The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Future of Gaming...
Seeing The Game again just reminded me of the old days in this forum (so long ago that back then, his name reminded me of Triple H, a WWF wrestler... - so long ago I still liked WWF wrestling... - so long ago, the WWF was actually called the WWF rather than WWE! :-D) when we used to talk about the endless possibilities of the forthcoming PS2, Xbox and Gamecube. I mean, the N64 games were still fantastic back then and these new consoles would take things even further.
But they've been, the standard has raised and they don't really impress anymore. They haven't shown any real limits though.
Sure, the visual could possibly be better, but only a really anal retentive graphics freak would really notice the difference.
It takes an expert to notice a proper difference between the Xbox and PS2 versions of multi platform games.
IBM and Sony have just enveiled a new chip with new technology which is about 100 times as fast as the Xbox technology.
Great power. How can it be used?
This new tech could allow them to craft some seriously powerful server systems for online play, so those huge 1000 player war games we've all been dreaming off can finally become a reality.
Both MS and Sony have said that this generation of online play is only the prototype, the practice run. What's more, by the time the new generation of consoles come out, nearly EVERYONE (even PB) should have access to Broadband Internet (which'll hopefully be cheaper by then as well).
Sony have actually said something about the PS3 being online based as a full home entertainment system, for shopping, downloading rental films, blah blah...
But that doesn't answer what'll be done with the console's new power.
The 250 Ghz of promised power could allow more polygons with a higher resolution and richer textures and more advanced effects than ever before, and I've no doubt that EA will be churning out Fifa's with classic gameplay and visuals that could fool you into thinking that you were watching it on Sky TV.
But I want to know what devellopers with vision and imagination would do with the power.
The current generation of consoles can already handle a lot.
They can manage vast, realistic, interactive, detailed levels, without slowdown or fogging.
Games like Super Mario Sunshine show that there's little to be improved on the playability side, and even then that's down to programming rather than console power.
Games like Gran Tourismo (as boring as I find them) show that realistic physics and graphics aren't a problem anymore.
The Grand Theft Auto series even managed to create a living, breathing city for you to play around in.
The way I see it, the next big advancement will be in the AI within games.
Sure, current AI is very good.
FPS foes are hiding, using cover and pulling out hundreds of pre-programmed tactics to kill you.
RTS foes are actually managing to surprise opponents with their clever tactics, and beat em up opponents are learning to fix their style based on what style you're trying to beat them with.
But I'm not talking "fake human player" AI, I think the use of AI can go deeper than that.
How? If you're still awake after reading all that then I'll explain to you! ;-)
One example is a games character you control.
Be it fighter, platformer or even a sports game, you choose the direction and the action of the player, the computer runs a preset animation to suit it. This is why computer game characters tend to look so stupid and repetitive. Some of the better companies hide this by stringing together multiple animation sequences and combining them to make them seem more varied and make them run smoother, but it's still getting old and dated.
Also, it's a pain with the gameplay.
In a fighting game, have you ever landed a perfect hit on someone, only it doesn't connected because your opponent was going through the "recovery" animation. Or you press the wrong button and nothing will stop your character from go through the "big slow kick" animation which will leave you open to attack or something.
Now what if your character had a mind of it's own?
Instead of a walking animation, the AI would work out how to move the legs in a way that would keep the body balanced.
It would choose the movement of each arm and leg depending on what it was trying to do.
You'd still control WHAT the character does, but the AI would work out HOW to do it, rather than go through standard, repetitive animation frames.
Say for example a 3D beat-em-up.
Normally you press punch and the character does a punch, straight in front of him/her regardless of what is happening, the same way EVERY time.
If the AI was thinking then the characters head would already have it's eye's on the opponent and would throw the punch in THAT direction rather than just going through the punch animation.
Some games already do a couple of tricks similar. Many games have your characters eye-ing opponents, but it's still just strung together animation frames which almost works as well.
There are somethings that animation can't handle very well though, like blocking.
EVERY game. You press block, your character goes into block position (usually putting an arm infront of their face) through the block animation, and any attack thrown at you get's blocked.
Is that how Bruce Lee and Jackie Chan block attacks?
No, it's not.
They see the punch coming and use their hands or feet to hit it away.
Finding the right block animation for every attack animation is would be tedious and impractical, but getting a computer to work out the best way to block an attack wouldn't. It wouldn't take any skill out of the game, you'd still have to press the block button, but when you did the computer AI would block the attack properly, rather than just covering their face.
