Artificial Intelligence in games

[PapaPetro]

Oblivion was again a precursor of the incline and that's a FACT.

Of course once the design started leaning towards classic CRPG design with quests, storylines, cutscenes and voiced dialog - smart AI started to be an obstacle - not a strength.

AI should put the fire under the ass of those lazy writers. Imagine the hit on their egos when a robot can be more creative than them; friendly competition of muses.

 

[Konjad]

Oblivion was again a precursor of the incline and that's a FACT.

Of course once the design started leaning towards classic CRPG design with quests, storylines, cutscenes and voiced dialog - smart AI started to be an obstacle - not a strength.

AI should put the fire under the ass of those lazy writers. Imagine the hit on their egos when a robot can be more creative than them; friendly competition of muses.

Vast majority of game "writers" just write a script for a movie, ignoring any possibilities of emergent gameplay

 

[gooseman]

far cry 2 ai works well for the game. they flank, take cover, throw grenades, blind fire and suppress, help wounded, etc. i'm not entirely sure if it's all that "advanced". i've beaten the game at least twice and it's still nebulous to me. it helps that the game doesn't have the "mark enemies to see them through walls" bullshit of nu far crys. it was hard for me to keep track of where the enemies are and they still take me by surprise. the rest of the game plays very well into this. the only negatives are outposts that respawn very quickly and road patrols going by every 2 minutes (I remember getting into a fight with one, beating them, fixing my car, getting back in and that same moment another partol shows up... the same sequence played out and... a third patrol...). it would've been easy for them to tweak, I think there's a mod to fix some of this.

 

[NecroLord]

far cry 2 ai works well for the game. they flank, take cover, throw grenades, blind fire and suppress, help wounded, etc. i'm not entirely sure if it's all that "advanced". i've beaten the game at least twice and it's still nebulous to me. it helps that the game doesn't have the "mark enemies to see them through walls" bullshit of nu far crys. it was hard for me to keep track of where the enemies are and they still take me by surprise. the rest of the game plays very well into this. the only negatives are outposts that respawn very quickly and road patrols going by every 2 minutes (I remember getting into a fight with one, beating them, fixing my car, getting back in and that same moment another partol shows up... the same sequence played out and... a third patrol...). it would've been easy for them to tweak, I think there's a mod to fix some of this.

I don't know about "advanced", but it does show a lot of sophistication.
The AI doesn't just stand there, being useless and taking it.

Pertinent examples: Unreal and UT99, FEAR, etc.

I heard that AI is crushing it at chess.

 

[ind33d]

But they fixed these things, didn't they? Oblivion's Radiant AI was sometimes hilarious, but did not have major flaws, definitely was not breaking the game. It should've been a base to build upon, but instead got removed and we get banal scripts in Skyrim. Imagine if Bethesda actually improved it a bit for Skyrim and then continued to work at it for further games. Eventually it could be something unique and their games would be interesting for that aspect alone despite otherwise being boring. It would probably be better than stalker's a-life, especially since bethesda has a lot of money.

According to Todd Howard, npcs would loot dungeons in their dev build. They were only a few steps removed from a version where npcs could beat the game. The goblin staff wars made the final cut. It would have been hilarious if the player goes off into the woods for a few hours, only to come back to deserted cities, because all the npcs died invading Oblivion. Or if npcs kept killing the player, because they want that that quest-related item in his inventory.

it's obvious that bethesda is so ambitious that the devs don't even know what's in the shipped product because it all gets cut

 

[gooseman]

I heard that AI is crushing it at chess.

Chess is a bad example, because for a computer it's trivial to solve. Deep blue is one of the first chess computers that was powerful enough to beat Kasparov, but it did so by forcing 3 draws and getting 2 wins out of 6 games and it was after a year of upgrades after it lost to him first. It took many skilled engineers to build the thing and optimize the algorithms to work on IBM supercomputer hardware they had back then. These days, even a very unsophisticated algorithm could probably beat people at chess with no optimizations on a consumer grade cpu. Modern consumer grade hardware is orders of magnitude more powerful than Deep Blue was.
And because it is so easy for AI, playing against it sucks and becomes kind of pointless, because it will just win every time, unless artificially gimped. It's like playing an FPS game where bots headshot you the exact frame it becomes possible for them to see you. The problem then becomes "how do we gimp this all-powerful AI so the game is fun?" or whatever your goal for the AI is. It doesn't have to be human-like necessarily, it just has to do whatever would fit the game best.

