I hate AI-controlled characters. Never have I thought, "thanks, AI-controlled character, you really saved us back there" in any genre. Instead, my thoughts usually have more to do questioning their use of a healing item, choice of target in combat, or worse: the suspicion that the AI doesn't know that "friendly fire" means we'll all die if they stand in the back and spray bullets everywhere.
While some of this nonsense can surely be traced back to poor programming, I suspect that even if the AI were making excellent decisions every single time, it would still come out looking foolish if a) they aren't the same decisions the player would have made or b) the player can't understand the reasoning behind a seemly odd decision.
Final Fantasy XII solves these issues quite handily with the introduction of the Gambit system: essentially a series of IF-THEN statements the player uses to instruct the party AI how to respond to various combat situations. Though the syntax is a bit different than in these examples, the simpler sorts of decisions Gambits can be used to make are, "if a character is poisoned, cure their poison", or "if there is an enemy in range, attack it", but it goes even deeper than that.
Some of the more interesting Gambits are based on the percentages of remaining health for an ally or an enemy. They make it possible for a character to steal from an enemy only at the beginning of the battle (enemy health = 100%), or to gang up on an enemy that's almost dead (enemy health < 10%, or enemy with lowest health) to get it out of the way rather than let it continue to attack. On the ally side, these Gambits can be used to heal characters whose HP are below a certain percentage, and can even select which healing spell or item to use based on how low their HP gets. They can even automate buffs and debuffs -- which I'll admit, I rarely used in JRPGs before FFXII -- and take advantage of enemy weaknesses (if enemy is weak to fire, cast Firaga).
In short, Gambits automate a significant portion of FFXII's combat by selection actions the player's behalf. In fact, they can be active for every member in the party at the same time, meaning that it's possible for the player to put down the controller and let a battle play out completely on its own. This leads to the common criticism of Gambits: that they allow the game to play itself.
The problem, as I understand it, is that part of the appeal of JRPGs is in selecting actions for each party member. In particular, a good boss battles is a chance for the player to work out a strategy for keeping everyone alive while continuing to damage the enemy. At their best, these battles often require careful consideration of what each character should do next as they slowly approach victory. When Gambits are enabled (note that they can be disabled), every battle takes off without needing any input from the player. There's no need for strategy, no weighing the odds of how the next turn will help or hurt, just three AI characters running around beating up on some monster automatically.
I think it's a fairly reasonable argument, and I hope I've represented it accurately, but I nevertheless think it fails to consider the way that the Gambits are put into place and the limitations they have on them.
Other than the first ones meant to introduce the player to the concept, the game doesn't automatically set any Gambits. It is up to the player to determine what actions they want each player to take in response to various triggers. I know, as a player of JRPGs, that if an enemy is weak to a particular element, I would do well to attack using that element. I also know that using the proper element will most likely mean entering a menu for magic, and then scrolling to the appropriate spell each time I want to use it. What I appreciate about Gambits is that they allow me to tell the game that I would like to use that appropriate spell whenever appropriate, and then it gets used whenever appropriate. Likewise, if I don't care about using magic, I can just as easily tell the game that I want to just attack, no matter the weakness, and off it goes.
The point is that it is still up to the player to decide how the battles will play out, but it will not necessarily be up to the player to navigate the menus to make it happen each time. For me, the ideal party would be one that has such carefully tuned Gambits that they never need any input from me once a battle starts. It would be the perfectly balanced party, prepared for any situation. I can get close to that, but there are still times when player input is useful, due to the limited number of Gambits each character can have, and a limited selection of IF-THEN statements to choose from, both of which do increase as the game progresses.
What this means is that there will often be exceptions to what the Gambits can handle, so the player will need to step in and issue commands. Doing so pauses the action, providing time to actually go through menus and select the action each character should take next. This can be repeated as often as necessary, bringing the game to something of a turn-based system, even if only temporarily. And once the battle ends, the player can then refine the Gambits to effectively improve the AI for the next encounter.
Unfortunately, there are times when there won't be enough room to add another Gambit, or the IF-THEN statement that would fix everything isn't available yet, because the store that sells it is still out of reach. Having to buy gambits in shops is the part of this whole system that irks me. I suppose it could be overwhelming to have every Gambit available from the beginning, and there's the danger that a new player might get a list of the best Gambits to use online and never bother learning to use it themselves. While I agree that experimenting and perfecting a character's Gambits is a significant part of the fun, I do wish they would trust us enough to let us sort out for ourselves how we want to engage with this in all aspects.
That one gripe aside, I do love the Gambit system, and I hope it gets used again in some later Final Fatnasy, or in whatever JRPG happens to copy it. The pseudo-evolution of this system that shows up in Final Fantasy XIII is still good at streamlining battles, though I miss the more granular tweaking that can be done with Gambits. For anyone who passed on FFXII because of Gambits, -- as I almost did -- I'd encourage you to give it a shot, if for no other reason than this is one of the few games that, if you don't like the AI, you can change it to better suit you.
