging when playing as a heterosexual white man™?
It's good for the first few months but gets old really fast?
No. The reading comprehension is your issue. You are trying to push two distinct conversations into one to try and not look stupid. This isn't twitter. You said
Much like it was when their older brothers were "forced" to play as or "couldn't identify with" a black player character in San Andreas.
To which my response was to ask for receipts with this statement
Who was this? lmao. Tales from my ass.
You then went on to reference the original post about female playable characters with this hot take from the surface of twitter
I hope that is all true. The incels raging against playing as a woman will be a very special moment I will savor fully
To which I responded it won't be an issue because if you look at GTA:O there is a precedent already. There are literally hundrends of thousands of players who happily play as female avatars and don't incel out. And then provided the official R* photo mode archives to show they are actually quite popular and dominate the pages, thus destroying your wished for hot take. So you're left holding yout hot take and nothing else. Where are the incels raging out that you can play as a female online? So as you're so heavy into the series, I can see you are maybe speaking from your own experience where you will incel out?
Rockstar's patent describes a system that primarily will change this and give NPCs more situational awareness. They will essentially have an objective of navigating from one location to another (simplified, but is essential in making routines similar to rdr2) and be able to take into account other external factors. Coolest of all,NPCS will still exist when your game isn’t rendering them in this implementation.
The large part they also mention is this implementation uses a lot less processing power. The NPC schedules can be relayed by a central server (they could possibly use the console itself as well) and it doesn’t require the same constant surrounding analysis as previous AI. Rockstar mentions this will allow them to have denser traffic with the same resources.
Essentially each driver will have its own profile, and have unique driving characteristics as well as skill level. Some might speed, others might not. Each vehicle will also affect the driving of these drivers.
I just dont see this being implemented in the way described. They'd need to program thousands of nodes across the game world lining every road, and have them referenced constantly by thousands of basic AI routines running in the background. I can see it working in a more sparsely populated world like RDR, but GTA just doesn't seem likely to me. The return on investment as far as allocating resources goes just doesn't seem worth it.This is just fkn AWESOME
r/GTA6
Takeaway from yesterday’s patent post
I’ve read over the patent post from yesterday, and I noticed a lot of people missed the most exciting information in it. I’ll sum it up in non technical language:
It’s essentially a method to improve vehicle AI when driving
Currently, when NPCs drive on the road, they can sense a few cars around them to determine crashes or other things to drive around. This is “dumb” AI as it has very few factors to take into account, and requires a lot of computational resources. This is why vehicles despawn when far away, to free up the CPU.
Here’s a quote from the patent:
Rockstar's patent describes a system that primarily will change this and give NPCs more situational awareness. They will essentially have an objective of navigating from one location to another (simplified, but is essential in making routines similar to rdr2) and be able to take into account other external factors. Coolest of all,NPCS will still exist when your game isn’t rendering them in this implementation.
Specific examples mentioned by Rockstar state they will be able to use weather conditions, traffic, and crashes to determine where to go. Some areas might be dangerous in the rain, they might avoid it. If an area has too much traffic, they will avoid it. Possibly destructible environmental areas could be reacted to (similar to bridges in Just Cause, this point is speculation however ). Cars will also be able to take into account # of lanes and speed in their decisions. NPCs will be also able to take into account high speed chases, and be able to navigate if they themselves are speeding.
There will also be other reactions that are mentioned specifically, such as changing lanes before a highway exit appears, and as Rockstar puts it
The large part they also mention is this implementation uses a lot less processing power. The NPC schedules can be relayed by a central server (they could possibly use the console itself as well) and it doesn’t require the same constant surrounding analysis as previous AI. Rockstar mentions this will allow them to have denser traffic with the same resources.
A large aim also seems to be “realism.” Rockstar's patent mentions realistic reactions to various factors as being the main intent. For example, NPCs will each have different driving ability levels, based on the driver and the car:
Essentially each driver will have its own profile, and have unique driving characteristics as well as skill level. Some might speed, others might not. Each vehicle will also affect the driving of these drivers.
Personally I find this very exciting. It builds an image of a denser world, with many variable environmental conditions. It remains to be seen to what degree this will be implemented, either way it’s a great find!
This also seems to give the idea that weather and changing conditions will have a large impact on the Gameworld. As the other patent posted today mentioned as well, response and varying environments are heavily emphasized. IMO this is biggest takeaway from this, and will be important even if it is not incorporated into GTA 6.
Keep in mind though, patents do not mean this tech will be used, or used to the full extent described. Companies often patent stuff that they might use and then decide not to use them due to lack of feasibility, or go for a broad patent and use it a lot more limitedly.
https://uspto.report/patent/app/20200338450 patent
Credit to /u/ElementNo28 for finding the patent
gamerant.com
It’s also ok not to.
Never said it wasn't, my friend.
