Off Topic: The Flood
This topic has moved here: Subject: When are we going to achieve at least realistic...
  • Subject: When are we going to achieve at least realistic...
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • of 3
Subject: When are we going to achieve at least realistic...

I think you're forgetting that we are talking about AI in first person shooters. The strength of your AI opponents must be limited by the capabillities of the player to fight against them, and in a first person shooter, there are a ton of limitations.

Whereas in real life it's easy to whip your head (and weapon) around to face sudden threats at the drop of a hat, in a first person shooter, things are a lot more methodical and plodding, and as a result the enemies have to me methodical and plodding so that you can keep up with them.

Look at a game like Dark Souls compared to a game like Skyrim. Skyrim usually has enemies attack you one or two at a time. Dark Souls has swarms of enemies fighting you sometimes. Why can Dark Souls get away with it? Because it's third person perspective grants the player more visual information to deal with that many more foes.

Does that sorta make sense?

  • 01.03.2013 3:50 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

People say robots can't have feelings, but I am sure it will happen eventually. Feelings are just a pattern of reactions to stimuli. Although it would take a ton of coding, it will be possible.

  • 01.03.2013 3:52 PM PDT

Fear and Fear 3 has the most challenging AI I have ever faced.

Fear 2 was just ballsed up though.

  • 01.03.2013 3:53 PM PDT
  • gamertag: Methew
  • user homepage:


Posted by: Hylebos
I think you're forgetting that we are talking about AI in first person shooters. The strength of your AI opponents must be limited by the capabillities of the player to fight against them, and in a first person shooter, there are a ton of limitations.

Whereas in real life it's easy to whip your head (and weapon) around to face sudden threats at the drop of a hat, in a first person shooter, things are a lot more methodical and plodding, and as a result the enemies have to me methodical and plodding so that you can keep up with them.

Look at a game like Dark Souls compared to a game like Skyrim. Skyrim usually has enemies attack you one or two at a time. Dark Souls has swarms of enemies fighting you sometimes. Why can Dark Souls get away with it? Because it's third person perspective grants the player more visual information to deal with that many more foes.

Does that sorta make sense?

Skyrim has a third person perspective.

Even then, the first person nature can be accounted for an difficulty, or in this case, how 'smart' the AI is can be adjusted.

Heck, Halo is probably the one franchise that could get away with it because we have a pseudo third person perspective in the Motion Tracker.

[Edited on 01.03.2013 3:58 PM PST]

  • 01.03.2013 3:57 PM PDT

The world is not beautiful: And that, in a way, lends it a sort of beauty.

~Kino's Journey


Posted by: Hylebos
Does that sorta make sense?
Well ,there are two problems with what you're saying:

1. While you can charge into an army of enemies in Dark Souls, it's usually best to pick them off one (maybe two) at a time.

2. Motion trackers, lack of visual information/first person perspective is now a much smaller problem.
-Seems i've been ninja'd by the OP himself.

[Edited on 01.03.2013 4:02 PM PST]

  • 01.03.2013 4:02 PM PDT


Posted by: bergXX09
FEAR from 2005 would like to talk to you.


Yeah, just played through F.E.A.R. after I got it on the steam sale, and its AI is pretty damn good.

Far Cry 3 AI is also pretty good when it works right. Sometime it takes them too long to "see" something that they're supposed to react to though.

  • 01.03.2013 4:04 PM PDT

Got a better idea than that. Why don't we just let actual humans control the bad guys?

  • 01.03.2013 4:18 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Writer's Corner
6/15/2011 11:39 PM: bobcast [2597260] issued a 3 day ban expiring on 6/18/2011 11:39 PM.
Reason: A Bungie.net Forum Moderator has banned you for violating the code of conduct and/or rules of the forum in the thread below
http://www.bungie.net/Forums/posts.aspx?postID=61704535
Inappropriate. Went a little to far with the butt hole tearing.


Posted by: Mitochondrion
Got a better idea than that. Why don't we just let actual humans control the bad guys?


Hmm...

why don't we just kill actual humans?

Don't really need a videogame at all.

  • 01.03.2013 4:20 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:


Posted by: Player3Th0mas1
The game wuld be impossible when all AIs are the same difficulty as people you fight in Matchmaking...
Except they wouldn't behave like that. They'd behave like people in a real-life war scenario, so fear would play a part.

