• Announcements

    • khawk

      Download the Game Design and Indie Game Marketing Freebook   07/19/17

      GameDev.net and CRC Press have teamed up to bring a free ebook of content curated from top titles published by CRC Press. The freebook, Practices of Game Design & Indie Game Marketing, includes chapters from The Art of Game Design: A Book of Lenses, A Practical Guide to Indie Game Marketing, and An Architectural Approach to Level Design. The GameDev.net FreeBook is relevant to game designers, developers, and those interested in learning more about the challenges in game development. We know game development can be a tough discipline and business, so we picked several chapters from CRC Press titles that we thought would be of interest to you, the GameDev.net audience, in your journey to design, develop, and market your next game. The free ebook is available through CRC Press by clicking here. The Curated Books The Art of Game Design: A Book of Lenses, Second Edition, by Jesse Schell Presents 100+ sets of questions, or different lenses, for viewing a game’s design, encompassing diverse fields such as psychology, architecture, music, film, software engineering, theme park design, mathematics, anthropology, and more. Written by one of the world's top game designers, this book describes the deepest and most fundamental principles of game design, demonstrating how tactics used in board, card, and athletic games also work in video games. It provides practical instruction on creating world-class games that will be played again and again. View it here. A Practical Guide to Indie Game Marketing, by Joel Dreskin Marketing is an essential but too frequently overlooked or minimized component of the release plan for indie games. A Practical Guide to Indie Game Marketing provides you with the tools needed to build visibility and sell your indie games. With special focus on those developers with small budgets and limited staff and resources, this book is packed with tangible recommendations and techniques that you can put to use immediately. As a seasoned professional of the indie game arena, author Joel Dreskin gives you insight into practical, real-world experiences of marketing numerous successful games and also provides stories of the failures. View it here. An Architectural Approach to Level Design This is one of the first books to integrate architectural and spatial design theory with the field of level design. The book presents architectural techniques and theories for level designers to use in their own work. It connects architecture and level design in different ways that address the practical elements of how designers construct space and the experiential elements of how and why humans interact with this space. Throughout the text, readers learn skills for spatial layout, evoking emotion through gamespaces, and creating better levels through architectural theory. View it here. Learn more and download the ebook by clicking here. Did you know? GameDev.net and CRC Press also recently teamed up to bring GDNet+ Members up to a 20% discount on all CRC Press books. Learn more about this and other benefits here.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
DarkThrone

Why is so hard to find anything useful?

67 posts in this topic

Twenty years ago if I posted a question on the internet there was a good chance that it would be answered. Of course twenty years ago if you had access to the internet and were capable of accessing usenet you KNEW how to ask a question. Does this mean that in the last twenty years people have become more arrogant or no longer feel the need to "share knowledge?" No. In my opinion the only thing that has changed over the last twenty years is the quality of questions. A lot of times they are either too vague or general for anyone to provide a response. While they could certain make a few assumptions and provide a couple of answers nobody is going to spend 20 minutes on a reply that in all probability doesn't answer the question.

The second issue is one of research (as pointed out by ApochPiQ). It's not unreasonable to expect that people research a topic they are interested in. Considering that at the top of this page are links to columns, articles, and other resources. In addition to the typical suggestion of "google is your friend" so is Wikipedia. If you search for AI on Wikipedia you get a list of possible topics such as cognitive science, connectionism, fuzzy systems, and statistical inference. You may not know what any of those topics are (or what they even mean) but you now have somewhere to start. After reading about some of those topics you will most certainly have a few questions. The difference is that instead of asking "where can I find out about AI" you end up asking "are there any good websites that cover fuzzy logic in games". It's more specific and you're likely to get several answers rather than absolute silence.

I also think there's a misconception about forums being for "sharing of knowledge". Sharing knowledge is not an absolute. It comes in many forms and not all are obvious. You might gain knowlege by participating in a forum thread debating the merits using fuzzy logic to augment an existing approach to game AI. It doesn't necessarily mean that any specific knowledge is going to be "shared" but when the discussion is over chances are you will have learned something about fuzzy logic.



