Advanced A.I and the Future of the Gaming Industry

This is a subject rarely being talked about, and one that has always fascinated me since the day I started gaming.

Visuals are nice... but what about enemy Artificial Intelligence? Will it get more complex to the point where it can equal real behaviour in our world?

There are limitations however.

It will require alot of processing power. And not to mention, it is risky due to both lack of time and financial investment.

Did we reach our peak allready with games such as Half-Life 2? I don't think so. But the development team of Valve invested alot of focus on this particular technology. After nearly 5 years of development, they finally released the game wich received many positive reactions by all gamers.

Just like the human brain, A.I development is very complex. But there are also the facial expressions wich allow for intense emotions such as Fear, Anger, Sadness, Laughter etc.

As advanced Half-Life 2's A.I may have been for its time. In my eyes, these are merely baby steps. Games have much more potential. That is the main thing that fascinates me so much about games. The movie industry is much more restricted, and doesn't have as much room for creativity.

Notice how this game isn't as visual centric as the average game nowdays? This is Will Wright's new game, Spore. It has an advanced and complex A.I technology wich takes character evolution to a new level.

Perhaps the direction he took may influence the gaming industry to a slightly more A.I centric mentality.

The first impressions I had with GTAIV was that Rockstar didn't seem to have improved the enemy reaction's and behaviour drastically like i expected it would be. And I guess I was right... shortly after Will Wright mentioned it himself in a interview also.

Ubisoft's Tom Clancy End War has implementation of voice recognition... a form of A.I also.

How do you personally think games will look like in the future? Open your imagination, and the possibilities are endless.

The thing I'm looking forward to, is realistic character conversations. I wish Bethesda improves this in their next Elder Scrolls rpg.

I think games like Spore and Endwar could give the industry as a whole an insight into what gives a game great potential and uniqueness, with great gameplay, great graphics aren't neccesary imo.

None of those games you have listed have anything particularly advanced about AI, and you're statement of AI requireing powerful processors is dead wrong.

FEAR, a 2005 game, is largely regarded as the FPS with the best AI.

Do you realize that FEAR's AI is just as smart on a minimum spec machine as it it is running on IBM's Blue Gene? A minimum spec machine to run fear isnt much better than the original Xbox.

The reality is that A is fairly hard to sell, andinvesting heavy resources into AI is a very risky venture, where as investing in multiplayer, game length, or graphics tends to have definit, obvious pay offs.

Why use HL2 as a paragon of AI? The first HL was heads and tails above what was out there previously, but Half Life 2 (and I know Hermits will flip out at this) was overshadowed by the AI in Halo 2 in the same year. The GAME wasn't, but the AI was pretty flat in comparison to what consolites consider its rival.

Oh, and Black and White kicked both their arses about 8 times over in AI - just not as a game.Shafftehr

Half-Life 2 had better AI.

SOURCE

[QUOTE="Shafftehr"]Why use HL2 as a paragon of AI? The first HL was heads and tails above what was out there previously, but Half Life 2 (and I know Hermits will flip out at this) was overshadowed by the AI in Halo 2 in the same year. The GAME wasn't, but the AI was pretty flat in comparison to what consolites consider its rival.

Oh, and Black and White kicked both their arses about 8 times over in AI - just not as a game.VoodooGamer

Half-Life 2 had better AI.

SOURCE

The next big jump in gaming AI will be to allowing the programs to "learn" about the players they are playing against. Most AI now is already as smart as it can get, the only way it can get smarter is if it has the ability to learn... thus becoming closer to "true" AI.foxhound_fox

Maybe and NO.

AI is nowhere NEAR as smart as it can get.

Not even close.

But the next direction the industry will probably go in is learning the gamer's habits. Then again, that's not really the kind of AI the TC is talking about.

And Jesus TC, why would you use Half Life 2 when discussing intelligent AI? Half Live 2 AI was functionally handicapped.

None of those games you have listed have anything particularly advanced about AI, and you're statement of AI requireing powerful processors is dead wrong.

FEAR, a 2005 game, is largely regarded as the FPS with the best AI.

Do you realize that FEAR's AI is just as smart on a minimum spec machine as it it is running on IBM's Blue Gene? A minimum spec machine to run fear isnt much better than the original Xbox.

The reality is that A is fairly hard to sell, andinvesting heavy resources into AI is a very risky venture, where as investing in multiplayer, game length, or graphics tends to have definit, obvious pay offs.

XaosII

FEAR's AI requires a fairly low CPU power, but that's because FEAR only has to control no more than half a dozen enemies at one time. Having mass numbers of agents all with their own AI identities is the next challenge, but that relies purely on hardware.The number of collisions and interactions that can occur grows exponentially the more agents you add to the environment.

