Review Oblivion tickles RPGDot's fancy

[GhanBuriGhan]

It doesn't matter how many things a game tries to do. What really matters is how well it works. Radiant AI may be a step forward in theory but in application its incredibly backwards.

Sorry, but no. It may not be all that, but I am still very happy it's in there instead of being absent as in MW. NPC's ARE more alive, no matter how you turn it. That makes it a good feature, although it's not quite playing out as it was hyped to be. The "idiocy" is nowhere near as jarring as you make it out to be - it happens especially in the NPC conversations, but so what, after some time you just stop to listen too closely, and than it's no worse than Gothics conversation bits. And so what if you can break the AI by some tricks like in that video - every moderately complex system will have that problem. On the whole, it's still a big plus for the game. And I really would rather encourage Bethsoft and other developers to refine the concept and think how it can be made to truly work instead of everyone trashing it all the way to hell - you know what that means - just cut the feature, and replace it with something even more basic.

 

[Dhruin]

I don't think I demand too much - the conversation thing doesn't bother me that much (as you say, Gothic recycles short clips) and I can even accept silly things like staring at walls or walking pointlessly back and forth. What bugs the crap out of me is the enemy states - I've killed people in the one room and had no reaction from the others who just stand there or walk over the body of their comrade. Or putting an arrow in a bandit and the one 6 feet away doesn't react.

Contrast that against "psychic" guards. I know people dispute whether they are really psychic (and I don't know) but it's jarring when I kill someone silently in their basement and the whole universe knows vs hacking up a group in a room and noone reacts.

Gothic does this better. Enter someone's house uninvited - they challenge you. Stay too long, they make a fuss. Works every time.

Otherwise, yes, it's a big step forward from Morrowind.

 

[GhanBuriGhan]

I don't think I demand too much - the conversation thing doesn't bother me that much (as you say, Gothic recycles short clips) and I can even accept silly things like staring at walls or walking pointlessly back and forth. What bugs the crap out of me is the enemy states - I've killed people in the one room and had no reaction from the others who just stand there or walk over the body of their comrade. Or putting an arrow in a bandit and the one 6 feet away doesn't react.

Contrast that against "psychic" guards. I know people dispute whether they are really psychic (and I don't know) but it's jarring when I kill someone silently in their basement and the whole universe knows vs hacking up a group in a room and noone reacts.

Gothic does this better. Enter someone's house uninvited - they challenge you. Stay too long, they make a fuss. Works every time.

Otherwise, yes, it's a big step forward from Morrowind.

Sure, that's rather jarring, Gothic did it better, and it's dissapointing that combat AI is not better. They added some neat things like the grab weapons bit and the different combat styles, but there is much left to do, especailly as you point out realistic group behavior. It may be nitpicking, however I would like to point out that that has nothing to do with radiant AI though. RAI was solely advertised to do NPC schedules and reactions to the environment - the combat AI is seperate from it.

s to psychic Guards, the way Emilpags explained it, killing someone (unless you kill in one hit) sends out an alarm signal (supposedly to simulate the sound of fignting shouts for help etc. Assuming a guard is within earshot (which in cities appears to be always) they will be alarmed and a) know your crime and b) start tracking you. I guess the problem is that that signal extends too far, and you don't have a strategy available to effectively silence NPC's - apparently they can still sound the alarm if silenced or paralyzed, e.g. Which is poorly thought out, really.

 

[Dhruin]

Bah! You're altogether too reasonable, GhanBuriGhan. Yes, the Radiant AI was never promoted as effective combat AI.

As an aside, it's amazing that the appearance of intelligence is in some ways more important to a game than the reality. In hindsight, they might have concentrated their efforts on different elements to better overall effect.

 

[dunduks]

... what Obvlivion does for the first time is to give NPCs a certain amount of freedom as well. Furthermore, their system is expandable, and it won't take long before the first modders combine theAI packages present in Oblivion to create extremely interesting things.

Jesus f-ing Crist, RAI is not the first and it's a piss poor implementation of AI, if you want to see an excelent AI in work - just check out Space Rangers. And whats with the - "moders will fix everything" attitude??? If you make a product, it should work out of the box.

 

[Excrément]

And whats with the - "moders will fix everything" attitude??? If you make a product, it should work out of the box.

they never say that, the Codex said it but not Bethesda.