There's hundreds of possibilities for AI and character motion which would make games more fluid, more realistic and give more possibilities to the gameplay than before.
The use of AI doesn't end there though.
Another example could be speech.
The audio version of motion capture is voice acting, which works quite well if done right, but again it's preset, pre-recorded and get's repetitive.
What if the computer could learn to say words properly with a voice.
Work out what tone of voice to use to make it sound as realistic as possible. Yeah, most programs that do that end up sound like Steven Hawkings but that technology is atleast 20 years old now, back in the days when Mario's 2D platforming didn't even exist yet.
If it could be done properly, next time you hear a commentator in a sports game, you won't hear the same one-liners again, and again, and again, and again, and again... :-)
Also, it would be able to read the names of your customised characters and places. In a role playing game, you could type what you wanted your character to say and watch them say it.
It would also save time on voice acting.
All the develloper would have to do is type in the dialogue and possibly add tone of voice, like excitement or drowsyness, and they could put that in like a font, just like putting bold text on a word document.
And the dialogue - what if the AI could allow the computer to choose what to say instead of reading the same pre-set dialogue over and over.
Not only would it keep it varied, if it could understand what you were saying then it would bring a whole new world of communication between you and your computer.
You could bark orders at AI controlled team mates in army games, who might obey without question, ask why you want them to all jump off a cliff or perhaps even shoot you for it! ;-)
Or how about communicating intelligently in an artificially intellegent RPG world, who's body is moving realistically because it is controlled by an intelligent AI and any other uses of artificial intelligence that I've not even thought of yet! :-)
Well that's the future of gaming. That, and playing online ofcourse. ;-)
Seeing The Game again just reminded me of the old days in this forum (so long ago that back then, his name reminded me of Triple H, a WWF wrestler... - so long ago I still liked WWF wrestling... - so long ago, the WWF was actually called the WWF rather than WWE! :-D) when we used to talk about the endless possibilities of the forthcoming PS2, Xbox and Gamecube. I mean, the N64 games were still fantastic back then and these new consoles would take things even further.
But they've been, the standard has raised and they don't really impress anymore. They haven't shown any real limits though.
Sure, the visual could possibly be better, but only a really anal retentive graphics freak would really notice the difference.
It takes an expert to notice a proper difference between the Xbox and PS2 versions of multi platform games.
IBM and Sony have just enveiled a new chip with new technology which is about 100 times as fast as the Xbox technology.
Great power. How can it be used?
This new tech could allow them to craft some seriously powerful server systems for online play, so those huge 1000 player war games we've all been dreaming off can finally become a reality.
Both MS and Sony have said that this generation of online play is only the prototype, the practice run. What's more, by the time the new generation of consoles come out, nearly EVERYONE (even PB) should have access to Broadband Internet (which'll hopefully be cheaper by then as well).
Sony have actually said something about the PS3 being online based as a full home entertainment system, for shopping, downloading rental films, blah blah...
But that doesn't answer what'll be done with the console's new power.
The 250 Ghz of promised power could allow more polygons with a higher resolution and richer textures and more advanced effects than ever before, and I've no doubt that EA will be churning out Fifa's with classic gameplay and visuals that could fool you into thinking that you were watching it on Sky TV.
But I want to know what devellopers with vision and imagination would do with the power.
The current generation of consoles can already handle a lot.
They can manage vast, realistic, interactive, detailed levels, without slowdown or fogging.
Games like Super Mario Sunshine show that there's little to be improved on the playability side, and even then that's down to programming rather than console power.
Games like Gran Tourismo (as boring as I find them) show that realistic physics and graphics aren't a problem anymore.
The Grand Theft Auto series even managed to create a living, breathing city for you to play around in.
The way I see it, the next big advancement will be in the AI within games.
Sure, current AI is very good.
FPS foes are hiding, using cover and pulling out hundreds of pre-programmed tactics to kill you.
RTS foes are actually managing to surprise opponents with their clever tactics, and beat em up opponents are learning to fix their style based on what style you're trying to beat them with.
But I'm not talking "fake human player" AI, I think the use of AI can go deeper than that.
How? If you're still awake after reading all that then I'll explain to you! ;-)
One example is a games character you control.