  • 01.03.2013 4:21 PM PDT

Posted by: A 3 Legged Goat
"Team shoot the wraith!"
"What's a team shoot and what's a wraith?!"
"It means we all shoot at the big blue thing together!"
"Okay!"
*starts betraying blue teammate*

Posted by: ABotelho
AI is incredibly difficult.
Seriously. Have you ever tried programming computer AI? It's ridiculous.

AI won't make sales like graphics do.

  • 01.03.2013 4:31 PM PDT

Why are you here?

I thought Batman Arkham City and Asylum had pretty decent AI.

  • 01.03.2013 4:33 PM PDT

Posted by: Methew
Posted by: Hylebos
I think you're forgetting that we are talking about AI in first person shooters. The strength of your AI opponents must be limited by the capabillities of the player to fight against them, and in a first person shooter, there are a ton of limitations.

Whereas in real life it's easy to whip your head (and weapon) around to face sudden threats at the drop of a hat, in a first person shooter, things are a lot more methodical and plodding, and as a result the enemies have to me methodical and plodding so that you can keep up with them.

Look at a game like Dark Souls compared to a game like Skyrim. Skyrim usually has enemies attack you one or two at a time. Dark Souls has swarms of enemies fighting you sometimes. Why can Dark Souls get away with it? Because it's third person perspective grants the player more visual information to deal with that many more foes.

Does that sorta make sense?

Skyrim has a third person perspective.
But the game is first and foremost designed to be played from the first person perspective and is therefore limited by the first person perspective. I hopefully explained that somewhere in this thread if you were interested in extra reading.

Things like motion trackers definitely help, but I still definitely feel that you can't have things like Hunters hurling grunts or Skirmishers dropping from above, it's too much information for the tiny window that the first person perspective provides.

In the Spring I'm hoping to take a Computer Science course on AI, so maybe I can have a better answer for you then. Another thing I've been meaning to do (that I would now recommend to you if you wanted to understand some of the behind the scenes stuff) is to read all of Bungie's Publications, there seems to be quite a few on the subjects of artificial intelligence, and since these are usually presentations pitched to fellow developers, they might reveal insight that you otherwise wouldn't find in an article written to the public.

Posted by: DarkJet7

Posted by: Hylebos
Does that sorta make sense?
Well ,there are two problems with what you're saying:

1. While you can charge into an army of enemies in Dark Souls, it's usually best to pick them off one (maybe two) at a time.
It's an optimal strategy for sure, but you'll still notice that there are more situations where there are enough enemies to swarm you in Dark Souls than there are in Skyrim.

2. Motion trackers, lack of visual information/first person perspective is now a much smaller problem. The problem with motion trackers is that they don't provide quite the same amount of information that you would get in a third person perspective game or in real life. Imagine a scene like in Asassins Creed, where the guards mostly mob up around you and take turns attacking, you wouldn't be able to pull that off in a first person perspective game, not even with a motion tracker.

[Edited on 01.03.2013 4:37 PM PST]

  • 01.03.2013 4:34 PM PDT

There's a “U” and “I” in union but just an “I” in my beliefs


Posted by: VehementWolf54
I thought Batman Arkham City and Asylum had pretty decent AI.
Yeah, and damn good dialogue.

  • 01.03.2013 4:40 PM PDT
  • gamertag: Methew
  • user homepage:

Posted by: kil1ertomatog
Posted by: ABotelho
AI is incredibly difficult.
Seriously. Have you ever tried programming computer AI? It's ridiculous.

AI won't make sales like graphics do.

Because Crysis 2 and RAGE have been huge financial successes.

Meanwhile the graphical requirements for TF2 are a fraction of what it took for either game and are arguably infinitely better.

  • 01.03.2013 4:43 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:


Posted by: Methew

Posted by: Sliding Ghost
Posted by: Methew
Increase the radius of their vision cones, have them scan the area, have them start patrolling, checking obvious hiding spots, have detection based on things such as sight, sound, etc.
This is going to be hard to believe, but the Brutes in Halo 3 are aware of their allies if you silently kill them and their body goes right through them or lands in front of them. And if they haven't spotted you, they'll run right up to their ally's corpse and observe it (if only they'd pay their respects like the Elites do... then they'd be convincing).

In Halo 2, you had to turn on Armory for something like this to occur.

With Reach, it has since been discarded. What a downgrade!