 

[Gilius Thunderhead]

I don't simply want "humanlike" AI, I want superhuman or geniuslike AI. Imagine playing a Total War game where you fight against a legendary commander like Hannibal or Belisarius and he's actually a military genius, someone who has studied your past battles and comes up with a plan to exploit your weaknesses. We're still in the Stone Age as far as that is concerned, specially with games. The possibilities are endless.

far cry 2 ai works well for the game. they flank, take cover, throw grenades, blind fire and suppress, help wounded, etc. i'm not entirely sure if it's all that "advanced". i've beaten the game at least twice and it's still nebulous to me. it helps that the game doesn't have the "mark enemies to see them through walls" bullshit of nu far crys. it was hard for me to keep track of where the enemies are and they still take me by surprise. the rest of the game plays very well into this. the only negatives are outposts that respawn very quickly and road patrols going by every 2 minutes (I remember getting into a fight with one, beating them, fixing my car, getting back in and that same moment another partol shows up... the same sequence played out and... a third patrol...). it would've been easy for them to tweak, I think there's a mod to fix some of this.

I think FC2's AI is merely OK, but its effectiveness is greatly enhanced by the environment. I remember many times when I was trying to get the drop on the enemy, crouching, observing, moving carefully from cover to cover, only to find a patrol right next to me, looking in another direction! How did we even manage to miss each other? The lush vegetation, irregular terrain, deceiving contrasts of light and shade do much to reduce the awareness advantage that the player has in most games. And the AI can often take advantage of that. If you're up against a mortar guy or a sniper he'll not reveal himself to you even if he's the last man alive in the outpost and you'll realize your mistake only too late (at least if you're playing on highest difficulty with mods).

 

[Azdul]

Oblivion was again a precursor of the incline and that's a FACT.

Of course once the design started leaning towards classic CRPG design with quests, storylines, cutscenes and voiced dialog - smart AI started to be an obstacle - not a strength.

AI should put the fire under the ass of those lazy writers. Imagine the hit on their egos when a robot can be more creative than them; friendly competition of muses.

Vast majority of game "writers" just write a script for a movie, ignoring any possibilities of emergent gameplay

I'm actually quite curious how Wayward Realms will turn out.

Ted Peterson and Julian LeFay got my Kickstarter money for breaking Internet walkthroughs back in 1996. You could not google altavista the solution to one of the quests, because the name of older brother of the prince was unique to each playthrough.

Of course this quote from manual was a big fat lie:
When the players ask what the story to Daggerfall is, I imagine Macbeth asking what the story to Macbeth is before the play begins. You are the protagonist, the hero of the game - the story is what you decide to make it.

because in 1996 the possibilities were not endless:

However, in 2024 it should be possible to generate it on the fly, evolving in unpredictable directions with NPCs having their own agendas, pressing issues and secrets. I want NPCs to behave like this:

 

[Old Hans]

I don't simply want "humanlike" AI, I want superhuman or geniuslike AI. Imagine playing a Total War game where you fight against a legendary commander like Hannibal or Belisarius and he's actually a military genius, someone who has studied your past battles and comes up with a plan to exploit your weaknesses. We're still in the Stone Age as far as that is concerned, specially with games. The possibilities are endless.

it computers had limitless CPU power, that would be possible.

 

[Lemming42]

Of course this quote from manual was a big fat lie:
When the players ask what the story to Daggerfall is, I imagine Macbeth asking what the story to Macbeth is before the play begins. You are the protagonist, the hero of the game - the story is what you decide to make it.

It's obviously a very over-enthusiastic bit of marketing talk but I think the idea behind the quote was to suggest that the game is sufficiently freeform and systems-based to alllow the player to make their own story emergently, same as stuff like Darklands and Mount & Blade. Daggerfall allows for it in a way none of the other TES games really do.

That's what they should be aiming for with Wayward Realms IMO; expanding and building on stuff like Daggerfall's political system which tracks reputation between different groups. Wars, plagues, famines, bandit raids, sieges, and all kinds of other events should be able to break out across the map according to that system, with exciting things happening across the map that the player might never even hear of or encounter.

 

[NecroLord]

Oblivion was again a precursor of the incline and that's a FACT.

Of course once the design started leaning towards classic CRPG design with quests, storylines, cutscenes and voiced dialog - smart AI started to be an obstacle - not a strength.

AI should put the fire under the ass of those lazy writers. Imagine the hit on their egos when a robot can be more creative than them; friendly competition of muses.

Vast majority of game "writers" just write a script for a movie, ignoring any possibilities of emergent gameplay

I'm actually quite curious how Wayward Realms will turn out.

