"
But "learning" is not what game AI does. And it REALLY gets you in trouble from a design standpoint when it is attempted.
(Do I really need to keep typing "game AI" every time instead of "AI" on a message board devoted, by its very nature, to "games"?)
"
That is why I mentioned offline -- though we ARE getting sufficient processing resources to do some (more than a little) 'adaption' in-game.
One of the problem with AI is the the huge amount of logic it takes as it gets better (more 'intelligent') and a big part of an AI task is building that logic.
Having the system's "learning" of that logic efficient has to happen -- some by observing player behavior - mimicing, others by building the logic dircted by a human (which becomes the choke point no matter how fast the computer gets).
Even 'emergent behavior' (touted by so much AI literature) has to be applied selectively by a human (emergent behavior that is wrong is worse than none).
Ditto for NN which is still built up and culled by a human hand (training sets and controlled learning cycles and disposing of mis-grown NN)
What is the A* search without the hand tailored heuristics which can grow horrendously as the game complexity grows. The further step of a meta search to create the proper heuristics is closer to "AI" (and yes, that will probably have to happen 'out-of-game' for a long time yet)
----
You might also have to come up with a new term "Intelligence Simulation" to really express the truth about most 'Game AI'
Show differencesHistory of post edits
#2wodinoneeye
Posted 03 October 2012 - 10:21 PM
"
But "learning" is not what game AI does. And it REALLY gets you in trouble from a design standpoint when it is attempted.
(Do I really need to keep typing "game AI" every time instead of "AI" on a message board devoted, by its very nature, to "games"?)
"
That is why I mentioned offline -- though we ARE getting sufficient processing resources to do some (more than a little) 'adaption' in-game.
One of the problem with AI is the the huge amount of logic it takes as it gets better (more 'intelligent') and a big part of an AI task is building that logic.
Having the system's "learning" of that logic efficient has to happen -- some by observing player behavior - mimicing, others by building the logic dircted by a human (which becomes the choke point no matter how fast the computer gets).
Even 'emergent behavior' (touted by so much AI literature) has to be applied selectively by a human (emergent behavior that is wrong is worse than none).
Ditto for NN which is still built up and culled by a human hand (training sets and controlled learning cycles and disposing of mis-grown NN)
What is the A* search without the hand tailoerd heuristics which can grow horrendously as the game complexity grows. The further step of a meta search to create the proper heuristics is closer to "AI" (and yes, that will probably have to happen 'out-of-game' for a long time yet)
----
You might also have to come up with a new term "Intelligence Simulation" to really express the truth about most 'Game AI'
But "learning" is not what game AI does. And it REALLY gets you in trouble from a design standpoint when it is attempted.
(Do I really need to keep typing "game AI" every time instead of "AI" on a message board devoted, by its very nature, to "games"?)
"
That is why I mentioned offline -- though we ARE getting sufficient processing resources to do some (more than a little) 'adaption' in-game.
One of the problem with AI is the the huge amount of logic it takes as it gets better (more 'intelligent') and a big part of an AI task is building that logic.
Having the system's "learning" of that logic efficient has to happen -- some by observing player behavior - mimicing, others by building the logic dircted by a human (which becomes the choke point no matter how fast the computer gets).
Even 'emergent behavior' (touted by so much AI literature) has to be applied selectively by a human (emergent behavior that is wrong is worse than none).
Ditto for NN which is still built up and culled by a human hand (training sets and controlled learning cycles and disposing of mis-grown NN)
What is the A* search without the hand tailoerd heuristics which can grow horrendously as the game complexity grows. The further step of a meta search to create the proper heuristics is closer to "AI" (and yes, that will probably have to happen 'out-of-game' for a long time yet)
----
You might also have to come up with a new term "Intelligence Simulation" to really express the truth about most 'Game AI'
#1wodinoneeye
Posted 03 October 2012 - 10:16 PM
"
But "learning" is not what game AI does. And it REALLY gets you in trouble from a design standpoint when it is attempted.
(Do I really need to keep typing "game AI" every time instead of "AI" on a message board devoted, by its very nature, to "games"?)
"
That is why I mentioned offline -- though we ARE getting sufficient (more than a little) processing resources to do some 'adaption' in-game.
One of the problem with AI is the the huge amount of logic it takes as it gets better (more 'intelligent') and a big part of an AI task is building that logic.
Having the system's "learning" of that logic efficient has to happen -- some by observing player behavior - mimicing, others by building the logic dircted by a human (which becomes the choke point no matter how fast the computer gets).
Even 'emergent behavior' (touted by so much AI literature) has to be applied selectively by a human (emergent behavior that is wrong is worse than none).
Ditto for NN which is still built up and culled by a human hand (training sets and controlled learning cycles and disposing of mis-grown NN)
----
You might also have to come up with a new term "Intelligence Simulation" to really express the truth about most 'Game AI'
But "learning" is not what game AI does. And it REALLY gets you in trouble from a design standpoint when it is attempted.
(Do I really need to keep typing "game AI" every time instead of "AI" on a message board devoted, by its very nature, to "games"?)
"
That is why I mentioned offline -- though we ARE getting sufficient (more than a little) processing resources to do some 'adaption' in-game.
One of the problem with AI is the the huge amount of logic it takes as it gets better (more 'intelligent') and a big part of an AI task is building that logic.
Having the system's "learning" of that logic efficient has to happen -- some by observing player behavior - mimicing, others by building the logic dircted by a human (which becomes the choke point no matter how fast the computer gets).
Even 'emergent behavior' (touted by so much AI literature) has to be applied selectively by a human (emergent behavior that is wrong is worse than none).
Ditto for NN which is still built up and culled by a human hand (training sets and controlled learning cycles and disposing of mis-grown NN)
----
You might also have to come up with a new term "Intelligence Simulation" to really express the truth about most 'Game AI'