One link with more than enough resources start researching AI: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_intelligence
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by DarkThrone
The problem, Sagar_Indurkhya, is that mathematics is not the key to IA, only a tool to build it.


I disagree. While there is certainly a huge debate about how much math and which algorithms are best suited for AI, mathematics is a very key component in its development AND understanding. Emotions have little to do with AI. Many highly intelligent people (many in the genius range) exhibit some degree of autism and may lack certain emotional responses. In my opinion emotions are the exact opposite of intelligence. Given a particular situation a person may make decisions to do things they would otherwise avoid if they did not have particular emotions.

If you're going to continue with the assertion that psychology is needed to gain insight into AI explain why it's so important, what it contributes, and why AI cannot be obtained without it.



Quote:
Ah, only to remember, the Occam's Razor, that is kicked some posts ago.
WeirdoFu, I think YOU don't understand the principle of it. Occam's Razor principle is "On two possibilities, the more simple one are the right one."


That's one way to interpret it although I don't consider it very accurate. Occam's razor is typically expressed as "all things being equal, the simplest answer is usually the right one." In practice the number of solutions are not limited to two nor is the probable solution expressed as an absolute. Regardless of how you interpret Occam's razor you still have to get to the point of having multiple solutions to choose from.

I understand your desire to learn from discussion but many of the questions and comments you're posted are illogical. When discussing theory it's foolish to ask someone for a concrete solution in hopes of proving them wrong. After all if you have a concrete solution that proves a theory then it's not a theory anymore is it? (assuming of course you can prove the solution always applies)

[Edited by - Helter Skelter on June 27, 2005 7:21:00 AM]
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:

Life is mathemathical


Isnt that a misconseption

Mathamatics describes what we see as life, its a tool for explaining logic and patterns, not the source of the patterns themselves. Its somewhat paradoxical since mathematics is a way of describing what we see logically in our minds, and what we see logically in our minds is mathematical.

I guess this is in part related to Godels incompletness theorem:

Quote:

If an Axiomatic system can be proven consistent from within itself
thn it is inconsistent


Thats what i make of it anyway :)
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
yes, really feelings and intelligence are opposite things. But human beings ( and all universe, if you see ) acts in total balance. It's not a machism, please. Mens have a reason tendency, while womans have a feeling tendency. Both have some fails in some aspects, and this make the things works on a couple.

Real Intelligence is a total balance of feeling and reason. It can be see since long time ago, on ancient cultures. The secret is simple hiden on a complex thing.

And on true, I don't want to prove such thing. Each one have your own concepts over Intelligence, and nothing that I can do can change it.

But I have my own concept of AI. The only thing I don't have is a way to implement EXACTLY as I wish to be. I just point some ideas to it. If you can use it, great. If you show me that is wrong, great.

Foolish or not, there's it. My theory is not wrong, and I don't want a NOBEL to it. OK?

Some years of research are made before I get here.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by DarkThrone
Mens have a reason tendency, while womans have a feeling tendency. Both have some fails in some aspects, and this make the things works on a couple.


I'm not even going to touch that one!

Quote:
Real Intelligence is a total balance of feeling and reason. It can be see since long time ago, on ancient cultures. The secret is simple hiden on a complex thing.


In some respects there are a handful of people, including those in acedamia, that agree with this. However this is typically LIMITED to decision making (and related topics) rather than as a direct, indirect, or causal link to intelligence. In that respect emotion (feeling) can have an effect on which decisions we make. It does not however dictact that the absence of emotion is an abscence of intelligence. To believe that both must exist equally in order for one to be present is, to me, completely absurd.

Quote:
And on true, I don't want to prove such thing. Each one have your own concepts over Intelligence, and nothing that I can do can change it.


To me it sounds like you're saying "I have this theory but I don't want to prove it" so I really have to ask....why wouldn't you want to prove a theory that is directly related and can have significant impact on the work you are doing? If you're investing so much time and effort to create an artificially intelligent being wouldn't it be more advantageous to know there's a possibility of success or a potential for failure?

Regardless of whether you succeed or fail it's still one step closer to a solution. Reminds me of something someone once said to me:

"People who strive never to fail will never experience true success."

