I'm not hoping to be kited until death with zero chance at victory (Hello current AI system in reverse), but I'd hope the AI could possibly use tactics like healing one another, throwing up icewalls or using defensive measure, silencing casters when they are doing a "heroic" super move, etc. Yes more playerish, but still dumb AI that hopefully most of us can overcome. I want to win just like everyone else, doesn't mean I don't want to have to actually put in 2 brain cells worth of effort to do so.
All of that was done in EQ1 back in 1999 - so to me none of that is better AI, its just that most recent games reverted to idiot-NPCs. Why?
in EQ1, NPCs healed eachother, called for help, ran on low health, cast root/mez/stun/blindness (turn your screen black) on players. None of this is much better AI, just more abilities more scripts to be run.
Why was this abandoned in more recent games?
Because masses hate it, this would frustrate the modern average gamer too much - and MMO games are made to sell to masses.
I loved EQ1 - I'd love to play a game that has the same NPC behavior like EQ1, and you will never see it in a major MMO, indie games are a lot more likely to have it.
Would I like it and some small minority - sure.
Would masses want better AI - nope - too frustrating.
My 2c
Forgot one awesome thing NPCs did in EQ1 - if a player got down to below 25% health, all NPCs would ignore aggro and attack the low HP player to kill him/her.
Can you hear the rage of masses today if this mechanic was in WoW or any popular game? Heheh - yeah.
The masses never played EQ, nor experienced any of that. These are also the more simple variables that were possible 15 years ago and that I can think up right now. To think that SOE/SB with 15 years of experience and whatever the heck Storybricks is capable of is the same exact thing as EQ 99 is crazy.
Like I said, maybe we can't think too outside the box because we've never known "better". It hasn't happened yet. They've flat out said that they are doing things no other game has done. We can simplify it down to attack or not attack, run or not run, heal or not heal, but I'm betting there will be more to it.
While it is all based on hype and assumption, I guess I just don't get why all the doom and gloom, "meh it's been done" attitude. Besides enjoying popping all our poor little hype balloons.
I said above, they rebooted EQN a few times because they didn't want to do the same old thing.
The "masses" want themeparks, trinity, 1 class per character, subs, vertical progression, gear grind, xp grind, dumb AI, the list goes on. Guess EQN is a failure before it hits the gate. It could be, no doubt, but I'm sending my faith their way in the hopes it is enjoyable and that it has enough options to bring in the masses that have grown tired of playing the same game for the last 15 years in some form or another.
Maybe some like to be the jaded, cynical, pessimistic folks that can go "I told you so" but I've been there done that. Either EQN will be the game to change things or it won't. Until it has a chance, I'm not going to be Mr. Rain Cloud about it.
I am just using real life anecdote to base my view on things on. I would love a more challenging world, even if it would simply go back to the way it was in EQ1. But in my experience even that is way to hard for most people.
Look at recent released games. People complain that ESO and Wildstar are too hard... I didn't play wildstar so I don't know about it but as for ESO it is so solo friendly it hurts my head, yet people still think it's too hard. I soloed to VR11.5
I had a blast playing vanilla EQ for many years, a lots of fight were close ones, a missed runner in a dungeon would often result in your death or at least an evac. Cleric NPC had access to the same spells PC had, when they were casting a full health spell you had to interrupt it because mobs didn't die in 5 seconds.
I miss it, but I also know that the new players would most likely never settle for it. And while I would be really happy with a niche game, for some reason I doubt that SOE would. That is why I prefer to be MR. Rain cloud today and leave room to be impressed later. I had my balloon poped so often I don't get excited anymore on promises.
Guess it's just a different way to approach it. Been doing this way too long to stay negative or critical beforehand. I give them a chance, they either make me happy or not.
We can assume a lot for others, but until they have a chance to experience it themselves, we won't know.
EQN seems to be an attempt to bridge many different styles of play and even genres to some degree. But I think it is about the overall game, not one particular element that may bring people in or scare them off.
EQ had a lot of scary things in it for people that want the easy ride. WoW has become so easy, people want harder content. It doesn't have to be either or. EQN could offer enough variance to make the "masses" happy. Only time will tell though.
