Wolfire Games Forums

You're obviously not a programmer, because then you would understand how difficult it is to make actual Artificial Intelligence.

Actually, I do understand.

I realise that AI isn't easy, and as you'll notice I have said repeatedly, nobody has thus far made decent AI. However, I have also said that developers have had a long time to figure it out in the interim.

The biggest factor that has crippled AI thus far (and you yourself have mentioned this) is the fact that companies are unwilling to put time and effort into getting it right. Often they take outdated libraries, polish them up a bit and re-release them as 'innovative' AI systems. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

The issue with this mentality is that even current-gen AI is fundamentally flawed. I realise that humans are vastly complex, and that reactions are always different depending on the circumstances, however my biggest gripe is that AI is just too instant. The AI already knows where you are, and no amount of faked 'searching' can cover this fact. Enemies always start reacting to your presence straight away; there's no factor of dismissal, inattentiveness, or even false assumption that makes the AI draw the wrong conclusions.

Ultimately, the AI just gives off a sense of pure omniscience, coupled with contrived, scripted events, and completely unrealistic behaviour.

I wasn't referring to you Makrond, I was referring to the Count.

Everything you said was spot-on.

I feel happy now... *insert random Asian smiley here*

lol i know its hard to make it I'm just saying a smart computer would be really kick *** lmao

Makrond wrote:Actually, I do understand.

I realise that AI isn't easy, and as you'll notice I have said repeatedly, nobody has thus far made decent AI. However, I have also said that developers have had a long time to figure it out in the interim.

The biggest factor that has crippled AI thus far (and you yourself have mentioned this) is the fact that companies are unwilling to put time and effort into getting it right. Often they take outdated libraries, polish them up a bit and re-release them as 'innovative' AI systems. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

The issue with this mentality is that even current-gen AI is fundamentally flawed. I realise that humans are vastly complex, and that reactions are always different depending on the circumstances, however my biggest gripe is that AI is just too instant. The AI already knows where you are, and no amount of faked 'searching' can cover this fact. Enemies always start reacting to your presence straight away; there's no factor of dismissal, inattentiveness, or even false assumption that makes the AI draw the wrong conclusions.

Ultimately, the AI just gives off a sense of pure omniscience, coupled with contrived, scripted events, and completely unrealistic behaviour.

The best enemy AI I've seen in terms of AI that isn't omniscient and doesn't immediately react to you is Hitman: Blood Money's AI. I remember once I decided to play a level just by killing everyone on-board the boat. (I had LOTS of tranquilizers, which somehow equate to health-potions...) If the AI hears something, it doesn't even assume it's you.

The first thing I noticed was how all the civilians reacted; Some ran, some trying to escape past me, others cowering in place. One rushed to pick up a gun that one of my enemies had dropped and try to turn the tables; When they saw my reaction to that (planting one in the guy's skull), nobody else tried that.

Blood money is awesome.

I love how they actually follow blood trails if you drag a bleeding body away.

But.. Assassins Creed for instance, simply standing too close to a guard can result in a city-wide chase scene or a one-man-army type sword-fight.

Mass Effect is another example, as soon as you step into a room, your team-mates know a fight is coming, and the enemy know where you are. As great as their fighting AI is, there is no possible stealth in Mass Effect.

(By great fighting AI, I mean they won't just sit behind cover and jump out every now and again, if you shoot at the cover they are behind alot, they'll stay there, if you don't move for a while, they'll get impatient and head towards your cover.)

Random note- I've killed every person on the map on nearly all of the levels now. I've got the white house level, the crow level, and the hotel left now.

Makrond wrote:The issue with this mentality is that even current-gen AI is fundamentally flawed. I realise that humans are vastly complex, and that reactions are always different depending on the circumstances, however my biggest gripe is that AI is just too instant. The AI already knows where you are, and no amount of faked 'searching' can cover this fact. Enemies always start reacting to your presence straight away; there's no factor of dismissal, inattentiveness, or even false assumption that makes the AI draw the wrong conclusions.