Be it fighter, platformer or even a sports game, you choose the direction and the action of the player, the computer runs a preset animation to suit it. This is why computer game characters tend to look so stupid and repetitive. Some of the better companies hide this by stringing together multiple animation sequences and combining them to make them seem more varied and make them run smoother, but it's still getting old and dated.
Also, it's a pain with the gameplay.
In a fighting game, have you ever landed a perfect hit on someone, only it doesn't connected because your opponent was going through the "recovery" animation. Or you press the wrong button and nothing will stop your character from go through the "big slow kick" animation which will leave you open to attack or something.
Now what if your character had a mind of it's own?
Instead of a walking animation, the AI would work out how to move the legs in a way that would keep the body balanced.
It would choose the movement of each arm and leg depending on what it was trying to do.
You'd still control WHAT the character does, but the AI would work out HOW to do it, rather than go through standard, repetitive animation frames.
Say for example a 3D beat-em-up.
Normally you press punch and the character does a punch, straight in front of him/her regardless of what is happening, the same way EVERY time.
If the AI was thinking then the characters head would already have it's eye's on the opponent and would throw the punch in THAT direction rather than just going through the punch animation.
Some games already do a couple of tricks similar. Many games have your characters eye-ing opponents, but it's still just strung together animation frames which almost works as well.
There are somethings that animation can't handle very well though, like blocking.
EVERY game. You press block, your character goes into block position (usually putting an arm infront of their face) through the block animation, and any attack thrown at you get's blocked.
Is that how Bruce Lee and Jackie Chan block attacks?
No, it's not.
They see the punch coming and use their hands or feet to hit it away.
Finding the right block animation for every attack animation is would be tedious and impractical, but getting a computer to work out the best way to block an attack wouldn't. It wouldn't take any skill out of the game, you'd still have to press the block button, but when you did the computer AI would block the attack properly, rather than just covering their face.
There's hundreds of possibilities for AI and character motion which would make games more fluid, more realistic and give more possibilities to the gameplay than before.
The use of AI doesn't end there though.
Another example could be speech.
The audio version of motion capture is voice acting, which works quite well if done right, but again it's preset, pre-recorded and get's repetitive.
What if the computer could learn to say words properly with a voice.
Work out what tone of voice to use to make it sound as realistic as possible. Yeah, most programs that do that end up sound like Steven Hawkings but that technology is atleast 20 years old now, back in the days when Mario's 2D platforming didn't even exist yet.
If it could be done properly, next time you hear a commentator in a sports game, you won't hear the same one-liners again, and again, and again, and again, and again... :-)
Also, it would be able to read the names of your customised characters and places. In a role playing game, you could type what you wanted your character to say and watch them say it.
It would also save time on voice acting.
All the develloper would have to do is type in the dialogue and possibly add tone of voice, like excitement or drowsyness, and they could put that in like a font, just like putting bold text on a word document.
And the dialogue - what if the AI could allow the computer to choose what to say instead of reading the same pre-set dialogue over and over.
Not only would it keep it varied, if it could understand what you were saying then it would bring a whole new world of communication between you and your computer.
You could bark orders at AI controlled team mates in army games, who might obey without question, ask why you want them to all jump off a cliff or perhaps even shoot you for it! ;-)
Or how about communicating intelligently in an artificially intellegent RPG world, who's body is moving realistically because it is controlled by an intelligent AI and any other uses of artificial intelligence that I've not even thought of yet! :-)
Well that's the future of gaming. That, and playing online ofcourse. ;-)
Yeah.
The AI would have to be a lot more intelligent but it would be more fool-proof than before. It would be able to cope with changes to the situation like a change of scenery (like in Red Faction) more naturally instead of the programmer having to write a new preset AI for each possible scenario of play.
It would also prevent glitches in the game allowing human/computer players from cheating. Like seeing through walls etc.
The AI would have to be a lot more intelligent but it would be more fool-proof than before. It would be able to cope with changes to the situation like a change of scenery (like in Red Faction) more naturally instead of the programmer having to write a new preset AI for each possible scenario of play.
It would also prevent glitches in the game allowing human/computer players from cheating. Like seeing through walls etc.
Some interesting ideas there. If it could be done then it could take games to a new level. Could mean more intelligent thinking would be needed, as poorly thought out plans of attack and the like would not work out the same as they would with everything being preset.
Hope it wins a GAD... Tis a good post. Although you drag on about the fighting games a little longer than everything else.
Help!