The next big jump in gaming AI will be to allowing the programs to "learn" about the players they are playing against. Most AI now is already as smart as it can get, the only way it can get smarter is if it has the ability to learn... thus becoming closer to "true" AI.foxhound_fox

Some games already do this in short bursts, Melee and Brawl come to mind.

None of those games you have listed have anything particularly advanced about AI, and you're statement of AI requireing powerful processors is dead wrong.

XaosII

Would you care to point out exactly what part of that article I'm supposed to read to prove this? I don't really feel like reading through the Wiki on a game I beat a long time ago to prove something you're too lazy to point out to me.Shafftehr

You're the one whos lazy.

It's all there, you just have to READ. :roll:

Having played both games almost side by side, I repeatedly found myself more challenged and generally impressed by Halo 2's AI than Half Life 2's. And again, Black and White beats them both on the upside of the head.
Shafftehr

Your opinion is worthless considering the fact that YOU made an OBJECTIVE stance on Half-Life 2's AI. ;)

[QUOTE="XaosII"]

None of those games you have listed have anything particularly advanced about AI, and you're statement of AI requireing powerful processors is dead wrong.

Shafftehr

the reality is that there is a trade-off. most people will buy a good looking game with slightly below average AI, rather than a game that looks terrible but has out-of-this-world AI.

Most of the time, AI that impressive is neither warranted nor desired.

But to suggest AI doesn't require powerful processing is wrong on every meaningful level.

Putting it simply, imagine even trying to create a flow-graph for the human mind? I don't think they would finish it in two life times. Even the experts barely know how it functions.

also.... In gta cops can now climb ladders and navigate to you wherever you are provided there is a way to get there. That is drastic... can you even remember what they were like in older GTAs? Crysis has realistic AI but it can be a bit numb at times.

I think the key is scripted events tbh... I don't see any other short term workaround.

[QUOTE="Shafftehr"]

Would you care to point out exactly what part of that article I'm supposed to read to prove this? I don't really feel like reading through the Wiki on a game I beat a long time ago to prove something you're too lazy to point out to me.VoodooGamer

You're the one whos lazy.

It's all there, you just have to READ. :roll:

"The game has been critically praised for its advances in computer animation, sound, narration, computer graphics, artificial intelligence (AI) and physics."

Which doesn't prove a damn thing other than that someone liked it. It doesn't suppose that it's better than Halo 2's AI (which it's not) or anything else. Just says people liked it.

How you post that link then use it to talk down to someone is beyond my ability to comprehend.

FEAR's AI requires a fairly low CPU power, but that's because FEAR only has to control no more than half a dozen enemies at one time. Having mass numbers of agents all with their own AI identities is the next challenge, but that relies purely on hardware.The number of collisions and interactions that can occur grows exponentially the more agents you add to the environment.

mjarantilla

Medieval 2's requirements are higher than FEAR, but nothing extraordinary.

You can argue that FEAR's AI per soldier is more advanced than M:TW's AI per soldier, and you'd be right, but then you need to start asking yourself "is it necessary to do so"? Not really. M:TW certianly cuz use an AI boost for the strategic level, and maybe the tactical level, but not really the per unit level.

[QUOTE="Shafftehr"]

Would you care to point out exactly what part of that article I'm supposed to read to prove this? I don't really feel like reading through the Wiki on a game I beat a long time ago to prove something you're too lazy to point out to me.VoodooGamer

You're the one whos lazy.

It's all there, you just have to READ. :roll:

Having played both games almost side by side, I repeatedly found myself more challenged and generally impressed by Halo 2's AI than Half Life 2's. And again, Black and White beats them both on the upside of the head.
Shafftehr

Your opinion is worthless considering the fact that YOU made an OBJECTIVE stance on Half-Life 2's AI. ;)

Should have used F.E.A.R. for your A.I. comparison, now that was a great game.

Also, dare I say it, Crysis. Though at times it could act a bit off, but I say we forgive those minor lapses for the sheer scale of the game. Most of the time it was brilliant. 8)

Should have used F.E.A.R. for your A.I. comparison, now that was a great game.

Also, dare I say it, Crysis. Though at times it could act a bit off, but I say we forgive those minor lapses for the sheer scale of the game. Most of the time it was brilliant. 8)

thrones

I remember when I thought I could just get away with cloaking into shacks because it worked before, but that was before the dudes with red berets and shotguns showed up... I was just lying down in a shack recovering when *BOOM* the wall fell down and some big dude with plate armour and a 12 gauge walked through where the wall was. That was my first "ohh snap" moment regarding physics awareness of AI.