Bethesda just release a tool that permits modders to change the game in order to "improve" the game.
but this "improve" could be subjective.
Isome people can like some mods, other hates it. Bethesda did the game they wanted after people could dislike this game and do mod to fix the things they dislike.

it's not their interest to release a broken game in order to be dependant of the modders to fix it, they don't make cash on mods.
but it could be their interest to release a broken game in order to sell after an add-on. (if you think about it : Tribunal was released in order that high-level characters could still find a little challenge -that was one of the big broken thing of MW, once you were lvl 15, the game was almost over...- they could easily handle this without an add-on but before MW was released...)

but they just do what they want, and don't feel obliged to buy their games.

 

[DarkUnderlord]

Furthermore, their system is expandable, and it won't take long before the first modders combine theAI packages present in Oblivion to create extremely interesting things.

And whats with the - "moders will fix everything" attitude??? If you make a product, it should work out of the box.

they never say that, the Codex said it but not Bethesda.

Actually Rendelius said it in his review, which is what dunduks was referring to. It helps if you're following the conversation. In general it's the attitude we seem to get from several people who have reviewed the game saying "[such and such] is crap but at least modders can fix it!"

... or in other words, excusing Bethesda for not putting the effort in to fix the broken aspects of the game and instead simply releasing the tools onto the community so they can do everything for them. It's a lot of the same attitude we saw with regard to NWN. It seems game developers have given up on actually making games and are instead creating half-arsed toolets so that the gamers have the job of making something that's worth playing.

[Bethesda] don't make cash on mods.

Actually, they do...

but they just do what they want, and don't feel obliged to buy their games.

There's only so far that argument goes though. For example, if I sell you a piece of shit under the guise that it's the greatest sandwich topping ever, you're going to be a little upset when you bite into that chewy brownness.

For Oblivion, we were promised really cool AI out of the box, beautiful graphics and a number of other things. What we find is the AI isn't as dynamic as promised (no setting the dog on fire anywhere) and the graphics require a bunch of .ini tweaks to really shine like in the screenshots. And the wiki dialogue system was "completely revamped" too... Which it wasn't, unless you consider removing options as "completely revamping" something.

 

[Section8]

... or in other words, excusing Bethesda for not putting the effort in to fix the broken aspects of the game and instead simply releasing the tools onto the community so they can do everything for them. It's a lot of the same attitude we saw with regard to NWN. It seems game developers have given up on actually making games and are instead creating half-arsed toolets so that the gamers have the job of making something that's worth playing.

To be fair, NWN was supposed to be a DIY D&D toolkit from the get go. The utterly shabby campaign that came with it was essentially an afterthought when Bioware realised they could also sell the game to naive Baldur's Gate fans expecting something similar.

However, both games do share the same hallmarks, having what is essentially a "mod-lite" toolkit, that is fairly simplistic on the surface, with some fairly nasty scripting to face up to if you want to do anything in depth. There's also a lot of built in limitations, and some poor design conventions that can't be readily altered.

 

[Rat Keeng]

Instead of people saying a bunch of stuff about everything, they now say very little about almost nothing. Honestly, there is no improvement in dialogue, they just removed every option except rumours, and the town the NPC is in. They all still say the same thing about the same things, and in inconsistent voices to!

One of the things that truly bugged me about Oblivion's dialogue; if you're having all the dialogue voiced anyway, at least write different responses for each voice. It seems like such a pathetic waste of resources, to send the same line to five different voice actors, so you end up with a town full of people who, in different voices, say "Hey! Aren't you the hero of Kvatch?"

Ok, so the NPCs say the same things just like in Morrowind, but at least they go to bars and repeat the same conversations over and over, after using hoes to cultivate doorsteps. OBLIBIAN COMSE ALIVRE!!1

 

[elander_]

On the whole, it's still a big plus for the game. And I really would rather encourage Bethsoft and other developers to refine the concept and think how it can be made to truly work instead of everyone trashing it all the way to hell - you know what that means - just cut the feature, and replace it with something even more basic.

Probably it will be much better used in the hands of modders. But i have also heard a lot of features were removed from the scripting language this may have been dumbed down. It would be interesting if someone made a good TESCS review as this is an essential feature to enjoy Oblivion even if a player is not thinking about modding the game.

 

[Diogo Ribeiro]

Sorry, but no.

Judging a game on potential rather than application is delusive, no matter how much you'd like to say it isn't.

It may not be all that, but I am still very happy it's in there instead of being absent as in MW.

Good for you but your argument is falacious because you're reacting as if I had said that what passed as an AI for Morrowind was better than Radiant AI which simply isn't true.