The infuriating part about this is that the technology is capable of doing it, at what cost I do not know but I digress.

In Dishonored enemies have vision cones and won't see you unless unless they actually look at you. In Reach if you've been spotted and sneak around and then look at the enemies from behind, they'll magically turn around and start shooting at you. In Mark of the Ninja, sound can betray your presence and make guards look at the direction it came from.

Yet in the new Hitman game, sneaking around with a sledgehammer as a cop in front of a cop in tall grass isn't suspicious. Soon as you leave the grass though all bets are off.

How hard would it be to add these things to current games? How hard would it be to program two sets of patrol routes for enemies, a relaxed and an aggressive one. How hard would it be to have a "Hey is that something over there?" range on sight/sound locks and a "ENEMY! KILL IT!" range?
Indeed, in Halo 3, this does not normally occur.

To get this scenario, start up The Covenant, save all your Elite allies and get them into the third tower, then after defeating the Hunters, instead of going through the door, use a brute shot or fuel rod to jump into the terminal room and jump onto the elevator and head back to the door. Wait for the red dots to appear then go in and you'll have an opportunity to assassinate all 7 Brutes. If you don't want Elites interfering, send the elevator up and get off of it.

Anyways, the Halo games are a bit too cheap about the alertness level while those other 2 games you mentioned just make stealth way too easy. It isn't a matter of adding them as it is implementing balance.

Oh and I liked how the sniper had a silenced effect in CE. ODST is noticeably missing that feature for it's two guns.

  • 01.03.2013 4:45 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:


Posted by: DarkJet7

Posted by: Methew
Dark Souls
Just something i'd like to add, why can't we have AI behavior change depending on what weapon your using? like if you have a flame thrower or a shotgun then every soldier is going to high tail it out of there the second they see you, not stand there shooting(or worse, charge you head on).

Also, i quoted Dark souls because i saw a glimpse of this in Anor Londo, changing from a great shield to a regular shield meant that my blocks no longer staggered silver knights, causing them to attack more frequently(and because the shield was weaker, my stamina drained a lot more and the fight dynamic was almost completely changed), why can't we see more of this AI counterplay?
IIRC, Reach had the Elites be more evasive when you changed to a sniper. Halo 3 Brutes would deploy an equipment if you brought your crosshair anywhere near them (then again, I don't think it mattered which weapon you were holding).

Anyways, yeah, that'd be really nice. Look at the Hunters. They used to be known for following you all over the map and now they just camp. I think they were the most interesting in CE and Halo 3 despite never presenting a great challenge.

  • 01.03.2013 4:46 PM PDT
  • gamertag: Methew
  • user homepage:

Posted by: Hylebos
The problem with motion trackers is that they don't provide quite the same amount of information that you would get in a third person perspective game or in real life. Imagine a scene like in Asassins Creed, where the guards mostly mob up around you and take turns attacking, you wouldn't be able to pull that off in a first person perspective game, not even with a motion tracker.

I'll have to give the links a read.

In the mean time: Yes, the first person perspective does limit the player and that even with a motion tracker you can't have swarms of baddies around the player. That just means that the intensity needs to be lowered and that flanking enemies need to allow time for the player to spot them on the MT, or deal low damage so that players can deal with them.

I don't expect a FPS with better AI to have them swarming the player. I do expect them to behave better than they currently do. I expect enemies in stealth games to not be moronic cows for the slaughter but to actively seek me out once they suspect something is wrong. I expect different classes of enemies (Grunts and Jackals) to use their different strengths and to use those strength's to cover each others weaknesses. And I expect this to break down once leadership (Elites) are dead.

To borrow from a image another poster posted in this thread: Why is 2005 the benchmark for AI?

[Edited on 01.03.2013 4:51 PM PST]

  • 01.03.2013 4:50 PM PDT

Sometimes, I dream about cheese.


Posted by: Methew
Posted by: Hylebos
The problem with motion trackers is that they don't provide quite the same amount of information that you would get in a third person perspective game or in real life. Imagine a scene like in Asassins Creed, where the guards mostly mob up around you and take turns attacking, you wouldn't be able to pull that off in a first person perspective game, not even with a motion tracker.

I'll have to give the links a read.

In the mean time: Yes, the first person perspective does limit the player and that even with a motion tracker you can't have swarms of baddies around the player. That just means that the intensity needs to be lowered and that flanking enemies need to allow time for the player to spot them on the MT, or deal low damage so that players can deal with them.