[QUOTE="mjarantilla"]

FEAR's AI requires a fairly low CPU power, but that's because FEAR only has to control no more than half a dozen enemies at one time. Having mass numbers of agents all with their own AI identities is the next challenge, but that relies purely on hardware.The number of collisions and interactions that can occur grows exponentially the more agents you add to the environment.

XaosII

Medieval 2's requirements are higher than FEAR, but nothing extraordinary.

You can argue that FEAR's AI per soldier is more advanced than M:TW's AI per soldier, and you'd be right, but then you need to start asking yourself "is it necessary to do so"? Not really. M:TW certianly cuz use an AI boost for the strategic level, and maybe the tactical level, but not really the per unit level.

Well, that's the other end of the scale. But just as an example, my old PC (a 3.0GHz P4) could run FEAR just fine, a 2005 game, just fine, but when I tried playing an 4v4 game of C&C Generals (a 2003 game), it would really slow down towards the endgame when there were hundreds of units swarming all over the map, and even though the AI for those units was extremely simple, it still bogged down my CPU to a crawl because of sheer numbers.

A game closer to the middle of the spectrum, the ones which have to balance AI complexity with agent count, would have the most trouble with AI. These are games like GTAIV, which require all agents to have their own relatively complex AI, while also requiring the engine to track up to a hundred or more agents at one time. I'm sure there are ways to optimize, but it probably still poses a problem, especially as developers try to increase the number of agents.

I don't see any reason to read something that contradicts what I have seen EVIDENCED through multiple playthroughs of both games. You're the one trying to convince me - why do you expect ME to read something when YOU are the one interested in convincing me?Shaffer

You don't feel the need to read something that contradicts your train-wreck of an opinion? I'm sorry but if you're too ignorant then you have no place in my presence. Please move along. ;)

My opinion is quite worthwhile to me. Again, after multiple playthroughs of each game, I was notably more impressed by what I saw enemies doing in Halo 2 than in Half Life 2. Squad AI was about equal, and while I got hung up on Half Life 2 allies much more oftne, the game was much more cramped.

So again, if YOU want to convince ME of this, you can show me what I have to read. I know what I saw, and I don't really care what HL2 wiki says.Shaffer

The fact that your beginning post took an objective stance on the AI of Half-Life 2 negates any subjective argument you may have. Don't like it? Too bad.

PS - go here:

http://www.literatureproject.com/republic/republic_14.htm

THere is definitive proof in there that Halo 2 has better AI than HL3 on the page linked. Don't believe me? Won't read it? You're lazy - read the whole thing and you'll see. Have a nice day.Shaffer

Lazy? Lets see what the mods think of that shall we? ;)

yep i think graphics have achieved enough for gaming (crysis), realistic A.I. is the next horizon. with pc games it will see leaps and bounds of progress in the next few years.paullywog

AI is the final horizon.

Anyone who's spent any time learning about AI knows why. It would take so much time, energy, effort and money invested to make even remotely good AI, game companies would go broke.

Best bet for decent AI anytime in the next 10 years would be for a pool of the very best AI programmers from each company to get together and be locked in together for 5 years while they work on a scalable AI engine. The Unreal Engine 3 of AI, so to speak.

AI is probably the most difficult thing to create. And you can forget about intelligent AI on a massive scale (battles with lots of enemies), becuase those will be dumb until we're old and grey. it would simply require too much processing power to proportion intelligent AI across dozens of enemies. simply urealistic.

You don't feel the need to read something that contradicts your train-wreck of an opinion? I'm sorry but if you're too ignorant then you have no place in my presence. Please move along. ;)

The fact that your beginning post took an objective stance on the AI of Half-Life 2 negates any subjective argument you may have. Don't like it? Too bad.

Lazy? Lets see what the mods think of that shall we? ;)

VoodooGamer

stop talking to people like their stupid.Dreams-Visions

I'm not, lern2red.

All your WIKI link says is:

"The game has been critically praised for its advances in computer animation, sound, narration, computer graphics, artificial intelligence (AI) and physics."

Which doesn't prove a damn thing other than that someone liked it. It doesn't suppose that it's better than Halo 2's AI (which it's not) or anything else. Just says people liked it.

The fact that I used a source that shows the AI was highly-applauded does mean something especially since you have yet to provide any source. Your opinion is in the minority which further proves my point and solidifies my opinion that Half-Life 2's AI was better.

How you post that link then use it to talk down to someone is beyond my ability to comprehend.