Ted Peterson and Julian LeFay got my Kickstarter money for breaking Internet walkthroughs back in 1996. You could not google altavista the solution to one of the quests, because the name of older brother of the prince was unique to each playthrough.

Of course this quote from manual was a big fat lie:
When the players ask what the story to Daggerfall is, I imagine Macbeth asking what the story to Macbeth is before the play begins. You are the protagonist, the hero of the game - the story is what you decide to make it.

because in 1996 the possibilities were not endless:

However, in 2024 it should be possible to generate it on the fly, evolving in unpredictable directions with NPCs having their own agendas, pressing issues and secrets. I want NPCs to behave like this:

So why didn't they add horse riding enemies in the end?

 

[Desman]

I don't simply want "humanlike" AI, I want superhuman or geniuslike AI. Imagine playing a Total War game where you fight against a legendary commander like Hannibal or Belisarius and he's actually a military genius, someone who has studied your past battles and comes up with a plan to exploit your weaknesses. We're still in the Stone Age as far as that is concerned, specially with games. The possibilities are endless.

it computers had limitless CPU power, that would be possible.

It would be extremly boring because a superhuman AI would just outmicro/outmacro you and kite or cycle charge you to death on the battlefield, it would basicly break and exploit the game mechanics. An FPS comparison would be like playing against bots with perfect aim (very boring).
That's also why it is way more fun to play chess vs an human than vs bots regardless of their level (the bots don't play "humanlike" moves even when they are designed to suck).

"Humanlike" AI are way more interesting, especially if they can mimic our behaviour and different type of personalities properly.
CiV 4 was pretty good at that, each different leaders had several stats dictating their actions (ranging from warmonging psychos to absolute doormats).
I always used to pick my opponents carefuly to have the most action packed and fun games (sup Moctezuma).

Edit: Unreal tournament also had awesome bots for its time. You could tweak their agression level and playstyle too, not just their "overall" skill.

 

[Azdul]

I don't simply want "humanlike" AI, I want superhuman or geniuslike AI. Imagine playing a Total War game where you fight against a legendary commander like Hannibal or Belisarius and he's actually a military genius, someone who has studied your past battles and comes up with a plan to exploit your weaknesses. We're still in the Stone Age as far as that is concerned, specially with games. The possibilities are endless.

it computers had limitless CPU power, that would be possible.

Hannibal or Belisarius didn't have unlimited brain power.

I was actually impressed with first Shogun: Total War 1 AI when it tried maneuver described by Sun Tzu on me - once or twice.

The problem with making battle AI better is that we don't have good training data set for the ancient era. When you analyze Alexander the Great battles and realize that neither he nor his opponent had a walkie-talkie - both could realistically do the following:

• plan the first move
• predict opponent's response
• tell the commanders what to do when the predicted response happens
• hope for the best

Everything else depended on his generals and small group of companions within Alexander's voice range.

 

[Azdul]

Oblivion was again a precursor of the incline and that's a FACT.

Of course once the design started leaning towards classic CRPG design with quests, storylines, cutscenes and voiced dialog - smart AI started to be an obstacle - not a strength.

AI should put the fire under the ass of those lazy writers. Imagine the hit on their egos when a robot can be more creative than them; friendly competition of muses.

Vast majority of game "writers" just write a script for a movie, ignoring any possibilities of emergent gameplay

I'm actually quite curious how Wayward Realms will turn out.

Ted Peterson and Julian LeFay got my Kickstarter money for breaking Internet walkthroughs back in 1996. You could not google altavista the solution to one of the quests, because the name of older brother of the prince was unique to each playthrough.

Of course this quote from manual was a big fat lie:
When the players ask what the story to Daggerfall is, I imagine Macbeth asking what the story to Macbeth is before the play begins. You are the protagonist, the hero of the game - the story is what you decide to make it.

because in 1996 the possibilities were not endless:

However, in 2024 it should be possible to generate it on the fly, evolving in unpredictable directions with NPCs having their own agendas, pressing issues and secrets. I want NPCs to behave like this:

So why didn't they add horse riding enemies in the end?

Julian LeFay was not aware of 'state machine' concept as a way to manage the quests. Daggerfall was falling apart at the seams even without independent actors following their own agenda. At some point they had to release somewhat playable version, even if in 1.00 it was impossible to finish the main quest.

 

[NecroLord]

Oblivion was again a precursor of the incline and that's a FACT.

Of course once the design started leaning towards classic CRPG design with quests, storylines, cutscenes and voiced dialog - smart AI started to be an obstacle - not a strength.

AI should put the fire under the ass of those lazy writers. Imagine the hit on their egos when a robot can be more creative than them; friendly competition of muses.