Only played the WS/ESO betas, but no idea how they could be considered "hard" at least on the solo end beyond being boring. Haven't really followed them either, but if EQN can offer group content that is easy to get into, challenging, and rewarding, maybe people won't have to worry about being able to solo and how easy/hard a game is based on that one aspect. Next month needs to hurry up.
i agree with your post, smarter equals more challenging to the point of rivaling and besting it's opponent and many MMO developers have said they'd like to do it but players are against it because it gets too hard... i also highlighted a point in the original post you replied too.
A mob simply deciding to run away and find back up would be "smarter" yet isn't posing a harder challenge, at least not until they find back up.
Now, there are already MMO's on the market that have AI that does this... it's not smarter at all, what does that mean for a player if an enemy is going to go find backup... stun and kill alternatively pick him off while he's running away... you basically just voided your own argument, A Smart Mob would not only run away, but it would throw up defensives, CC you and do whatever it had to do to kite you while surviving long enough to find help. You wouldnt find that fun, you wouldnt find chasing a mob, thats healing itself, throwing up defensives, CCing you etc... fun especially if you didnt have the skill to counter it.
Thank you for telling me what I want. You know me best I guess. You might have missed some of the conversation as well.
First there is that. Which they talk about making AI challenging, yet keeping it fun. "Smart" AI would/could be harder, doesn't have to be entirely be the case though. Or it just comes down to your personal definition. A mob throwing up a shield to defend itself is "smarter" and makes it "harder" to kill, but doesn't make it god like. If you think "smarter" means an Orc only attacks with 100 friends or kiting or some other unbalanced action, well that's your deal.
I believe I said earlier, that no I would not want to get owned by a mob I have no chance at defeating, pretty much how most game AI is in reverse. We have a huge tool set to win while they are just meat sacks to beat on.
I would enjoy mobs having even a tiny bit more options then just swing or run. As you said, throwing up defense, CC, healing, etc.
Still want a decent chance at winning, just not a 100% for sure that I could just spam 1 and pick my nose with the other hand and win.
Smarter doesn't have to equate to being super overpowered never going to lose. Just like PVP. Those that utilize their tools better have more options and better chance at winning. Playing smart. Doesn't mean one side is always going to win without any chance of losing. Both continue to act and react until the end. Mobs can screw up just like players if the AI allows for it (read the article).
As they say, making "hard" AI is not difficult. Making challenging, engaging, fun content is a bit more to take on and is supposed to be their secret sauce.
I quit playing all mmorpg's so i was hoping this was going to be a great game to get me back but SOE scares me.
They have become super cheap with all the xpacs for EQ2 i mean like none of them have been worth a dime,more like all of them should have been combined to form one actual good xpac.
What it tells me is SOE is going to split up work and nickle and dime us and they have already done this with EQNext by dividing the Landmark part into it's own IP to double the sales from what SHOULD be one complete game.What i fear is SOE is going to keep going down this road,as soon as they think they have enough to sell us they will release Next even if only 30% done.
I know SOE has not cheapened their product from EQ1 then EQ2 i was happy with those products but the xpacs since have been awful.Point is no matter what they announce i am going to be forever skeptical of anything they do because everything with them has been sneaky since Smedley decided cash shop plus a join the club fee is the way to go.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
I quit playing all mmorpg's so i was hoping this was going to be a great game to get me back but SOE scares me.
They have become super cheap with all the xpacs for EQ2 i mean like none of them have been worth a dime,more like all of them should have been combined to form one actual good xpac.
What it tells me is SOE is going to split up work and nickle and dime us and they have already done this with EQNext by dividing the Landmark part into it's own IP to double the sales from what SHOULD be one complete game.What i fear is SOE is going to keep going down this road,as soon as they think they have enough to sell us they will release Next even if only 30% done.
I know SOE has not cheapened their product from EQ1 then EQ2 i was happy with those products but the xpacs since have been awful.Point is no matter what they announce i am going to be forever skeptical of anything they do because everything with them has been sneaky since Smedley decided cash shop plus a join the club fee is the way to go.
Can't disagree with what you say, but with Landmark and EQN both being F2P (at release) and following more the PS2 model (hopefully), not sure how they will nickle and dime us too much. PS2 is playable completely F2P, but it doesn't feel like I "have" to pay anything or am being ripped off when I do pay for things. That is the sign of a good cash shop and F2P model. EQ/EQ2 were more "have" to pay to play in the F2P model, which I'm crossing my fingers doesn't happen in EQN.