NPC's ARE more alive, no matter how you turn it. (...) The "idiocy" is nowhere near as jarring as you make it out to be

I haven't 'turned' nor 'made it out to be' something in particular so I suspect you're either baiting or just trying to create some form of argument by exacerbating or outright lying about what I've said. Nowhere in my post did I present any specifics of just how much of it is broken and I certainly didn't mention any "idiocy" that Radiant AI might display. Then again I didn't even have to really, seeing as there's ample proof lying around here and even in Bethesda's own forums.

- it happens especially in the NPC conversations, but so what, after some time you just stop to listen too closely,

Because when people stop paying attention to what's wrong it definitely goes away, right?

And so what if you can break the AI by some tricks like in that video

Problem is that players aren't the only ones to break the AI. It breaks itself.

every moderately complex system will have that problem.

You may prefer to attribute these problems to the underlying complexity of the system, but it's incredibly shortsighted to suggest that these kinds of problems should be excusable in face of the system's suggested complexity rather than a lack of polish by the development team which worked on it for several years. If they failed to test all of its permutations in order to fix them that's exclusively their fault. If they didn't want the system to display so many inconsistencies then they shouldn't have developed one in the first place, or one that would present so many results that they would not be able to analyze them all.

And I really would rather encourage Bethsoft and other developers to refine the concept and think how it can be made to truly work

I'll support the development and implementation of this concept when it works, not botched attempts.

instead of everyone trashing it all the way to hell - you know what that means - just cut the feature, and replace it with something even more basic.

Cute, considering that according to Bethesda itself they had to tone down the AI routines because the behavior of the characters were deemed too conflicting with the players' own goals such as townsfolk trying to close Oblivion gates or solve quests on their own. It takes a great leap of logic to claim characters framing the PC for crimes he didn't do, town guards pick pocketing beggars, and similar contradictions in intended application for the Radiant AI - insofar as presenting a credible or breathing, living world - and for the gameworld itself are in any way "advanced".

 

[GhanBuriGhan]

So you admit it's an improvement for the series (Whcih I said I did, so I am not judging on potential, hence also not commiting a falacy), but yet it's a "botched attempt"? Which is it then? It can't be both.

As to "turn it", that was a general statement, like "no matter from which perspective you look at it" meaning "I am right whatever you say becaue it's a fact" Don't blow your top over it.

I don't think it was ever said that NPC went to solve quest on their own or closed Oblivion gates. I also don't remember an actual statement that they had to tone the system down as a whole. People made that up on the TES forums AFAIK. That they had to squash bugs in it and that they liked to talk about the funnier ones is rather obvious, isn't it?

So you support the concept when it works. Well it does work. It has some bugs and it does not quite have the effect it should. So do you support it or not? And if you don't, does that mean you don't want Bethesda or other developers to research and develop the underlying ideas any further?

My position is that the system is already an improvement as it is, but that proper further development has even greater potential, and that it should, by all means be persued - greater autonomy for NPC's is a daunting prospect, but in the long run I think it's absolutely needed if we still want to have increasingly open ended huge RPG's in the future.

 

[Diogo Ribeiro]

So you admit it's an improvement for the series (Whcih I said I did, so I am not judging on potential, hence also not commiting a falacy), but yet it's a "botched attempt"? Which is it then? It can't be both.

No, I don't admit it being an improvement to the series as I wasn't refering to the AI in those terms; rather as a standalone concept. You were the one to bring up comparisons to Morrowind to the table. I said the concept itself in theory is sound and an improvement on some AI elements which had been established in the past, but in actual application it actually runs largely contrary and backwards to what it proposes to emulate.

I don't think it was ever said that NPC went to solve quest on their own or closed Oblivion gates.

As per your own reply further down the road, it should be rather obvious I was talking about the funnier examples mentioned.

I also don't remember an actual statement that they had to tone the system down as a whole.

Did I read Bizarro World's Bethesda statements?

So you support the concept when it works. Well it does work. It has some bugs and it does not quite have the effect it should.

By your own admission it doesn't entirely work as proposed, therefore I don't think it's accurate to say it works. To do so would imply the entirety of the concept worked in its application - and it clearly doesn't.

So do you support it or not? And if you don't, does that mean you don't want Bethesda or other developers to research and develop the underlying ideas any further?

I was explicit enough on my other post. I don't think I really have to repeat myself, do I?

