In a recent episode of The AIAS Game Maker’s Notebook Podcast, Todd Howard, renowned game designer and director at Bethesda Game Studios, shed light on a deliberate design choice for their upcoming game, Starfield. Howard revealed that the combat AI in Starfield was intentionally designed to be “stupid” to enhance the overall gaming experience for players. This decision, aimed at balancing strategic combat and player enjoyment, has generated both interest and discussions among gamers.
The challenge of space combat
Todd Howard began by acknowledging the challenges associated with designing space combat in Starfield. Drawing inspiration from successful titles like Faster Than Light and MechWarrior, he emphasized the need for an intuitive combat system. Players should not find themselves frequently pausing the game to decipher complex power allocations and systems, a key aspect of many space-themed games.
AI integration: a delicate balance
In the process of developing the game, the integration of AI into gameplay proved to be a complex task. This challenge arose despite the positive progress in refining combat mechanics. The game’s director, Todd Howard, emphasized the delicate balance required in AI integration.
The main concern was avoiding excessively intelligent enemy AI. Such AI could potentially prolong battles, causing frustration for both players and the AI itself. This frustration arose from the constant maneuvering for advantageous positions, disrupting the flow of gameplay.
As a response to this challenge, the development team had to make a pivotal design decision. They needed to find the right equilibrium between AI intelligence and player enjoyment. This decision was instrumental in ensuring that the gameplay experience remained engaging and satisfying for all users.
Todd Howard on Making Starfield AI “stupid”
To circumvent the issue of prolonged battles and make the gameplay more enjoyable, Bethesda opted to design the AI in Starfield as intentionally “stupid.” Instead of creating highly intelligent adversaries that could outmaneuver players, the AI was programmed to follow more straightforward flight paths, essentially inviting players to engage and shoot them.
Howard explained, “It’s very easy to make the enemies really, really smart or end up in the situation where you’re forever just jousting. It turns out you have to make the AI really stupid… they should fly, and then they need to turn, basically like, ‘Hey player, why don’t you just shoot me for a while.'”
Player feedback and criticisms
Since this revelation, Starfield’s space combat has garnered attention from players and streamers alike. Dr Disrespect, a prominent gaming personality, notably criticized the control scheme and overall flight experience, deeming it the “absolute worst control scheme and control experience of a flight simulator I’ve ever experienced in my life.” Such candid feedback from the gaming community emphasizes the importance of balancing AI intelligence with player enjoyment.
Balancing strategy and enjoyment
The insights shared by Todd Howard provide valuable context for understanding the design philosophy behind Starfield’s combat AI. The intention to prioritize player enjoyment over complex AI strategies underscores the developer’s commitment to delivering a game that appeals to a broad audience.
Todd Howard’s explanation of the deliberate decision to make Starfield’s combat AI “stupid” sheds light on the complex considerations involved in the world of game design. Balancing strategic depth with player accessibility is an ongoing challenge for developers, and Bethesda’s approach, though unconventional, reflects their dedication to creating an enjoyable and fun gaming experience. As Starfield’s release date approaches, players and fans await further insights into the game’s unique design choices and the impact they will have on the final product and game experience.