I'm gonna say not a release date more like in-game gameplay showing off combat and the AI and maybe how the questing will work. I bet they are farther along with EQN than most think they are since alot of things we are messing around with in Landmark are going to be in EQN also.
Originally posted by Gallus85 I can't wait to see what they're going to reveal at SOE live this year. I hope we get to hear how they plan to handle horizontal progression.
As much as I love to theorycraft and let my imagination go wild, I do appreciate when companies slap real facts in my face and let me come down to earth a bit. Will be nice to see some more details, hopefully they are a bit more to the point then the vagueness so far.
Originally posted by Bidwood People complain a lot about how slow the development of Landmark is. Could that be because they are investing a lot of resources in Next?
Is Landmark development really slow? The game has been like one year in development now and most games takes at the minimum three years before they are released, five isn't out there for MMOs.
Games are made in chunks of features. They focused on harvesting and building early on because Landmark and the devs working on EQNext needed these (well building mostly). Now these two features are quite polished, so they moved to other features and add those once they are quite close to their final design.
Some features require final server structures: VOIP, guilds, final chat system, seeing all the island and connecting oceans, even combat because SOE talked about a server handling the monster AI.
Some features require 3rd parties work: water.
Some features are simply technological hurdles: combat and AI
Some features are just low on the priority list because they are more like nice-to-have and not really required: merchants, player's vendor stalls, revamped chats, lots of social stuff.
Originally posted by Zhar I honestly doubt they will be announcing anything related to the release date for Next as long as they can keep milking Landmark like they are.
Landmark has a very cheap entry fee especially compared to something like AA so I am not sure it qualifies as milking.
I believe that Landmark came about because of what they were doing with EQN and not the other way around. I would not be surprised if there were an early access announcement at SOE Live this year.
Originally posted by Tyggs We don't even have a solid release date for Landmark yet.
David said. We have some good suprizes... you will not be saying "When will you be building EQN" after SoE live. Sounds like we getting a release date for EQN, and who knows maybe Landmark.
I don't know, sounds more like "We'll be showing you all the work we've done on EQN since last year" more than anything else.
exactly Bill.. I expect we are still years away from a EQN release date.. lol
Don't hold your breathe pal, SOE only do things which benefits them we are a secondary thought and it's always been like that since the early days. Leopard never changes it's spots and he's done well to fool many people yet again by using the we are listening line and sucks people in.
I've played EQI for ten years and all that happened in that time is the game went down the pan through greed, all $oE care about is $$$ They have made some shocking decisions over the last ten years or so and EQL & EQN need to work to keep them all in jobs. I guess they will announce the start of H1Z1 at the show at some point as they need another cash cow to keep what staff they have left.
This thread seriously made me feel like my IQ was stabbed several times -.-
People need to learn to use Google and look up definitions.
First of all, Emergence AI has little to do with combat. Let's break this down and define the word emergence. The act of becoming known or coming into view : the act of emerging. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/emergence <--- Seriously .. use this more often please. Dictionaries exist for a reason.
In scientific use the word emergence tends to be talking about behaviors how a larger entity would react toward a smaller entity. It's all a bit more complicated but it essentially means how these entities would interact through the world and how other entities would change their behaviors. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergence
With that said, Emergence AI isn't the same as Combat AI. Emergence AI has to do with NPC Spawning, World pathfinding, and general npc behaviors through interactions in the environment and other players. However, Combat AI may interact with the Emergence AI. All AI systems can be broken down into groups to describe a particular part of the AI.
I suggest you give that a read over. Game AI is not even really AI to begin with. Meaning no matter how many variety of tasks they give to the NPCs, it doesn't actually make them smarter. Once you learn what they are capable of, you will find a work around and they will be just as easy as any other AI. You just have to learn their habits. This kind of AI is nothing new and has been used since the 1970s. The only thing really new in more recent AI is the processing power, which allows us to increase the amount of variety in the AI. More choices based on certain triggers.
If you where to add an actual smart AI into the game, it would be too hard for most people. The only reason we can take down 10 npcs with 1 character is because these npcs are not smart and we can figure out their patterns. Taking on 10 who are much smarter will make the game very difficult. This is assuming you are of equal level. It may even make the game next to impossible. That is like taking on 10 people in real life. 1 person against 10, even if you are a good fighter is extremely hard to do. Even against 5 is a challenge.