 

[GhanBuriGhan]

No, I don't admit it being an improvement to the series as I wasn't refering to the AI in those terms; rather as a standalone concept. You were the one to bring up comparisons to Morrowind to the table.

You are evading. Is it or sin't it an improvement to the series, in your opinion?

God, you people are so black and white. Why can't something be unsatisfactory, why do you have to make it out to be "broken"?. Why can't it be "it works, but it has bugs, and certainly can be improved", why does it have to be "it runs largely contrary and backwards to what it proposes to emulate"?

Did I read Bizarro World's Bethesda statements?

I don't know. Did you?

 

[Diogo Ribeiro]

You are evading. Is it or sin't it an improvement to the series, in your opinion?

I'm not evading the question for the very simple reason that it wasn't my point. It was you who originally brought up the issue of it being better than Morrowind, then went on about trying to drag an answer out of me at all costs to a question or subject I didn't bring up.

You're also asking something which I already answered. Unless you've got a hard on for 'yes' or 'no' replies, I won't repeat myself.

God, you people are so black and white.

If there's anything that's black and white here I suspect it has to be your perception or your reasoning which seems troubled in accepting anything that isn't a simple 'yes' or 'no'. You're assuming I'm being black and white in my argument when I've made no argument against the Radiant AI system that involved saying it was either an absolute positive or negative on its own; rather, I stated it couldn't be said it works entirely as expected. That alone should suggest that some parts work while others doesn't. It seems only you had a problem understanding that.

Why can't something be unsatisfactory, why do you have to make it out to be "broken"?.

Why do you assume your terminology is more apt than mine or others? The collorary of your argument is that you get to decide your own descriptions of the game's feature are better than others, which is impractical at best and bludgeoningly stupid at worst. It can be unsatisfactory, just as it can be broken, just as it can be something else. One does not exclude the other nor are they really any different from a personal evaluation stance because saying it's either unsatisfactory or broken doesn't mean it does not have its merits. Except for you, it would seem.

Why can't it be "it works, but it has bugs, and certainly can be improved", why does it have to be "it runs largely contrary and backwards to what it proposes to emulate"?

Because that's how I expressed my opinion of it. And because it's true. I don't care if my appraisal of the system doesn't particularly fit your own self-aggrandizing definition. Suffice to say either one is valid and doesn't contradict the other in any way. It also doesn't mean that having a different interpretation means I disagree with yours, even if you seem to try and suggest otherwise.

I don't know. Did you?

You tell me.

 

[GhanBuriGhan]

I really don't want to get on your nerves, but the only answer to my question I can see in your replies is

"No, I don't admit it being an improvement to the series as I wasn't refering to the AI in those terms; rather as a standalone concept."

Which doesn't seem to be an answer, but stating that you don't want to answer. As you did again here:

"I'm not evading the question for the very simple reason that it wasn't my point. It was you who originally brought up the issue of it being better than Morrowind, then went on about trying to drag an answer out of me at all costs to a question or subject I didn't bring up."

So yes, a simple yes or know would help me understand where you stand. The reason I keep asking, is that I think it's relevant to the discussion: If you think it IS an improvement, than i can concentrate on talking about what should be improved within the system immediately. If you think it's not an improvement at all, I would first give you my arguments why I think it is, and only then I could proceed to detail what I think is wrong with it, whats good with it, and the synthesis: what could be done better with it.

And regarding the Beth quote, I was sort of asking for a link - you don't expect me to find it for you, or do you?

 

[Diogo Ribeiro]

You're not getting on my nerves and I'm certainly not going to pop a vein, but I think

I said the concept itself in theory is sound and an improvement on some AI elements which had been established in the past

should have been clear enough. It doesn't specifically address any of the Elder Scroll's past games but it could just as well because I was talking of AI in general terms. Morrowind wasn't specifically mentioned though it could be infered given the broad range of the statement.

And as for it being an improvement, again, I indicated I had no qualms with this statement of yours:

it works, but it has bugs, and certainly can be improved

except in the 'works' part (but only when taken into the context of it fully working as intended, as I said before). Of course anything that made the empty shells of Morrowind better is an improvement and by association Radiant AI is an improvement and a step in the right direction - but not enough of an improvement or that big enough of a step, on its own or when applied to the series, for reasons already discussed.

If it's still incomprehensible, YES it is an improvement over Morrowind but NO it's not all that jazz.

I can't see how that really benefits or relates to the discussion as my inital point was a different one and remains the same: a game should only be judged on what it does, not what it could do.

