In Josh's recent devlog (5 April, 2014), Josh struggles with tearing apart the symmetry between players and AI for the sake of gameplay.

Josh wrote: ere we come to a situation where we need to remember that Limit Theory is a game. For the most part, the PC - NPC symmetry exists to bolster the experience of the player. The idea is that a world filled with actors who are, by-and-large, capable of interacting with the world in the same way as you, should be an inherently more dynamic and interesting world. But when and where a design decision starts to seriously affect the player's ability to have fun is precisely the time and location at which we mustn't hesitate to rip that decision to shreds. I'm not positive yet, but this may be one of those situations.

Do you agree that players should be different to AI, where gameplay is a major concern?

I think AI should be equal to the player when it comes to combat skills, economics, and preferably death. I believe the AI should be able to hire the player for a task, or else pay the player for existing as long as the player executes a command when the command is given. The player should also be charged for holding onto idle AI for extended periods of time. Getting paid by the hour may actually become an important part of LT.

Differences between the player and AI are the obvious ones such as the ability to use the nodal editor, using the ship and station designer after Universe Generation, and other items not related to game play.

If the player can reload or restart the game he will never be equal to an NPC. =)

Seems to me like a classic "gameplay vs realism" tradeoff. And I say gameplay over realism, every time.

To answer this thread's title:

NOOOOOOOOOOO

Thank you for your time.

BTAxis wrote:Seems to me like a classic "gameplay vs realism" tradeoff. And I say gameplay over realism, every time.

I prefer "gamist-simulationist friction".

Because realism isn't what matters, plausibility and internal consistency is.

I think that this would be an interesting opportunity to instigate multiple types of hiring.
-Time (Hourly) based hiring
-Objective based hiring.

Objective based hiring would be used by players frequently to get NPC's to follow orders in an RTS style system.
BUT Players could also have use of the objective based hiring.
=When you are busy.
=When you don't really care who does it.
=When you aren't really looking for a relationship.
=When you don't care to oversee the mission, because it's ever so simple.

Simply put, if you need something done, but it's a simple task that you can just set parameters, leave it at some base, and wait for someone to do it, then be notified when it's done, and be happy, without taking up your time, there's that. 'Post a job' style jobs would be useful for a busy body just starting out, who wants something done cheap, not having to pay someone for more than needed. When done, you get the info of how much time it took, who did it, and any details needed.

AI would obviously use this method for you, and in some cases, it'd seem useful the other way around.

Now, the other side, hourly hiring. Players would be all over this of course, but I could see it being used in reverse.
Unlike the other kind of job which is usually individual based, not really portraying any real desire to make ties or anything like that, hourly hiring would be used for larger groups, or maybe mission assist. Examples:
=When a faction is needing an area guarded.
=Patrol routes.
=Highway security.
=Long term eradication missions.
=Recruiting into faction.

The nice thing about this style is you'd be doing more steady missions that allow you to play a more active role in the advancement of a faction. Think of it like joining an army, or elite force. Obviously they'd have you do more than a single mission. Just like higher authority AI tell sub-AI their basic objectives, you'd be informed of yours with waypoints, and basic mission briefings.
While these missions may start out a bit dull, they'd have the advantage of hourly wage, and the ability to advance in ranks of another faction.

Other: I'd like to see players and NPCs (but not "workers," per Josh's devlog for today) have equivalent options inside the game world.

The equivalent of the player's save/reload ability, which improves results for his character, would be to (optionally) grant NPCs better-than-average "luck" for random events.