If only there were some mechanism by which a random outcome could be determined, perhaps weighted by various factors including a complex statistical system and rules for resolution ... like in every RPG you've ever played ... perhaps exactly like the one that already exists in DOS2 ...
So do you want some kind of system where you press a button inside the game and a quest auto-resolves? For quests which are resolved through a dialogue choice, that already exists, it's the dialogue choice. There's no need to program in a coin flip for the very very few players who have no opinion and only want to flip a coin to decide. They can just flip a coin in real life.
For quests which are resolved through more complicated means, an in-game "coin flip" would not make any sense.
I'm not a programmer, but if it's already possible to do this right now in DOS2, it shouldn't be that hard to do it right now in DOS2. Call me crazy.
The rest of my post was me saying that it is NOT already possible to do. But from the sounds of it, it sounds like we have very different ideas about what exactly we each mean by the AI competing with players to solve quests.
Take for example player-controlled Sebille vs Hypothetical, AI-controlled Red Prince. Sebille has a goal to kill Stingtail, Red Prince has a goal to talk to Stingtail. What I am thinking is that the hypothetical advanced AI would take the Red Prince and have him wander around the map looking for a Lizard Dreamer.
However to say that yesterday was an FU, I cannot agree with. Yesterday was the last stretch goal, and some insight that there is probably going to be a ton of player created content in our futures. Does that mean it will all be multiplayer? I find that doubtful. So you should be at least a little existed about this, as like Neverwinter Nights, the single player game was vastly expanded by this type of tool set.
Actually, after seeing a glimpse of the GM mode, I am not any more optimistic that there will be a ton of player-created content than I was the day before. I also have doubts that much of that will be for the GM mode.
Confusion is understandable. The competitive questing thing means that each player character can be doing different things and even take different sides sometimes. Like a city guard will want to take the witch back to the stockade, and the Lawful Paladin player character might say, yes, take the witch back, and the Chaotic Warlock player character might say, no, set the witch free. Then there are various ways to resolve that conflict, both through questing and outright combat. Right now you can do stuff like this in multiplayer.
Ah, okay. I believe that stuff is coming. There are several spots where you answer for all your party members, but I think that is temporary and they will answer for themselves at some point when that system is added.