Interesting. Power is nothing without something to use it on.
Interesting. Power is nothing without something to use it on.
You ain't seen nothing! ;-)
This is was a rushed spontaneous warm up.
Back in the day, people would spend ages. Writing their topic bit by bit on MS word, building up behemoths that would shrink the scroll bar smaller than the **ahem** of a steroid abuser.
People stopped putting the effort in when GAD went, but now it's back, and so will these over-done topics.
And mine isn't the most exciting read you'll ever find, but I've seen a LOT worse! :-)
This is only the beggining. :-)
This is was a rushed spontaneous warm up.
Back in the day, people would spend ages. Writing their topic bit by bit on MS word, building up behemoths that would shrink the scroll bar smaller than the **ahem** of a steroid abuser.
People stopped putting the effort in when GAD went, but now it's back, and so will these over-done topics.
And mine isn't the most exciting read you'll ever find, but I've seen a LOT worse! :-)
This is only the beggining. :-)
burn this topic, it's longer than the bible :D
Future of Gaming...
Seeing The Game again just reminded me of the old days in this forum (so long ago that back then, his name reminded me of Triple H, a WWF wrestler... - so long ago I still liked WWF wrestling... - so long ago, the WWF was actually called the WWF rather than WWE! :-D) when we used to talk about the endless possibilities of the forthcoming PS2, Xbox and Gamecube. I mean, the N64 games were still fantastic back then and these new consoles would take things even further.
But they've been, the standard has raised and they don't really impress anymore. They haven't shown any real limits though.
Sure, the visual could possibly be better, but only a really anal retentive graphics freak would really notice the difference.
It takes an expert to notice a proper difference between the Xbox and PS2 versions of multi platform games.
IBM and Sony have just enveiled a new chip with new technology which is about 100 times as fast as the Xbox technology.
Great power. How can it be used?
This new tech could allow them to craft some seriously powerful server systems for online play, so those huge 1000 player war games we've all been dreaming off can finally become a reality.
Both MS and Sony have said that this generation of online play is only the prototype, the practice run. What's more, by the time the new generation of consoles come out, nearly EVERYONE (even PB) should have access to Broadband Internet (which'll hopefully be cheaper by then as well).
Sony have actually said something about the PS3 being online based as a full home entertainment system, for shopping, downloading rental films, blah blah...
But that doesn't answer what'll be done with the console's new power.
The 250 Ghz of promised power could allow more polygons with a higher resolution and richer textures and more advanced effects than ever before, and I've no doubt that EA will be churning out Fifa's with classic gameplay and visuals that could fool you into thinking that you were watching it on Sky TV.
But I want to know what devellopers with vision and imagination would do with the power.
The current generation of consoles can already handle a lot.
They can manage vast, realistic, interactive, detailed levels, without slowdown or fogging.
Games like Super Mario Sunshine show that there's little to be improved on the playability side, and even then that's down to programming rather than console power.
Games like Gran Tourismo (as boring as I find them) show that realistic physics and graphics aren't a problem anymore.
The Grand Theft Auto series even managed to create a living, breathing city for you to play around in.
The way I see it, the next big advancement will be in the AI within games.
Sure, current AI is very good.
FPS foes are hiding, using cover and pulling out hundreds of pre-programmed tactics to kill you.
RTS foes are actually managing to surprise opponents with their clever tactics, and beat em up opponents are learning to fix their style based on what style you're trying to beat them with.
But I'm not talking "fake human player" AI, I think the use of AI can go deeper than that.
How? If you're still awake after reading all that then I'll explain to you! ;-)
One example is a games character you control.
Be it fighter, platformer or even a sports game, you choose the direction and the action of the player, the computer runs a preset animation to suit it. This is why computer game characters tend to look so stupid and repetitive. Some of the better companies hide this by stringing together multiple animation sequences and combining them to make them seem more varied and make them run smoother, but it's still getting old and dated.
Also, it's a pain with the gameplay.
In a fighting game, have you ever landed a perfect hit on someone, only it doesn't connected because your opponent was going through the "recovery" animation. Or you press the wrong button and nothing will stop your character from go through the "big slow kick" animation which will leave you open to attack or something.
Now what if your character had a mind of it's own?
Instead of a walking animation, the AI would work out how to move the legs in a way that would keep the body balanced.
It would choose the movement of each arm and leg depending on what it was trying to do.
