Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

We're offering banner ads on our site from just $5!

1. Details HERE. 2. GDNet+ Subscriptions HERE. 3. Ad upload HERE.


#ActualAllEightUp

Posted 23 April 2013 - 12:35 AM

Tell the truth, I'd be hard pressed to say what is and what is not fuzzy logic according to a true definition.  What I mean is that if you have five options and they are weighted, normalize them to be 0-1 portions of a continuous range and randomly select one.  I suppose the argument could be that true fuzzy logic has a better distribution, or more proper math basis etc, blah, screw it, the easy way always seemed to work quite well so why get overly complicated?  More important than some technical term for how you choose things is quite simple: is it fun?  Fuzzy logic has a place I'm sure, but the full blown 'technically correct' version seems like a lot of work for something which can be done pretty closely using greatly simplified methods.

 

Take the mentioned game from the article: The Sims.  If you have the original 1 version, install it and make a house with four of everything.  The Sim always does the most appropriate actions.  The selection of actions was just randomly selecting from the top four actions which will positively impact the motivations.  If the sim needs to go to the bathroom and there are four toilets, they will always use one when that it the highest motivation.  Without 4 items, they may go watch TV instead and end up peeing on the floor as a result.  It's simple 1 in 4 chance that they do the correct thing in the original implementation.  Of course, very few folks realized how simple the AI was because the emergent behavior was often so entertaining, sometimes smart, sometimes like watching a slow motion train wreck... smile.png


#1AllEightUp

Posted 23 April 2013 - 12:32 AM

Tell the truth, I'd be hard pressed to say what is and what is not fuzzy logic according to a true definition.  What I mean is that if you have five options and they are weighted, normalize them to be 0-1 portions of a continuous range and randomly select one.  I suppose the argument could be that true fuzzy logic has a better distribution, or more proper math basis etc, blah, screw it, the easy way always seemed to work quite well so why get overly complicated?  More important than some technical term for how you choose things is quite simple: is it fun?  Fuzzy logic has a place I'm sure, but the full blown 'technically correct' version seems like a lot of work for something which can be done pretty closely using greatly simplified methods.

 

Take the mentioned game from the article: The Sims.  If you have the original 1 version, install it and make a house with four of everything.  The Sim always does the most appropriate actions because the selection of actions was just randomly selecting from the top four actions which will positively impact the motivations.  If the sim needs to go to the bathroom and there are four toilets, they will always use one when that it the highest motivation.  Without 4 items, they may go watch TV instead and end up peeing on the floor as a result.  It's simple 1 in 4 chance that they do the correct thing in the original implementation.  Of course, very few folks realized how simple the AI was because the emergent behavior was often so entertaining, sometimes smart, sometimes like watching a slow motion train wreck... :)


PARTNERS