For example, I don't want to constantly battle mindless computer-controlled spiders. I want it to be controlled by some other player who is bored of questing.

Similarly, when I only have 15 min available, I'm not going to start playing Skyrim, since it is not enough time. But if I have the option to log in as a spider or as some other creature to attack another player in his quests, I wouldn't mind doing that for a bit. Then when I log out, that creature in his game can be computer-controlled again, or transferred over to some other player who logged in as a creature. Also, there should be some indicator when a creature is player-controlled.

Same can go for radiant quests. If I log in as an old woman, I wanna be able to make up a story and give the player random items/ locations to explore.

This is a rehashed version of multiplayer, isn't it?

You do know that Skyrim is a single player game, right?

If one of the four is pregnant, and none of them know math.

Yes, hence the "no" in my title.

Player controlled NPC's???

NPC = Non-player character...

So... Player non-player characters?

My head hurts.

The answer lies in your question... NPC or... None Player Character. If you had playable characters, there would be no such term as NPC and every game would be multiplayer.

What you need is a more diverse AI in any game with NPC's Would you really want to be a Spider? see nothing for hours or days on end... Watching paint dry would be more entertaining surely!

What happens if it's the fifth one that is pregnant?

Hmm...no. Playable non-player character. Hard concept? Maybe that's why they didn't include it. They knew their audience.

I think about the only thing worse than the idea of TES going multiplayer is the idea of multiplayer where you're a spider or an old woman.

Then you started counting with the baby fetus, and the last of the four is also pregnant.

That actually makes sense. I think I need to change my sig...

Could you explain how that's a bad idea. Let's stick with the spider example. It would not be a separate game mode. If you don't want to play as a spider then don't. If you don't want your spiders to be player-controlled, then you can uncheck that option. I would think having player-controlled spiders is more exciting than computer-controlled ones.

"A non-player character (NPC), sometimes known as a non-person character or non-playable character, in a game is any character not controlled by a player."

Any player. Not you, not anybody else. Which brings us to...

Wow. No need to make personal digs. Was simply trying to bring some humour to the thread...

Wat.

Personally i think this calls for a "lulwat".

Because I think few people want to be a spider in someone else's adventure. In the horrific event Bethesda decided to destroy TES by going multiplayer, I seriously doubt they'd invest the resources in facilitating the ability for people to play a bit part in other people's quests.
And what is the human going to do with this spider the computer can't? Spiders basically attack you, you hit them, they die. However intelligent the operator, the choices for the spider are limited. The best you'd get is the immense irritation of a spider that keeps running away and spitting venom from a distance. Assuming anyone in the world is actually bored enough to want to ever spend their time doing it.

Pretty much, how can you have a player controlled non player character?

I would love the ability to control another person's character. I'd do all sorts of inane poo and end up with them butt-naked on the top of Azura's shrine. I suspect I'm not alone, and that's the greatest problem with this idea, right there.

That is nothing at all like what OP is suggesting.

Its called NPC for a reason. If they made you playable as a spider, it would no longer be and NPC.

This would hurt the TES series by taking time away from Developers to design, programme, test, patch etc etc the multiplayer parts. thats how.

Aaah...I see. Whoops. Forgive me, I thought he was proposing some sort of communal character pool. Now I understand.

But, still, afforded the opportunity I suspect a lot of people would still play with the objective of being as annoying as possible. I don't the 'teh Internets' could handle this sort of thing properly.

Well, this is technically not going "multiplayer" and destroying the genre. This is because everything would remain the same as the single player version, except that other players have the option to login as creatures in other player's games. It would in fact not even be that hard to implement. I wouldn't wanna do it for 2 hours either, but I would not mind messing around as a spider for 15 min spitting on a player. And I bet I could avoid his attacks better than any Artificial Intelligence script could.