The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
We like a challenge, that's one of the reasons we play games; to take our abilities into the virtual world. Are we being challanged enough or is the level of AI still too low? Computer-game designers face that challenge every day: how to imbue their work with enough intelligence so players will involve themselves in fantasy worlds. From the outside, it may appear that gaming companies are giving academic theorists a run for their money, at least in terms of practical AI applications.
Networked play has long been the main attraction for first-person shooters. Legions of devoted warriors spend their free time chasing others in underworlds of fantasy, blasting away enemy players or teams. Solo play pales when it's set against the range of action and smart unpredictability of real opponents and allies. Valve and other game companies are working to fix that.
A top priority for programmers of this genre, like WarCraft or Age of Empires, is increasing the intelligence of units under a player's control. The developers of Myth II went one better by raising the intelligence of the game's creatures. Balancing players' demands with technical limitations is the name of the game.
Gaming developers believe that strong AI could improve certain aspects of the games, like creating more challenging opponents and interesting sidekicks. It might also enhance the game's camera or point of view, as well as the graphics engine making smart rendering decisions. Newby, at Electronic Arts, already uses algorithms to generate crowd noises in simulated ballparks. For now, most of these improvements are on hold while game companies focus on developing strong visuals.
AI in gaming is just reaching the point where these kinds of spontaneously generated, emotionally significant events can happen. If all gamers are as excited as I, virtual beings in games may soon become as confusing, surprising, and interesting as other humans. At least more interesting than those in chat rooms.
Do you feel as though Shoot em ups are reachin there maximum level of AI or is there still room to challenge us the gamer?
Networked play has long been the main attraction for first-person shooters. Legions of devoted warriors spend their free time chasing others in underworlds of fantasy, blasting away enemy players or teams. Solo play pales when it's set against the range of action and smart unpredictability of real opponents and allies. Valve and other game companies are working to fix that.
A top priority for programmers of this genre, like WarCraft or Age of Empires, is increasing the intelligence of units under a player's control. The developers of Myth II went one better by raising the intelligence of the game's creatures. Balancing players' demands with technical limitations is the name of the game.
Gaming developers believe that strong AI could improve certain aspects of the games, like creating more challenging opponents and interesting sidekicks. It might also enhance the game's camera or point of view, as well as the graphics engine making smart rendering decisions. Newby, at Electronic Arts, already uses algorithms to generate crowd noises in simulated ballparks. For now, most of these improvements are on hold while game companies focus on developing strong visuals.
AI in gaming is just reaching the point where these kinds of spontaneously generated, emotionally significant events can happen. If all gamers are as excited as I, virtual beings in games may soon become as confusing, surprising, and interesting as other humans. At least more interesting than those in chat rooms.
Do you feel as though Shoot em ups are reachin there maximum level of AI or is there still room to challenge us the gamer?
I think that no Shoot 'Em up games are easy. If you put the level on it's hardest, then I'm sure that nobody would find it really easy.
Anyone?
We like a challenge, that's one of the reasons we play games; to take our abilities into the virtual world. Are we being challanged enough or is the level of AI still too low? Computer-game designers face that challenge every day: how to imbue their work with enough intelligence so players will involve themselves in fantasy worlds. From the outside, it may appear that gaming companies are giving academic theorists a run for their money, at least in terms of practical AI applications.
Networked play has long been the main attraction for first-person shooters. Legions of devoted warriors spend their free time chasing others in underworlds of fantasy, blasting away enemy players or teams. Solo play pales when it's set against the range of action and smart unpredictability of real opponents and allies. Valve and other game companies are working to fix that.
A top priority for programmers of this genre, like WarCraft or Age of Empires, is increasing the intelligence of units under a player's control. The developers of Myth II went one better by raising the intelligence of the game's creatures. Balancing players' demands with technical limitations is the name of the game.
Gaming developers believe that strong AI could improve certain aspects of the games, like creating more challenging opponents and interesting sidekicks. It might also enhance the game's camera or point of view, as well as the graphics engine making smart rendering decisions. Newby, at Electronic Arts, already uses algorithms to generate crowd noises in simulated ballparks. For now, most of these improvements are on hold while game companies focus on developing strong visuals.
AI in gaming is just reaching the point where these kinds of spontaneously generated, emotionally significant events can happen. If all gamers are as excited as I, virtual beings in games may soon become as confusing, surprising, and interesting as other humans. At least more interesting than those in chat rooms.
Do you feel as though Shoot em ups are reachin there maximum level of AI or is there still room to challenge us the gamer?
Networked play has long been the main attraction for first-person shooters. Legions of devoted warriors spend their free time chasing others in underworlds of fantasy, blasting away enemy players or teams. Solo play pales when it's set against the range of action and smart unpredictability of real opponents and allies. Valve and other game companies are working to fix that.
A top priority for programmers of this genre, like WarCraft or Age of Empires, is increasing the intelligence of units under a player's control. The developers of Myth II went one better by raising the intelligence of the game's creatures. Balancing players' demands with technical limitations is the name of the game.
Gaming developers believe that strong AI could improve certain aspects of the games, like creating more challenging opponents and interesting sidekicks. It might also enhance the game's camera or point of view, as well as the graphics engine making smart rendering decisions. Newby, at Electronic Arts, already uses algorithms to generate crowd noises in simulated ballparks. For now, most of these improvements are on hold while game companies focus on developing strong visuals.
AI in gaming is just reaching the point where these kinds of spontaneously generated, emotionally significant events can happen. If all gamers are as excited as I, virtual beings in games may soon become as confusing, surprising, and interesting as other humans. At least more interesting than those in chat rooms.
Do you feel as though Shoot em ups are reachin there maximum level of AI or is there still room to challenge us the gamer?