Artificial Intelligence?

Tcm9669 · 03-24-2007, 05:49 AM

Do you think that this should be used in games? Will it improve the game play? or just makes it harder for us to win? And besides gaming what do you think of Artificial Intelligence chatting? Ever tried it?

Trotter · 03-24-2007, 11:48 AM

AI in gaming is a definite plus. When everythig is set up on a timetable, it is too easy to learn the pattern. As long as the game is not weighted toward the AI, I have no problem with it.

I don't chat, and I would not like to have a program entertain me with it. I can't even stand automated answering services.

Oreo · 03-24-2007, 02:03 PM

A.I or A.L as they call it is definitly needed, especially with FPS and RTS games. If there were all set scripted actions, ud learn it all after a day or two. and playing on Super L33T hard mode, would become as easily as SUck Up Noob Mode.

.

i love AI that use there surroundings to good affect, that will hide to ambush you, ect ect. BUT !, I have one Huge annoyance with practically EVERY FPS game out. SILENCERS for guns make NO Differnece. You lie down deep in grass and fire without a silencer , they turn around and all shoot you, You try again but you think your doing well because you rememberd your silencer. But ****, it made no difference what so ever, even over long differences and perfectly camoflage. I would love it one day if i just herd the A.I scream and dive behind anything they could, then sneek away to find some Binoculars and then carefully examine in the distance to find were i shot from...

So far i havnt even seen an effective Silencer in Crysis...

Thanks. (stupid silencer)

Apokalipse · 03-24-2007, 02:22 PM

AI would definitely improve RTS games, aswell.

I remember playing against 7 brutal enemies in Red Alert 2; the computer players actions were like clockwork; they were so predictable, that I'd already have a countermeasure for everything they did, before they'd even done it.

They'd send the exact same amount and type of units at regular intervals, they'd always follow exactly the same path to your base, they'd always target exactly the same things etc...

At the end, I would end up getting somewhere between 2000-4000 kills, and about 0-5 losses.

yosa · 03-24-2007, 03:01 PM

I don't how pluasible it is for the generic aplication, I would love a beter AI though for gaming; as far as a talking AI; think advertising, its excesive in its current state.

Chankama · 03-25-2007, 11:27 AM

"Artificial Intelligence" as they describe in theory is "already" used in games. But, "Artificial Intelligence" as seen in movies like Terminator doesn't exist anywhere in the world...

Turing test - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Tcm9669 · 03-25-2007, 01:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chankama

"Artificial Intelligence" as they describe in theory is "already" used in games. But, "Artificial Intelligence" as seen in movies like Terminator doesn't exist anywhere in the world...

Turing test - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I know. If you read my question well, I asked if it SHOULD be used!?

Chankama · 03-25-2007, 02:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tcm9669

I know. If you read my question well, I asked if it SHOULD be used!?

I was trying to indicate that there is a difference in the meaning of AI depending on who you talk to. I guess we'll stick to the meaning of AI as most people use it.

Without "AI", you'll only have human multiplayer games or single player games. And if you take games like even StarCraft, with a 1 on 1 (human) game, there is still AI involved.

You tell a zealot to move/attack to a certain location and if he stops and attacks the enemy before going to the destination - that's AI.

Without AI, games will be pretty bad. AI is not necessarily fully functional "bots". Anything that does the tasks that "you" are not doing is still AI.

Peons seeking empty mineral fields when the one he's using is busy is AI as well.

Member Login