More of a paraphrase really but you get the idea.



Quote:
But I have my own concept of AI. The only thing I don't have is a way to implement EXACTLY as I wish to be. I just point some ideas to it. If you can use it, great. If you show me that is wrong, great.


For me or anyone else to say that your concept of AI is wrong would be pointless. You have to come to that conclusion yourself. But if you're not willing to expose yourself to discussion or seriously consider the criticism of your theory/concept/etc. you've only succeeded in wasting everyones time.

Quote:
My theory is not wrong, and I don't want a NOBEL to it. OK?


Since you seem to have no interest in proving your theory you'll never know if it's correct or not. Besides your idea is already trumped by existing theory making that discussion moot. Have no idea why you would even mention the Nobel prize.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ok, guys we have a winner

Well, first of all, because this guy, seems like original topic reborn as a phoenix on ashes.

Good, really good. Some people never learn - a great phrase on begin of Front Mission 3. - and like to make critics on the work of another people instead of show what he knows. Ok, it's a free world, I guess, and critics are fundamental part of the hard, kinda cruel way to knowledge.

I really need to prove my theory? Which theory, is the first thing I need to ask.

If is the theory that some people critics instead of help, it can easily proved with a simple mirror. Look at it and you can see exactly the kind of people that I say.

If is the pieces of small things that I said belong this topic, I must say that is only ideas throw in wind, and looking the things useful post clear me on points that show errors in some.

Well, Helter Skelter, as I said on another topics ( older to your presence here ), is that I have all that I said in several notes, far of your eyes.
I research this 2-3 years. I give some respect to truthfully member that points some real things, as Timkim ( sorry by kidding ) that make me some real important points and Daerax that give me some place to research about code.
WeirdoFu is a bit cetic, but isn't a hard critic. He points me some things useful too.

Well, guy, "Prove your theory" is that you saying.

Figures in your brain a human being that have a intelligence but no feelings.
he can really survive? Why he lives? Why he works? Why he learn manners if it don't matter?

A real intelligence MUST be a combination of reason and feelings. Big minds on history make your names moved for HONOR, LOYALTY, FAITH, LOVE, and a dozen of another feelings. The feeling that moves. Reason only is a machine that calculate into all possibilities, the less lose/win weight to make it.

If you disagree, please, instead of just say it, show it. Seems like you are a kind of guy that walk on the streets and show with your finger: "Look, this guy is a loser" and "This woman is so pervert" only to mask your own weakness.

I say it because I don't remember of a real good thing that you show here. Sorry.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been skipping this thread as it seemed to start as a general moan about lack of resources, and I find this sort of complaint a bit laughable in the face of the availability of information these days compared to only ten or fifteen years ago. However, now it seems to have become a good example of a kind of conversation that I can rarely be bothered with, which might be a reason why the OP feels he is never answered.

I was once a games AI programmer, I have a background that includes academic A-Life research at post-grad level and as a hobby coder I have always gravitated towards AI-related projects. I don't consider myself an expert, but you would imagine that I'd be interested in the theory discussion in this thread,and yet I'm not.

Why?

Because as a request for help it almost immediately becomes a demand for solutions. It also contains an inherent dismissal of a certain kind of approach which immediately disengages anyone who has ever considered such sources valuable.

Because as theory for discussion, it isn't being tabled as something that can be explored, it's a dictat of reality according to the poster. Beyond that, it seems to simply boil down to the idea that "feelings matter" in human decision making. The weather matters, as does the amount of coffee you've had, or whether the pretty girl at the checkout smiled at you when you bought your newspaper. It's hard to seriously engage with such a theory without a strong modelling concept to back it up.

Because, ultimately, I care about AI from the perspective of achieving a more natural interface between people and software, and on this forum that software is games. How would this theory apply to games? How would the player perceive the improvements? What actual difference to agent behaviours are foreseen? How would the programmer/designer/player control the AI and bound its behaviours?