Playing in a mutliplayer game is a great example. Taking on 5 other opponents isn't always easy. Most people die more often that they get kills. Keeping in mind, playing against a player doesn't mean it's harder. Not all players are all that smart. Imagine playing against 5 players but they all have knowledge on tactical warfare. Against 1 person, they would probably win every time. Now picture that in a PVE situation.
This would mean if you wanted true AI, smarter NPCs, you would have to dumb down the quantity of encounters. In the end, it just would not be all that fun for most people.
TL;DR: Some of you are expecting way to much from the AI combat. You are setting yourself up for disappointment. No matter how much variety they add, all it changes is the amount of time it takes to learn the patterns. Some of you have unrealistic expectations of what this AI will do.
This thread seriously made me feel like my IQ was stabbed several times -.-
People need to learn to use Google and look up definitions.
First of all, Emergence AI has little to do with combat. Let's break this down and define the word emergence. The act of becoming known or coming into view : the act of emerging. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/emergence <--- Seriously .. use this more often please. Dictionaries exist for a reason.
In scientific use the word emergence tends to be talking about behaviors how a larger entity would react toward a smaller entity. It's all a bit more complicated but it essentially means how these entities would interact through the world and how other entities would change their behaviors. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergence
With that said, Emergence AI isn't the same as Combat AI. Emergence AI has to do with NPC Spawning, World pathfinding, and general npc behaviors through interactions in the environment and other players. However, Combat AI may interact with the Emergence AI. All AI systems can be broken down into groups to describe a particular part of the AI.
I suggest you give that a read over. Game AI is not even really AI to begin with. Meaning no matter how many variety of tasks they give to the NPCs, it doesn't actually make them smarter. Once you learn what they are capable of, you will find a work around and they will be just as easy as any other AI. You just have to learn their habits. This kind of AI is nothing new and has been used since the 1970s. The only thing really new in more recent AI is the processing power, which allows us to increase the amount of variety in the AI. More choices based on certain triggers.
If you where to add an actual smart AI into the game, it would be too hard for most people. The only reason we can take down 10 npcs with 1 character is because these npcs are not smart and we can figure out their patterns. Taking on 10 who are much smarter will make the game very difficult. This is assuming you are of equal level. It may even make the game next to impossible. That is like taking on 10 people in real life. 1 person against 10, even if you are a good fighter is extremely hard to do. Even against 5 is a challenge.
Playing in a mutliplayer game is a great example. Taking on 5 other opponents isn't always easy. Most people die more often that they get kills. Keeping in mind, playing against a player doesn't mean it's harder. Not all players are all that smart. Imagine playing against 5 players but they all have knowledge on tactical warfare. Against 1 person, they would probably win every time. Now picture that in a PVE situation.
This would mean if you wanted true AI, smarter NPCs, you would have to dumb down the quantity of encounters. In the end, it just would not be all that fun for most people.
TL;DR: Some of you are expecting way to much from the AI combat. You are setting yourself up for disappointment. No matter how much variety they add, all it changes is the amount of time it takes to learn the patterns. Some of you have unrealistic expectations of what this AI will do.
Thanks for reiterating everything I already said. It's nice to know there's someone else on here that understands what's going on.
This thread seriously made me feel like my IQ was stabbed several times -.-
People need to learn to use Google and look up definitions.
First of all, Emergence AI has little to do with combat. Let's break this down and define the word emergence. The act of becoming known or coming into view : the act of emerging. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/emergence <--- Seriously .. use this more often please. Dictionaries exist for a reason.
In scientific use the word emergence tends to be talking about behaviors how a larger entity would react toward a smaller entity. It's all a bit more complicated but it essentially means how these entities would interact through the world and how other entities would change their behaviors. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergence
With that said, Emergence AI isn't the same as Combat AI. Emergence AI has to do with NPC Spawning, World pathfinding, and general npc behaviors through interactions in the environment and other players. However, Combat AI may interact with the Emergence AI. All AI systems can be broken down into groups to describe a particular part of the AI.
I suggest you give that a read over. Game AI is not even really AI to begin with. Meaning no matter how many variety of tasks they give to the NPCs, it doesn't actually make them smarter. Once you learn what they are capable of, you will find a work around and they will be just as easy as any other AI. You just have to learn their habits. This kind of AI is nothing new and has been used since the 1970s. The only thing really new in more recent AI is the processing power, which allows us to increase the amount of variety in the AI. More choices based on certain triggers.