You'd still control WHAT the character does, but the AI would work out HOW to do it, rather than go through standard, repetitive animation frames.
Say for example a 3D beat-em-up.
Normally you press punch and the character does a punch, straight in front of him/her regardless of what is happening, the same way EVERY time.
If the AI was thinking then the characters head would already have it's eye's on the opponent and would throw the punch in THAT direction rather than just going through the punch animation.
Some games already do a couple of tricks similar. Many games have your characters eye-ing opponents, but it's still just strung together animation frames which almost works as well.
There are somethings that animation can't handle very well though, like blocking.
EVERY game. You press block, your character goes into block position (usually putting an arm infront of their face) through the block animation, and any attack thrown at you get's blocked.
Is that how Bruce Lee and Jackie Chan block attacks?
No, it's not.
They see the punch coming and use their hands or feet to hit it away.
Finding the right block animation for every attack animation is would be tedious and impractical, but getting a computer to work out the best way to block an attack wouldn't. It wouldn't take any skill out of the game, you'd still have to press the block button, but when you did the computer AI would block the attack properly, rather than just covering their face.
There's hundreds of possibilities for AI and character motion which would make games more fluid, more realistic and give more possibilities to the gameplay than before.
The use of AI doesn't end there though.
Another example could be speech.
The audio version of motion capture is voice acting, which works quite well if done right, but again it's preset, pre-recorded and get's repetitive.
What if the computer could learn to say words properly with a voice.
Work out what tone of voice to use to make it sound as realistic as possible. Yeah, most programs that do that end up sound like Steven Hawkings but that technology is atleast 20 years old now, back in the days when Mario's 2D platforming didn't even exist yet.
If it could be done properly, next time you hear a commentator in a sports game, you won't hear the same one-liners again, and again, and again, and again, and again... :-)
Also, it would be able to read the names of your customised characters and places. In a role playing game, you could type what you wanted your character to say and watch them say it.
It would also save time on voice acting.
All the develloper would have to do is type in the dialogue and possibly add tone of voice, like excitement or drowsyness, and they could put that in like a font, just like putting bold text on a word document.
And the dialogue - what if the AI could allow the computer to choose what to say instead of reading the same pre-set dialogue over and over.
Not only would it keep it varied, if it could understand what you were saying then it would bring a whole new world of communication between you and your computer.
You could bark orders at AI controlled team mates in army games, who might obey without question, ask why you want them to all jump off a cliff or perhaps even shoot you for it! ;-)
Or how about communicating intelligently in an artificially intellegent RPG world, who's body is moving realistically because it is controlled by an intelligent AI and any other uses of artificial intelligence that I've not even thought of yet! :-)
Well that's the future of gaming. That, and playing online ofcourse. ;-)
Seeing The Game again just reminded me of the old days in this forum (so long ago that back then, his name reminded me of Triple H, a WWF wrestler... - so long ago I still liked WWF wrestling... - so long ago, the WWF was actually called the WWF rather than WWE! :-D) when we used to talk about the endless possibilities of the forthcoming PS2, Xbox and Gamecube. I mean, the N64 games were still fantastic back then and these new consoles would take things even further.
But they've been, the standard has raised and they don't really impress anymore. They haven't shown any real limits though.
Sure, the visual could possibly be better, but only a really anal retentive graphics freak would really notice the difference.
It takes an expert to notice a proper difference between the Xbox and PS2 versions of multi platform games.
IBM and Sony have just enveiled a new chip with new technology which is about 100 times as fast as the Xbox technology.
Great power. How can it be used?
This new tech could allow them to craft some seriously powerful server systems for online play, so those huge 1000 player war games we've all been dreaming off can finally become a reality.
Both MS and Sony have said that this generation of online play is only the prototype, the practice run. What's more, by the time the new generation of consoles come out, nearly EVERYONE (even PB) should have access to Broadband Internet (which'll hopefully be cheaper by then as well).
Sony have actually said something about the PS3 being online based as a full home entertainment system, for shopping, downloading rental films, blah blah...
But that doesn't answer what'll be done with the console's new power.
The 250 Ghz of promised power could allow more polygons with a higher resolution and richer textures and more advanced effects than ever before, and I've no doubt that EA will be churning out Fifa's with classic gameplay and visuals that could fool you into thinking that you were watching it on Sky TV.
But I want to know what devellopers with vision and imagination would do with the power.
The current generation of consoles can already handle a lot.