To be honest, it seems like you would have a much easier time tabling your idea and asking for resources in an academic psychology forum, as your thinking seems to be far more at their level.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Look for games as:

1. Thousand Arms (really funny)
2. Tokimeki memorial
3. General RPG
4. Shen Mue

The four on the list have a system of "talk to gather info" as fundamental part of your system. Shen Mue is the best on it. But even it have a list of predefined options to player choose, and play it several times make the game boring. (I am a compulsive player, really I know this feeling).

I think that will be more fun, if instead of you choose a option, you "type" a dialog. Even the programmers can have fun with it, because a N-possibilities that they can use instead of walk for the path that they build all the time.

And another possibility of a powerful IA on a game, eg. is a game of war, that can use decoys, and another resources with extremely accuracy instead of ramdomic or predefined times, taking army strategy unprevisible.

Sure that for someone it can be frustating because the game will be too hard. But for game lovers, I'm sure that is a challenge that can be you play until your hands lock, with the double of size, almost purple and painful.

And really is a bit hard to understand why some guys prefer boring me with pointless critics and decrease ratings instead of really point which are my faults.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by DarkThrone
I think that will be more fun, if instead of you choose a option, you "type" a dialog. Even the programmers can have fun with it, because a N-possibilities that they can use instead of walk for the path that they build all the time.


I've had that idea for quite a while, but as a programmer, I would have to say that I would not have fun implementing it. There are a few inherent problems to the approach.

1. It will only work on game systems that have keyboards, like the PC. On anything else, the user would either have to buy a keyboard, if they don't already own one or you'll need to implement an on screen keyboard, which is usually slow as hell and cumbersome.

2. Issues with internationalization/localization is inherent. This brings up two issues of what language to use as input and then the actual parsing process. In the end, your system will have to break down into a word parser that does nothing but look for key words and construct the proper response from there. Forcing the user to use full sentences would cause issues with grammar and complications in sentence structure, which is why speech recognition has never gotten very good. If you actually want to incorporate grammar into the system, that would be a huge undertaking in itself, since people can't even understand each other some times due to grammar issues. Like for example, no offense, but I have trouble understanding half the stuff you write. So, if I were to implement a "typing" input system in english within a game, you might not get very far if grammar is necessary for the NPCs to understand you. It might lend to creating a level of realism, but would sure be a huge learning curve for some people.

Personally, I had wished they'd build something like that for RPGs years ago. So, you can ask NPCs about things and events you've seen so far or items and they'll tell you what they know or direct you somewhere where you can find answers. Something like, "Oh, you want to know about the Water Dragon? Well, then you have to go to the next town." or "I'm not sure, you might want to ask the mayor." Instead of the usual, "Its a nice day out. I like to take walks on nice days." The ability to query any npc about anything, even if they may not know the answer would really lend some realism to games.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, really as I said, I have a bad English.


1. I was thinking on it too. For it, can be used the system that is already used by Mobile Phones. And can be made a table that was part of inventory where pre-made phrases can be builded by players and saved there. So, he/she can shift some words on it and select to speak.


2. Yes, grammar problems are really the worst of challenge. I am testing a project of a lexical parser with a friend. One of solutions that I reach is that if the NPC don't understand the ask, it need "figure" it. Maybe is the more slow part to resolve.

And as I said that will be fun for programmers, I think that will be fun to they "play" the game, because I really love play games, and love play a game that I build to myself without know all the potential of the game before play it.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The problem is that now anyone can access the Internet. It means people without sufficient knowledge or dedication.
Also, internet is free. Not everyone likes to share their work(too much).
And it may stop progress .,.. if for example there are collis detect library chances are that less people will develop it. So this way on the whole internet there's not incredibly wide variety.
Another example - once i've tried chess progam and it made first move for a pawn over another. Strangely enough i've noticed that bug in a bunch of other chess programs ... ??? Are they different or the same ?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Take a look at Facade (http://www.interactivestory.net). It is about as advanced in some of these areas as we are at, AI tech-wise.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dark_Throne, I think you are missing a point here. Game AI is not the AI in our brains. It is a collection of algorithms to make something appear intelligent enough to entertain people. I don't play Nightfire to deal with real AI. I play it to shoot and kill some bots that move around, and I get the feeling I am James Bond for a small time.