Vast majority of game "writers" just write a script for a movie, ignoring any possibilities of emergent gameplay

I'm actually quite curious how Wayward Realms will turn out.

Ted Peterson and Julian LeFay got my Kickstarter money for breaking Internet walkthroughs back in 1996. You could not google altavista the solution to one of the quests, because the name of older brother of the prince was unique to each playthrough.

Of course this quote from manual was a big fat lie:
When the players ask what the story to Daggerfall is, I imagine Macbeth asking what the story to Macbeth is before the play begins. You are the protagonist, the hero of the game - the story is what you decide to make it.

because in 1996 the possibilities were not endless:

However, in 2024 it should be possible to generate it on the fly, evolving in unpredictable directions with NPCs having their own agendas, pressing issues and secrets. I want NPCs to behave like this:

So why didn't they add horse riding enemies in the end?

Julian LeFay was not aware of 'state machine' concept as a way to manage the quests. Daggerfall was falling apart at the seams even without independent actors following their own agenda. At some point they had to release somewhat playable version, even if in 1.00 it was impossible to finish the main quest.

It was a bit too ambitious for its own good, perhaps.
Still one of my favorite rpgs though.

 

[gooseman]

Imagine playing a Total War game where you fight against a legendary commander like Hannibal or Belisarius and he's actually a military genius, someone who has studied your past battles and comes up with a plan to exploit your weaknesses. We're still in the Stone Age as far as that is concerned, specially with games. The possibilities are endless

Well, total war is long dead. The AI hasnt improved much since rome 1. They'll probably still run into a phalanx willingly and other stupid shit like that. They did dumb the game down, cutting out all the simulation stuff in favor of stats.

Julian LeFay was not aware of 'state machine' concept as a way to manage the quests. Daggerfall was falling apart at the seams even without independent actors following their own agenda. At some point they had to release somewhat playable version, even if in 1.00 it was impossible to finish the main quest.

It was a bit too ambitious for its own good

Ambitious, rushed, partially made in assembly and they weren't a big company with infinite money, unlike the ones we have today (who, somehow, cant even make a playable game anymore). A Daggerfall made today could be so much more. I want wayward realms to succeed, but I have little faith.

NPCs having their own agendas, pressing issues and secrets

Dwarf fortress does this, but it's all in the background simulation and rarely comes up. It has villains that will try to use corruption and other tactics to recruit agents to get them to carry out their schemes, like overthrow governments and steal artifacts.
You don't really need the detail of dwarf fortress for this. A game similar to Mount and Blade would work. Spruce up economic simulation, deepen politics and diplomacy, give the lords actual motivations and personalities, instead of them doing nothing but starting wars at random. Crusader kings does something similar, but the characters act quite predictably, since they're mostly motivated by traits and relations, so an ambitious guy who hates you will likely start a murder plot.
And then there's... majesty. Nothing sophisticated there, but it's using the concept brilliantly.

 

[Konjad]

Well, total war is long dead. The AI hasnt improved much since rome 1. They'll probably still run into a phalanx willingly and other stupid shit like that. They did dumb the game down, cutting out all the simulation stuff in favor of stats.

M2TW had better AI than RTW, at least pathfinding was improved significantly.

But other than that, there wasn't much improvement for battle AI indeed. Strategy-layer AI was quite decent in Three Kingdoms: Total War though, something I haven't seen in any other TW before and since, but they seemed to have later simplified it again. Plenty of players complained in Steam reviews about strategy layer that 'the game is cool but too complex'

 

[man_at_arms]

Well, total war is long dead. The AI hasnt improved much since rome 1. They'll probably still run into a phalanx willingly and other stupid shit like that. They did dumb the game down, cutting out all the simulation stuff in favor of stats.

M2TW had better AI than RTW, at least pathfinding was improved significantly.

But other than that, there wasn't much improvement for battle AI indeed. Strategy-layer AI was quite decent in Three Kingdoms: Total War though, something I haven't seen in any other TW before and since, but they seemed to have later simplified it again. Plenty of players complained in Steam reviews about strategy layer that 'the game is cool but too complex'

It's a shame that battles are awful in TW:3K due to the Warhammer-esque morale system where units are constantly rallying after breaking and it turns into a killfest clusterfuck of chasing down every enemy unit, because the strategic layer is one of their better ones. The map design, trigger points in faction progression that create the coalitions and kingdoms, army recruitment system (that tends towards enemy armies having elite units rather than trash tier militias all the time) and decent enough enemy army pathfinding create a compelling strategic layer experience.