While some of this nonsense can surely be traced back to poor programming, I suspect that even if the AI were making excellent decisions every single time, it would still come out looking foolish if a) they aren't the same decisions the player would have made or b) the player can't understand the reasoning behind a seemly odd decision.
Final Fantasy XII solves these issues quite handily with the introduction of the Gambit system: essentially a series of IF-THEN statements the player uses to instruct the party AI how to respond to various combat situations. Though the syntax is a bit different than in these examples, the simpler sorts of decisions Gambits can be used to make are, "if a character is poisoned, cure their poison", or "if there is an enemy in range, attack it", but it goes even deeper than that.
 |
| The Gambit menu, mon ami. |
Some of the more interesting Gambits are based on the percentages of remaining health for an ally or an enemy. They make it possible for a character to steal from an enemy only at the beginning of the battle (enemy health = 100%), or to gang up on an enemy that's almost dead (enemy health < 10%, or enemy with lowest health) to get it out of the way rather than let it continue to attack. On the ally side, these Gambits can be used to heal characters whose HP are below a certain percentage, and can even select which healing spell or item to use based on how low their HP gets. They can even automate buffs and debuffs -- which I'll admit, I rarely used in JRPGs before FFXII -- and take advantage of enemy weaknesses (if enemy is weak to fire, cast Firaga).
In short, Gambits automate a significant portion of FFXII's combat by selection actions the player's behalf. In fact, they can be active for every member in the party at the same time, meaning that it's possible for the player to put down the controller and let a battle play out completely on its own. This leads to the common criticism of Gambits: that they allow the game to play itself.
The problem, as I understand it, is that part of the appeal of JRPGs is in selecting actions for each party member. In particular, a good boss battles is a chance for the player to work out a strategy for keeping everyone alive while continuing to damage the enemy. At their best, these battles often require careful consideration of what each character should do next as they slowly approach victory. When Gambits are enabled (note that they can be disabled), every battle takes off without needing any input from the player. There's no need for strategy, no weighing the odds of how the next turn will help or hurt, just three AI characters running around beating up on some monster automatically.
I think it's a fairly reasonable argument, and I hope I've represented it accurately, but I nevertheless think it fails to consider the way that the Gambits are put into place and the limitations they have on them.
Other than the first ones meant to introduce the player to the concept, the game doesn't automatically set any Gambits. It is up to the player to determine what actions they want each player to take in response to various triggers. I know, as a player of JRPGs, that if an enemy is weak to a particular element, I would do well to attack using that element. I also know that using the proper element will most likely mean entering a menu for magic, and then scrolling to the appropriate spell each time I want to use it. What I appreciate about Gambits is that they allow me to tell the game that I would like to use that appropriate spell whenever appropriate, and then it gets used whenever appropriate. Likewise, if I don't care about using magic, I can just as easily tell the game that I want to just attack, no matter the weakness, and off it goes.
The point is that it is still up to the player to decide how the battles will play out, but it will not necessarily be up to the player to navigate the menus to make it happen each time. For me, the ideal party would be one that has such carefully tuned Gambits that they never need any input from me once a battle starts. It would be the perfectly balanced party, prepared for any situation. I can get close to that, but there are still times when player input is useful, due to the limited number of Gambits each character can have, and a limited selection of IF-THEN statements to choose from, both of which do increase as the game progresses.
What this means is that there will often be exceptions to what the Gambits can handle, so the player will need to step in and issue commands. Doing so pauses the action, providing time to actually go through menus and select the action each character should take next. This can be repeated as often as necessary, bringing the game to something of a turn-based system, even if only temporarily. And once the battle ends, the player can then refine the Gambits to effectively improve the AI for the next encounter.
Unfortunately, there are times when there won't be enough room to add another Gambit, or the IF-THEN statement that would fix everything isn't available yet, because the store that sells it is still out of reach. Having to buy gambits in shops is the part of this whole system that irks me. I suppose it could be overwhelming to have every Gambit available from the beginning, and there's the danger that a new player might get a list of the best Gambits to use online and never bother learning to use it themselves. While I agree that experimenting and perfecting a character's Gambits is a significant part of the fun, I do wish they would trust us enough to let us sort out for ourselves how we want to engage with this in all aspects.
That one gripe aside, I do love the Gambit system, and I hope it gets used again in some later Final Fatnasy, or in whatever JRPG happens to copy it. The pseudo-evolution of this system that shows up in Final Fantasy XIII is still good at streamlining battles, though I miss the more granular tweaking that can be done with Gambits. For anyone who passed on FFXII because of Gambits, -- as I almost did -- I'd encourage you to give it a shot, if for no other reason than this is one of the few games that, if you don't like the AI, you can change it to better suit you.
No comments:
Post a Comment