Cutting edge AI research, the kind that will possible lead to real AI, is conducted at Universities like MIT, Caltech, Berkley, etc. Look at CSAIL for each of these places. I promise you these people will blow your minds away.

Also note that when someone does big research, it is very rare they will give everything out free. They will most likely sell there paper for a low cost. You can get if off of amazon or somewhere. There is no such thing as a free lunch.

Also, AI is still an infant field. That is why high-risk scientists are attracted to it. If you are on the right track, you have to potential to uncover something huge, and make history.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, I apologize. In part you are true.

But look, my goal is not take a human simulator that thinks, disturbs, etc, etc... I agree it was a pain at some point. My goal is build a type of AI that can be similar to a VS. Match on a fighting game, or a RPG where you ask the right questions and get the right answer. Or a strategy game, where the enemy fronts are so accurate when you. You built a good strategy and wins the first match. They builds a strategy better in next round.

As I said, Thousand Arms are one of few date simulators that saves of trash. And this only because have a comic story, simple game system and a ANIME format that made the game exceptionally fun. And it's a RPG on base.

Other people likes other kind of games, as a car running, rpg, strategical games, simulators, etc, etc... It's hard to create a good IA that supply all this games. I need to build a good AI for a storyline game, as a date simulator, strategical, RPG. Imagine do this with the basical concept, line by line, without funds and a few people work on it. It will take YEARS of work.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by Sagar_Indurkhya
Also note that when someone does big research, it is very rare they will give everything out free. They will most likely sell there paper for a low cost. You can get if off of amazon or somewhere. There is no such thing as a free lunch.


This is not really true. If you visit the website of almost any compuer science researcher you'll find PDF copies of their more recent papers. It is true that for online access to old journals and conference proceedings you will often have to go to the IEEE or ACM online libraries, which means paying or getting access through your college if you're in school, but for any recent research you can usually get the paper from one of the authors homepages. I've never heard of a researcher selling his papers on amazon.com

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah, I agree.

In the world of Opensource projects, if you can't find some info FREE, so that's a big trouble with the concept of Internet.

PS: I spend 30USD/month to use internet service. Well, really the info is not FREE and I guess that's very sufficient, in a country that you work a month to gain 200USD/month.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by Anonymous Poster
Quote:
Original post by Sagar_Indurkhya
Also note that when someone does big research, it is very rare they will give everything out free. They will most likely sell there paper for a low cost. You can get if off of amazon or somewhere. There is no such thing as a free lunch.


This is not really true. If you visit the website of almost any compuer science researcher you'll find PDF copies of their more recent papers. It is true that for online access to old journals and conference proceedings you will often have to go to the IEEE or ACM online libraries, which means paying or getting access through your college if you're in school, but for any recent research you can usually get the paper from one of the authors homepages. I've never heard of a researcher selling his papers on amazon.com


Take a look at some of the applied technology papers - the ones that almost exactly tell you how to implement a new idea, etc. A lot of these are sold.

Many scientists trade in profits from sales for the publicity they get.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's funny, I had never found a topic like this one.

Anyways, DarkThrone, you are overdoing it. If you goal is to make AI that feels the same as competing against a human in a game that is.

For starters, AI consumes computer resources. At one point, you won't be able to make your AI more human-like because you don't have the resources, and before that, it will be detrimental to the gameplay. That's what stopped everything in the beginning.

Second, if you want AI that is so like what you want, start gathering people to help you with research, make a team, or do whatever you need to do about it.

I just hear you complaining about really stupid stuff. You keep saying that Brazil is not as advanced, that things are too costly, that things aren't really free. While it's true that things aren't totally free, certainly without things like open source everything would be a lot frigging harder. I live in a third world country, sure things are expensive, electricity shortages happen daily, most of the time water doesn't has enough pressure to get to my home, but you try to do what you can with what you have instead of complaining.

The way you should have started, instead of sounding like an angry depressed teenager with too much time in his hands, is to ask for AI resources that are advanced enough to seem as if you are playing with another person. Besides asking for help so the people in the forum can help you, I don't know what else you should be saying here. Now please stop complaining and be productive.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0