And regarding the Beth quote, I was sort of asking for a link - you don't expect me to find it for you, or do you?

If you're offering...

 

[HardCode]

I love both Gothic. And I acknowledge that the scripts for NPCs there are very well thought out. But in no way the AI there is 1000% better. Why? Because the NPCs have a much more narrow set there. Yes, the set is more elaborated, but what Obvlivion does for the first time is to give NPCs a certain amount of freedom as well. Furthermore, their system is expandable, and it won't take long before the first modders combine theAI packages present in Oblivion to create extremely interesting things.

Freedom to do what? Stare at the fucking walls for 5 game-hours? You should quit reviewing ... and games all together. Maybe RAI makes these things possible, but Oblivion doesn't. C++ makes things possible, but if I program a Hello World program, did I do anything WOW'ing and groundbreaking? We are talking about Oblivion's application of RAI, not RAI itself. Oblivion's application of RAI sucks asshole and that's it ... period. I could give a rat's ass what third-pary APIs can do in Oblivion if Oblivion doesn't do it well. That makes Oblivion shit, not the thrid-party API. You are trying to review the API. God, quit now.

 

[Section8]

Oblivion's RAI makes the NPCs less static than they were in Morrowind, so it's clearly a direct improvement when related back to that direct criticism. But does it actually contribute to making Oblivion seem like a "living world"?

I guess it depends on how wiling you are to overlook glaring flaws. For me personally, it doesn't make Cyrodiil come alive. Most of the time there's minor silliness going on, such as random conversation, staring at walls, etc, and entirely too often, there's major fuckups, particularly with relation to the guards. And I haven't even tried to break anything yet.

 

[GhanBuriGhan]

Whoa HardCode, you really hate it, don't you.

"Oblivion's application of RAI sucks asshole and that's it ... period"

That's too over the top for me. I was myself initially rather dissapointed by RAI. It's immediately clear when entering a town that there is nowhere near the life of Khorinis or the old camp, e.g., which is the current standard to beat, I would say. I purposely went into a pub in chorrol and waited to observe the customers come in. Nobody came. I listened to the NPC conversations and groaned in pain. I have followed a quest NPC and had to shake my head about the amount of time he just stood in a plaza and watched the bushes. That sucked, although it didn't quite "suck asshole".
But that is only one side of the coin. My character has been rescued by mounted guards on their patrol twice, and even more often have I seen killed monsters and bandits - it gives a nice feeling that these guys are really out there safeguarding the roads. Of course it's dissapointing again that they have no dialogue so that you could properly thak them.
I really like the NPC's sitting down in a park or to read, or to eat and drink. Or mixing potions or casting spells. I like NPC going to sleep and locking their shops. i liked that the lady in chorrol walked her dogs. I like the guards, blades and fightersguild types practicing with each other, targets or practice dummis. I like the simple fact that NPC aren't always in the same place. All that isn't spectacular, but it doesn't exactly "suck asshole" either. I have seen guys sneaking, pickpocketing and promplty getting killed by guards - and while that didn't look right (people sneaking in broad daylight for extended distances look very silly) it was still an entertaining encounter - not quite there, but in all honesty, it didn't "suck asshole".
I was very dissapointed that NPC did in fact not react to things being thrown at them (in fact they seem to posses an anti-grav field of sorts, as things riochet off them with amazing force) and that they did not notice a near miss fireball that sailed one inch from their noses. That almost "sucked asshole" but it's only one aspect of the whole.
I have not, however seen a single true bug that i would attribute to RAI. Quirky behavior yes, but nothing that has upset me. I have played about 40 hours now.

So, I agree that RAI is NOT the best AI in a game yet. Mostly because it was not effective in creating a truly living world. Which is mostly a problem of too few animations for things the NPC do, than the underlying RAI mechanics. It is however the best AI in a TES game so far, and it still results in more interesting NPC behavior than what I saw in KOTOR II (just to mention the game i played before Oblvivion) or Baldurs Gate. It was overhyped, and it failed to reach the mark set by Gothic I and II and the old gold standard Ultima VII. It does not however "suck asshole".

And RAI is not a third-party API. It doesn't exist outside Oblivion. And you need to calm down.

