Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Sign in to follow this  
Zoost

Trust

Recommended Posts

I'm a bit disapointed in Id or in their CEO (what's his name) because he told in several interviews about the RTCW AI that:

1. Soldiers pick up granades and throw them back
2. Soldiers kick back granades
3. Soldiers use surrounding objects for cover (like tables etc.)
4. and he said something like "sometimes I watch the enemy behavior, and I realise how scary the human-like AI behavior is "

My observations:
1.2. I played SP twice and thrown quite a bit of granades, but soldiers don't throw or kick granades back.
3. I noticed only 1 scripted event where a soldiers throws a table to use cover. But this is scripted.
4. The Id CEO makes the suggestion that it is scary how good the AI is, that is not my opinion.

Is it that a CEO will always speak in marketing language, or can we still trust him?

Share this post


Link to post

2. Soldiers kick back granades

kicking a granade is considered smart?

Share this post


Link to post

Believe me, the Nazi soldiers do kick the grenades back. I'm yet to see one throw one back, though. The 'environment' isn't just chairs - they use world geometry (like walls) for cover as well.

And I agree that the AI really isn't 'scary' in any way... But then, CEO's like Todd Hollenshead are supposed to exaggerate about their products.

Share this post


Link to post

the soldier do kick back the granades.i noticed that.

Soilders pick up granades and thow them back

i think not
the soldier do kick back the granades.i noticed that.
the soldier that throwing table is scripted.
AI is ok,but it is that not impressive.
thier CEO overhyped RTCW.i think the developer did`t so hype their game that much as Todd hollenshead did.

Share this post


Link to post

In Medal Of Honor for the Playstation they throw and kick grenades back.


Plus they also use geometry for cover...

MOH kicks arse! (sorry about my blatent use of swearing but I feel that very way about MOH)

Share this post


Link to post

CEO's tend to overhype. All developers do, as a matter of fact I barely pay attention to the interviews and go straight to the screenshots. They tell much more about the real gameplay.

The soldiers on RtCW do know how to put some challenge, just as any AI that heavily uses scripts (from Half-Life up to MoH:AA). There are no great, free-will AIs yet, so don't expect anything like that for some years more.

Share this post


Link to post

the soldiers do kick the grenades back....i know this...well. I learned it the hard way ;)

They only kick them back at you, when you throw the grenade directly at their feet. If the grenade just lands a few feet next to them, they just run for cover.

And I've seen soldiers kick over tables a number of times too. I'm not sure if it's just a scripted event or actual "AI" though, but I don't care as it's a nice touch no matter what it is.

Share this post


Link to post

It's scripted. Anything that complex needs scripting.

There are no good AIs on FPSs, I'll say it again. The trick is to not let the player know that. Take for example Half-Life, for years it was the "coolest AI ever". It looks like some people never realized you could just hit quickload, and watch the guys do the same over and over no matter what you do. You can even shoot at the air and let the fools cross the fire.

But this time Doom is about brute creatures that rely on speed or an insane amount of hitpoints. That's easier to do. Just take a look at Quake, pretty much all the creatures are really hard to fight. I just can't escape 4 Fiends at the same time, and the thought of two Shamblers on a narrow corridor freaks me out. Let's not talk about the Vorids :)

It's harder to realize there are flaws on the enemy AI when they're like nothing on this earth.

Share this post


Link to post

monster AI can be predictable,but good monster AI is still hard to encounter (see zaldron's post).and i have to add that purple blob bastard in the list too.they is fast ,annoying.and they can exploded themselves.four blobs in the same screen is much more terrifying than four fiends.

i'm not in faver of human-like AI much.coz i still see AI flaws.and there are not much varieties in that human enemy too.only weapon they hold or thier uniforn that is changed.overall AI behavior is the same.

Share this post


Link to post

Now we're talking about humanlike AI, I'd like to share my 'wishes' on some of the AI in the new Doom (just to hear some feedback, i.e. "you don't know what you're talkin' about moron!").

I want to see the 'former humans' exhibit a slightly humanoid behaviour (if we imagine that these dopes remember what they learned while human), meaning that the first thing they should do when they spot you, is to open fire at you instead of just running stupidly around (I would also be happy to see them cover each other). Also when you use melee weapons (or if some imp has been pissed off and attacks them) they'll do what they can to keep a decent distance, so that they take advantage of their hit-scan weapons' capablilities - this is what I've noticed is the former humans' greatest weakness in all of Id's older shooters: they allow melee enemies to go close to them, when they could deal out more damage from afar instead of gettin' ripped to shreds.
RtCW's soldiers actually back away, when zombie knights attack them (at least to an extent).

Share this post


Link to post

I dont think real AI would be possible with the resorces we have available today

exactly, it's not, and won't be any time soon. I heard on the discovery channel that it might be possible in the next 50 years. Personally I don't have a clue how they would go about creating it, and besides "Artificial Intelligents" would mean "Artificial Life" and that would mean "Playing God".

Share this post


Link to post

I dont think real AI would be possible with the resorces we have available today

exactly, it's not, and won't be any time soon. I heard on the discovery channel that it might be possible in the next 50 years. Personally I don't have a clue how they would go about creating it, and besides "Artificial Intelligents" would mean "Artificial Life" and that would mean "Playing God".

What limited resources? Our intelligence is unlimited, well except some forum goers, and they may prove otherwise. Anyway, if we can have "things" (AI) playing chess and winning, I think, it will be possible to further enhance the "foe".
One way I am tinkering with is giving some foes random variables. Some run, some hide, and some attack. Well that's not true AI either, but makes them less predictable, just like real people in real live, therefore just a little harder to overcome. In other words, for as long we got script capabilities, only our imagination and current computer capabilities are the limits to make good games.

To create real AI, means to give "freedom" of thought to the computer unit. Got nothing to do with playing god. We only have not figured out how to go about it yet. It just needs the next Einstein to figure something. Maybe tomorrow, maybe next year, - fifty years? Who calculated that? Certainly not someone of higher intelligence, rather someone with nothing better to do.

Share this post


Link to post

I consider anything that can think for itself alive, even if it's stripped of emotions. True emotions are a part of life but they are not a necessity, they are only chemicals that make your brain work diffrently. If a person would damage the organs responsible for making the chemicals that make your brain give you the sensation of love and happyness you would still be alive and by all means human. True he would most likely have a pointless and shitty life but that's besides the point.

Share this post


Link to post

I agree with Orion. There's people out there who can't feel hunger, thirst or sleep because of a damaged hipotalamus.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
×