DW

You need to read better. Debating /=/ talking down. ;)

Why use HL2 as a paragon of AI? The first HL was heads and tails above what was out there previously, but Half Life 2 (and I know Hermits will flip out at this) was overshadowed by the AI in Halo 2 in the same year. The GAME wasn't, but the AI was pretty flat in comparison to what consolites consider its rival.

Oh, and Black and White kicked both their arses about 8 times over in AI - just not as a game.Shafftehr

[QUOTE="Dreams-Visions"]

stop talking to people like their stupid.VoodooGamer

I'm not, lern2red.

All your WIKI link says is:

"The game has been critically praised for its advances in computer animation, sound, narration, computer graphics, artificial intelligence (AI) and physics."

Which doesn't prove a damn thing other than that someone liked it. It doesn't suppose that it's better than Halo 2's AI (which it's not) or anything else. Just says people liked it.

The fact that I used a source that shows the AI was highly-applauded does mean something especially since you have yet to provide any source. Your opinion is in the minority which further proves my point and solidifies my opinion that Half-Life 2's AI was better.

How you post that link then use it to talk down to someone is beyond my ability to comprehend.

DW

You need to read better. Debating /=/ talking down. ;)

I've learned at this point in life that everything isn't worth the time or hard feelings. ;)

I don't feel the nead to leaf through pages of information to find some individual quote that someone claims contradicts my "train wreck" of an opinion formed thorugh extensive experience playing both games.Shafftehr

Two playthroughes is EXTENSIVE experience now?? :lol:

My original post stated what seems quite obvious to me after multiple playthroughs of both games on multiple difficulties. If you care to contradict it, feel free to find me what you think does. It would have to be quite something to make me think that extensive observation is simply wrong.Shaffer

Uh oh..

Want to see what the mods think? Fill your boots. And while you're at it, that evidence is still waiting there in the link provided. Too lazy to read it all to find the information I vaguely referenced?Shaffer

I read your slip-shod link and it doesn't prove anything. And the fact that you're flaming (Lazy) is the reason why a mod is going to lock you up. :)

I think HL2's AI was pretty basic, but a HUGE chunk of what people think of as 'good ai' is related to the survivability of the enemies you fight - in HL2 they were pretty easy to kill. In FEAR, HL1 and Halo in general, the AI takes a few shots to die, and so gets time to show off their cool AI tricks and programming. Ditto for Far Cry and Crysis. People complained about the bad guys taking a lot of chest shots to die, but you had time to see them flex their intelligence. In... say, Rainbow Six (older games), they'd basically die or you'd die the instant you had LOS on each other, and so the AI had no chance to leave much of an impression.Makari

[QUOTE="VoodooGamer"][QUOTE="Shafftehr"]

I don't feel the nead to leaf through pages of information to find some individual quote that someone claims contradicts my "train wreck" of an opinion formed thorugh extensive experience playing both games.Shafftehr

Two playthroughes is EXTENSIVE experience now?? :lol:

My original post stated what seems quite obvious to me after multiple playthroughs of both games on multiple difficulties. If you care to contradict it, feel free to find me what you think does. It would have to be quite something to make me think that extensive observation is simply wrong.Shaffer

Uh oh..

Want to see what the mods think? Fill your boots. And while you're at it, that evidence is still waiting there in the link provided. Too lazy to read it all to find the information I vaguely referenced?Shaffer

I read your slip-shod link and it doesn't prove anything. And the fact that you're flaming (Lazy) is the reason why a mod is going to lock you up. :)

Ok, you're trolling, and it's obvious. Have a nice day.

You have got to be **** kidding me...:roll:

I assume you call anyone who wins a debate a troll eh? As well as lazy too.

Hmmm yes it's about time we see some better AI. Original Half Life is pretty much the last time I was wowed by AI. Although that guard who chased me over hills and through a river in Oblivion was cool too :P

The problem is improvements graphics, sound, campaign length, multiplayer, new features etc are all very easy to see progress in, while better AI is much more intangible. It being so timeconsuming and expensive to create good AI, the goal for most games is simply get it working, provide some basic intelligence and not be completely broken. As someone already suggested the best bet for great AI in the future would be a reusable engine designed by the best and brightest, and used for many games.

I can't wait for the day when I can walk up to an npc in a game and we can hold a conversation, based on what IT thinks, and not what the creator's want it to think. Imagine playing a game like the Elder Scrolls V and going through a city asking for them to sign a petition against slavery in the black marsh, and each individual person has their own specific reason for signing it or not. Also diversity in voice actors would work well. It would also be fantastic if they used hand gestures, and facial motions to show if they were really thinking about something, scoffing at it, or just plain wanting to get the hell out of there. :)MGSFan92

I saw a mud crab today. Dreadful things. xxastrocreepxx

Got a laugh out of me :).