They can manage vast, realistic, interactive, detailed levels, without slowdown or fogging.
Games like Super Mario Sunshine show that there's little to be improved on the playability side, and even then that's down to programming rather than console power.
Games like Gran Tourismo (as boring as I find them) show that realistic physics and graphics aren't a problem anymore.
The Grand Theft Auto series even managed to create a living, breathing city for you to play around in.
The way I see it, the next big advancement will be in the AI within games.
Sure, current AI is very good.
FPS foes are hiding, using cover and pulling out hundreds of pre-programmed tactics to kill you.
RTS foes are actually managing to surprise opponents with their clever tactics, and beat em up opponents are learning to fix their style based on what style you're trying to beat them with.
But I'm not talking "fake human player" AI, I think the use of AI can go deeper than that.
How? If you're still awake after reading all that then I'll explain to you! ;-)
One example is a games character you control.
Be it fighter, platformer or even a sports game, you choose the direction and the action of the player, the computer runs a preset animation to suit it. This is why computer game characters tend to look so stupid and repetitive. Some of the better companies hide this by stringing together multiple animation sequences and combining them to make them seem more varied and make them run smoother, but it's still getting old and dated.
Also, it's a pain with the gameplay.
In a fighting game, have you ever landed a perfect hit on someone, only it doesn't connected because your opponent was going through the "recovery" animation. Or you press the wrong button and nothing will stop your character from go through the "big slow kick" animation which will leave you open to attack or something.
Now what if your character had a mind of it's own?
Instead of a walking animation, the AI would work out how to move the legs in a way that would keep the body balanced.
It would choose the movement of each arm and leg depending on what it was trying to do.
You'd still control WHAT the character does, but the AI would work out HOW to do it, rather than go through standard, repetitive animation frames.
Say for example a 3D beat-em-up.
Normally you press punch and the character does a punch, straight in front of him/her regardless of what is happening, the same way EVERY time.
If the AI was thinking then the characters head would already have it's eye's on the opponent and would throw the punch in THAT direction rather than just going through the punch animation.
Some games already do a couple of tricks similar. Many games have your characters eye-ing opponents, but it's still just strung together animation frames which almost works as well.
There are somethings that animation can't handle very well though, like blocking.
EVERY game. You press block, your character goes into block position (usually putting an arm infront of their face) through the block animation, and any attack thrown at you get's blocked.
Is that how Bruce Lee and Jackie Chan block attacks?
No, it's not.
They see the punch coming and use their hands or feet to hit it away.
Finding the right block animation for every attack animation is would be tedious and impractical, but getting a computer to work out the best way to block an attack wouldn't. It wouldn't take any skill out of the game, you'd still have to press the block button, but when you did the computer AI would block the attack properly, rather than just covering their face.
There's hundreds of possibilities for AI and character motion which would make games more fluid, more realistic and give more possibilities to the gameplay than before.
The use of AI doesn't end there though.
Another example could be speech.
The audio version of motion capture is voice acting, which works quite well if done right, but again it's preset, pre-recorded and get's repetitive.
What if the computer could learn to say words properly with a voice.
Work out what tone of voice to use to make it sound as realistic as possible. Yeah, most programs that do that end up sound like Steven Hawkings but that technology is atleast 20 years old now, back in the days when Mario's 2D platforming didn't even exist yet.
If it could be done properly, next time you hear a commentator in a sports game, you won't hear the same one-liners again, and again, and again, and again, and again... :-)
Also, it would be able to read the names of your customised characters and places. In a role playing game, you could type what you wanted your character to say and watch them say it.
It would also save time on voice acting.
All the develloper would have to do is type in the dialogue and possibly add tone of voice, like excitement or drowsyness, and they could put that in like a font, just like putting bold text on a word document.
And the dialogue - what if the AI could allow the computer to choose what to say instead of reading the same pre-set dialogue over and over.
Not only would it keep it varied, if it could understand what you were saying then it would bring a whole new world of communication between you and your computer.
You could bark orders at AI controlled team mates in army games, who might obey without question, ask why you want them to all jump off a cliff or perhaps even shoot you for it! ;-)
Or how about communicating intelligently in an artificially intellegent RPG world, who's body is moving realistically because it is controlled by an intelligent AI and any other uses of artificial intelligence that I've not even thought of yet! :-)
Well that's the future of gaming. That, and playing online ofcourse. ;-)