Ultimately, the AI just gives off a sense of pure omniscience, coupled with contrived, scripted events, and completely unrealistic behaviour.

If you're really going to get caught up on realism, we might as well scrap all existing fictional games, including all First Person Shooter games due to the fact you can take 1000 bullets in the campaigns and still live. This is just so unrealistic, it needs to go!

Seriously AI does not have to be pin-point perfect to all natural occurences of human behaviour. The main thing about AI is that it is challenging and fun to play against. This is in the context of games that I am talking, obviously, and nothing else. Obviously it would be impossible for actual human beings to be as effective and efficient as the AI in Half Life or F.E.A.R., but those AI's are fun to play against and give the game a challenging aspect. And I don't mean challenging as in "Get-Shot-Once-And-You-Die" because that's just the fucking stupid kind of challenging. I mean challenging as in making you think about what you're going to do in certain situations, therefore making the game a more enjoyable experience.

Fuck realism.

Renegade_Turner wrote:Fuck realism.

This is why we need signatures.

Signatures?

Renegade_Turner wrote:

Makrond wrote:The issue with this mentality is that even current-gen AI is fundamentally flawed. I realise that humans are vastly complex, and that reactions are always different depending on the circumstances, however my biggest gripe is that AI is just too instant. The AI already knows where you are, and no amount of faked 'searching' can cover this fact. Enemies always start reacting to your presence straight away; there's no factor of dismissal, inattentiveness, or even false assumption that makes the AI draw the wrong conclusions.

Ultimately, the AI just gives off a sense of pure omniscience, coupled with contrived, scripted events, and completely unrealistic behaviour.

If you're really going to get caught up on realism, we might as well scrap all existing fictional games, including all First Person Shooter games due to the fact you can take 1000 bullets in the campaigns and still live. This is just so unrealistic, it needs to go!

Seriously AI does not have to be pin-point perfect to all natural occurences of human behaviour. The main thing about AI is that it is challenging and fun to play against. This is in the context of games that I am talking, obviously, and nothing else. Obviously it would be impossible for actual human beings to be as effective and efficient as the AI in Half Life or F.E.A.R., but those AI's are fun to play against and give the game a challenging aspect. And I don't mean challenging as in "Get-Shot-Once-And-You-Die" because that's just the fucking stupid kind of challenging. I mean challenging as in making you think about what you're going to do in certain situations, therefore making the game a more enjoyable experience.

Fuck realism.

At the same time, though, I think it'd be even funner if there were actually more things you could do to throw the enemy AI off. More weak and confusable AI makes for a more varied experience, as there's suddenly much more possibility in how to get through that next maze.

Renegade_Turner wrote:Signatures?

They go below every post you make..like a signature.

Oh that shit. That's for pretentious assholes.

Miyamoto Usagi wrote:At the same time, though, I think it'd be even funner if there were actually more things you could do to throw the enemy AI off. More weak and confusable AI makes for a more varied experience, as there's suddenly much more possibility in how to get through that next maze.

That would be time allocated to something which would be rather unfulfilling in relation to the time which has been spent on it, in my opinion. It'd be a kind of nice feature, but I'd rather that I was just playing against AI which challenges you to think about ways to beat it.

R_T, if AI was realistic, then a one-shot-you-die game would actually work.

Not my fault that you're too narrow-minded to see this.

Makrond wrote:R_T, if AI was realistic, then a one-shot-you-die game would actually work.

Not my fault that you're too narrow-minded to see this.

It wouldn't really work to be honest. The game would be rather uneventful. If you came up against any amount of enemies (i.e. more than one), you're dead.

And don't get hurt just because I don't agree with you're opinion. I could call you ignorant too, but I won't, because I'm not petty enough to call someone ignorant just because they don't see things my way. Grow up.