[QUOTE="Dreams-Visions"]

stop talking to people like their stupid.VoodooGamer

I'm not, lern2red.

All your WIKI link says is:

"The game has been critically praised for its advances in computer animation, sound, narration, computer graphics, artificial intelligence (AI) and physics."

Which doesn't prove a damn thing other than that someone liked it. It doesn't suppose that it's better than Halo 2's AI (which it's not) or anything else. Just says people liked it.

The fact that I used a source that shows the AI was highly-applauded does mean something especially since you have yet to provide any source. Your opinion is in the minority which further proves my point and solidifies my opinion that Half-Life 2's AI was better.

How you post that link then use it to talk down to someone is beyond my ability to comprehend.

DW

You need to read better. Debating /=/ talking down. ;)

So because wiki'edia said the AI was praised, that some how makes it better than games like Crysis and FEAR?

I saw a mud crab today. Dreadful things. xxastrocreepxx

lol best oblivion quote ever

Im sorry i love Half Life 2 but it's AI was Sub Par for it's time:?

Halo 2 had better AI, and im not being a fanboy:|

Welcome to the future of gaming a.i. people.

Its not a shooter, god simulator, sandbox game, role playing or strategy game. Instead it comes in the form of an interactive Drama.

Facade.

For all its worth its pretty amazing, and well worth the 200mb download.

Very very very impressive stuff.

Why use HL2 as a paragon of AI? The first HL was heads and tails above what was out there previously, but Half Life 2 (and I know Hermits will flip out at this) was overshadowed by the AI in Halo 2 in the same year. The GAME wasn't, but the AI was pretty flat in comparison to what consolites consider its rival.

Oh, and Black and White kicked both their arses about 8 times over in AI - just not as a game.Shafftehr

Black and Whites a.i certainly was impressive.

Welcome to the future of gaming a.i. people.

Its not a shooter, god simulator, sandbox game, role playing or strategy game. Instead it comes in the form of an interactive Drama.

Facade.

For all its worth its pretty amazing, and well worth the 200mb download.

Very very very impressive stuff.

skrat_01

Yeh I've seen that before. It was pretty entertaining at the start, but after a while you start to notice its flaws.

Here is what I find funny about all thise chatter about AI. People keep talking about bad AI, stopid enemies, etc. BUt they don't WANT real AI. If games had realistic AI then 99% of the people who complained about AI would be getting creamed the second they start the game.

I don't care how good you are at Madden, you aren't an NHL coach. Not even close. I don't care how good you are at FPS...you are not a marine. You are not a race car driver, you are not a military general and you are not a pilot of any shape or form. Therefore, if the AI WAS realistic, and you were required to have the knowledge, experience and expertise of these people to realistically play those types of games, then they would suck and people would cry about it.

Games are essentially made to be beaten. Therefore, AI is not supposed to be real. It is designed so somebody can pick up the controller, and with a little practice, beat the game and move on.

Why use HL2 as a paragon of AI? The first HL was heads and tails above what was out there previously, but Half Life 2 (and I know Hermits will flip out at this) was overshadowed by the AI in Halo 2 in the same year. The GAME wasn't, but the AI was pretty flat in comparison to what consolites consider its rival.

Oh, and Black and White kicked both their arses about 8 times over in AI - just not as a game.Shafftehr

LoL halo 2 had A.I.?

One of games with great AI is F.E.A.R.

Here is what I find funny about all thise chatter about AI. People keep talking about bad AI, stopid enemies, etc. BUt they don't WANT real AI. If games had realistic AI then 99% of the people who complained about AI would be getting creamed the second they start the game.

I don't care how good you are at Madden, you aren't an NHL coach. Not even close. I don't care how good you are at FPS...you are not a marine. You are not a race car driver, you are not a military general and you are not a pilot of any shape or form. Therefore, if the AI WAS realistic, and you were required to have the knowledge, experience and expertise of these people to realistically play those types of games, then they would suck and people would cry about it.

Games are essentially made to be beaten. Therefore, AI is not supposed to be real. It is designed so somebody can pick up the controller, and with a little practice, beat the game and move on.

ZIMdoom

There are different forms of A.I technology. Realistic conversations for example, won't make the difficulty any harder.

You can implement specific type of A.I depending on the genre of the game. Imagine a next-generation Rainbow Six game, where you can cooperate with your squad better then the previous games.

A.I =/= always difficulty. But you make a good point though.