I don't expect a FPS with better AI to have them swarming the player. I do expect them to behave better than they currently do. I expect enemies in stealth games to not be moronic cows for the slaughter but to actively seek me out once they suspect something is wrong. I expect different classes of enemies (Grunts and Jackals) to use their different strengths and to use those strength's to cover each others weaknesses. And I expect this to break down once leadership (Elites) are dead.

To borrow from a image another poster posted in this thread: Why is 2005 the benchmark for AI?


About the first person perspective thing, it's completely true.

There is a third person game called Overgrowth where you can fight multiple enemies that surround you, someone made a first person mod for it. Extremely difficult to see things coming at you.

  • 01.03.2013 4:57 PM PDT

The world is not beautiful: And that, in a way, lends it a sort of beauty.

~Kino's Journey


Posted by: Hylebos

Posted by: DarkJet7

Posted by: Hylebos
Does that sorta make sense?
Well ,there are two problems with what you're saying:

1. While you can charge into an army of enemies in Dark Souls, it's usually best to pick them off one (maybe two) at a time.
It's an optimal strategy for sure, but you'll still notice that there are more situations where there are enough enemies to swarm you in Dark Souls than there are in Skyrim.
I've barely even played skyrim >.>2. Motion trackers, lack of visual information/first person perspective is now a much smaller problem. The problem with motion trackers is that they don't provide quite the same amount of information that you would get in a third person perspective game or in real life. Imagine a scene like in Asassins Creed, where the guards mostly mob up around you and take turns attacking, you wouldn't be able to pull that off in a first person perspective game, not even with a motion tracker.while that's true, it sounds like you're trying to shove a square peg into a circle slot, first person doesn't work with swarms all around you, so clearly the game designers should be working on encounters that work with first person perspective that isn't funneling the swarms through a tight corridor.

[Edited on 01.03.2013 5:02 PM PST]

  • 01.03.2013 5:01 PM PDT
  • gamertag: Methew
  • user homepage:


Posted by: deadlyfluffball
About the first person perspective thing, it's completely true.

I don't deny that.

But the options aren't 'What we have right now' and 'AC3.' There's an entire spectrum of grey area we can play in.

  • 01.03.2013 5:12 PM PDT

Sometimes, I dream about cheese.


Posted by: Methew

Posted by: deadlyfluffball
About the first person perspective thing, it's completely true.

I don't deny that.

But the options aren't 'What we have right now' and 'AC3.' There's an entire spectrum of grey area we can play in.




Who said anything about assassins creed? I was just saying that fighting multiple enemies in a close space hand to hand in a game is difficult in first person.

  • 01.03.2013 5:14 PM PDT
  • gamertag: Methew
  • user homepage:

Posted by: deadlyfluffball
Who said anything about assassins creed?

Hylebos.

The player I was quoting when you responded to me responding to him.

  • 01.03.2013 5:16 PM PDT

Just remember that no matter how terrible you feel, or how much you want to let go, there are people who care about you and love you.

I thought this would be about AI allies...

Star Wars: Republic Commando had GREAT AI allies barbecue they were an extension of yourself; they did exactly what you told them to when you told them to do it, they weren't pushovers, and they were not overpowered.

  • 01.03.2013 5:20 PM PDT

Signatures are for little kids.


Posted by: Mitochondrion
Got a better idea than that. Why don't we just let actual humans control the bad guys?
You mean multiplayer?

That's all I play a FPS for anyway.

I agree AI in most games is idiotic. I remember enemies in MW2 who couldn't see my soldiers 3 feet in front of them but would shoot past them to shoot me 30 feet away.

  • 01.03.2013 5:20 PM PDT
  • gamertag: Methew
  • user homepage:


Posted by: Godshatter

Posted by: Mitochondrion
Got a better idea than that. Why don't we just let actual humans control the bad guys?
You mean multiplayer?

More like what we thought Firefight Versus would be. And more like what GOW: Judgement Overrun mode is shaping up to be.

Personally I'm wondering if they'll ever include a Competitive Campaign option. You and/or up to three of your friends play through the Campaign while the rest play as various enemy units during the game. If you die, you respawn by taking control of another unit currently spawned in the game.

  • 01.03.2013 5:25 PM PDT

  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • of 3