 

[Licaon_Kter]

...and you can always roleplay that stupid RAI... think of it like this: the imminent coming of Evil through the Oblivion gates got everybody fucked up...insane...or somethin'... corrupted (heh whenever i think of corruption i remember the fun times playing ADOM, that *you slowly get corrupted while dealing with corrupted entites* part is plain genius, you get bonus abilities from you're evil counter parts, but after you get corrupted enough you're up for a surprise, you get promoted to *full chaos creature*...game over and finding those *wish pools* was great... *i wish for a scroll of cure corruption*...eh... good times)

 

[Rhombus]

...and you can always roleplay that stupid RAI... think of it like this: the imminent coming of Evil through the Oblivion gates got everybody fucked up...insane...or somethin'... corrupted

lol

Hey, good idea. I can always roleplay that the game doesn't have all the problems and shortcomings it has, and that I'm actually playing the game the PR-hype was speaking about no?

Honestly though. I never really thought about the static-ness of NPCs in games like Fallout or Baldur's Gate.. even though they are very very static there.. I mean if anything, what made the NPCs in Morrowind not live was probably due to the wiki-dialogue.. which made them feel more like dictionaries than people... Maybe the fact that the NPCs in Fallout had personality was what made them feel alive, despite that they stood in the same position most of the time...

Schedules sounds nice, but if they all spew the same sentences all the time... I'm not sure if that would make them more alive to me... Just wondering if the answer lies somewhere else..

Kensai/Mage-Edit: Ooh.. Not that anyone cares but god damnit! I'm loosing my lurker status here. 50 posts already. Cheesses..

 

[Old Scratch]

The AI is broken; it doesn't behave the way it should. It's certainly an improvement over Morrowind, but Morrowind was about 5 years behind in the AI in games department when it was released.

From a programming perspective, it's not really any more interesting than Gothic and certainly doesn't work as well at creating the illusion of living characters. It actually appears to have less work and attention to detail put into it than Gothic too. Yes, NPCs are more automated and that's an interesting step for the genre, but rather than being an interesting feature in Oblivion, it's a glaring flaw. The fact they tried is no excuse if the end result was a catastrophe. It may have been more forgivable if Bethesda representatives and gaming publications hadn't placed so much emphasis on it.

 

[suibhne]

The AI is broken; it doesn't behave the way it should. It's certainly an improvement over Morrowind, but Morrowind was about 5 years behind in the AI in games department when it was released.

From a programming perspective, it's not really any more interesting than Gothic and certainly doesn't work as well at creating the illusion of living characters. It actually appears to have less work and attention to detail put into it than Gothic too. Yes, NPCs are more automated and that's an interesting step for the genre, but rather than being an interesting feature in Oblivion, it's a glaring flaw. The fact they tried is no excuse if the end result was a catastrophe. It may have been more forgivable if Bethesda representatives and gaming publications hadn't placed so much emphasis on it.

QFT MY PRETTIES

I haven't had a single "Wow" moment wrt Oblivion's AI. I still remember my first morning in the Old Camp, wandering around and watching diggers wash up in the pond, eat breakfast, roast meat, smoke, etc. That was the single experience that pulled me into Gothic, and that kept me going even when the game turned into a linear haul. In Oblivion, the only memorable AI moments have been total debacles, like the Imperial Legionnaire and Jauffre ganging up to attack Martin in the forest.

 

[GhanBuriGhan]

The AI is broken; it doesn't behave the way it should. It's certainly an improvement over Morrowind, but Morrowind was about 5 years behind in the AI in games department when it was released.

From a programming perspective, it's not really any more interesting than Gothic and certainly doesn't work as well at creating the illusion of living characters. It actually appears to have less work and attention to detail put into it than Gothic too. Yes, NPCs are more automated and that's an interesting step for the genre, but rather than being an interesting feature in Oblivion, it's a glaring flaw. The fact they tried is no excuse if the end result was a catastrophe. It may have been more forgivable if Bethesda representatives and gaming publications hadn't placed so much emphasis on it.

Broken? Glaring flaw? Why? Look, I'll happily bash all the individual flaws in RAI with you, but at the risk of playing the local Oblivion fanboy again, I don't accept such blanket statements. In my game it's neither broken nor a glaring flaw. It's dissapointing especially compared to what it was hyped to be, but it behaves as far as I can see, as it is supposed to and it adds more than it takes away. It certainly is not broken in the sense that it has messed anything up in my game or made me want to stop playing the game. As to flaws: it does not stand up to close scrutiny (follow an NPC and see the unrealistic "holes" in their schedule. It does not measure up to Gothic in effect. I'd call it underwhelming, but not broken.