If you where to add an actual smart AI into the game, it would be too hard for most people. The only reason we can take down 10 npcs with 1 character is because these npcs are not smart and we can figure out their patterns. Taking on 10 who are much smarter will make the game very difficult. This is assuming you are of equal level. It may even make the game next to impossible. That is like taking on 10 people in real life. 1 person against 10, even if you are a good fighter is extremely hard to do. Even against 5 is a challenge.
Playing in a mutliplayer game is a great example. Taking on 5 other opponents isn't always easy. Most people die more often that they get kills. Keeping in mind, playing against a player doesn't mean it's harder. Not all players are all that smart. Imagine playing against 5 players but they all have knowledge on tactical warfare. Against 1 person, they would probably win every time. Now picture that in a PVE situation.
This would mean if you wanted true AI, smarter NPCs, you would have to dumb down the quantity of encounters. In the end, it just would not be all that fun for most people.
TL;DR: Some of you are expecting way to much from the AI combat. You are setting yourself up for disappointment. No matter how much variety they add, all it changes is the amount of time it takes to learn the patterns. Some of you have unrealistic expectations of what this AI will do.
Thanks for reiterating everything I already said. It's nice to know there's someone else on here that understands what's going on.
I suggest you both take time to read this link below in full as you both are only partly right and allot wrong. Storybricks AI has so many applications to how a NPC would respond in combat, from class, race and class its epic. Why make a AI system and leave out one of the major parts of the game, combat? Have you even read the link below?
This thread seriously made me feel like my IQ was stabbed several times -.-
People need to learn to use Google and look up definitions.
First of all, Emergence AI has little to do with combat. Let's break this down and define the word emergence. The act of becoming known or coming into view : the act of emerging. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/emergence <--- Seriously .. use this more often please. Dictionaries exist for a reason.
In scientific use the word emergence tends to be talking about behaviors how a larger entity would react toward a smaller entity. It's all a bit more complicated but it essentially means how these entities would interact through the world and how other entities would change their behaviors. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergence
With that said, Emergence AI isn't the same as Combat AI. Emergence AI has to do with NPC Spawning, World pathfinding, and general npc behaviors through interactions in the environment and other players. However, Combat AI may interact with the Emergence AI. All AI systems can be broken down into groups to describe a particular part of the AI.
I suggest you give that a read over. Game AI is not even really AI to begin with. Meaning no matter how many variety of tasks they give to the NPCs, it doesn't actually make them smarter. Once you learn what they are capable of, you will find a work around and they will be just as easy as any other AI. You just have to learn their habits. This kind of AI is nothing new and has been used since the 1970s. The only thing really new in more recent AI is the processing power, which allows us to increase the amount of variety in the AI. More choices based on certain triggers.
If you where to add an actual smart AI into the game, it would be too hard for most people. The only reason we can take down 10 npcs with 1 character is because these npcs are not smart and we can figure out their patterns. Taking on 10 who are much smarter will make the game very difficult. This is assuming you are of equal level. It may even make the game next to impossible. That is like taking on 10 people in real life. 1 person against 10, even if you are a good fighter is extremely hard to do. Even against 5 is a challenge.
Playing in a mutliplayer game is a great example. Taking on 5 other opponents isn't always easy. Most people die more often that they get kills. Keeping in mind, playing against a player doesn't mean it's harder. Not all players are all that smart. Imagine playing against 5 players but they all have knowledge on tactical warfare. Against 1 person, they would probably win every time. Now picture that in a PVE situation.
This would mean if you wanted true AI, smarter NPCs, you would have to dumb down the quantity of encounters. In the end, it just would not be all that fun for most people.
TL;DR: Some of you are expecting way to much from the AI combat. You are setting yourself up for disappointment. No matter how much variety they add, all it changes is the amount of time it takes to learn the patterns. Some of you have unrealistic expectations of what this AI will do.
Thanks for reiterating everything I already said. It's nice to know there's someone else on here that understands what's going on.
I suggest you both take time to read this link below in full as you both are only partly right and allot wrong. Storybricks AI has so many applications to how a NPC would respond in combat, from class, race and class its epic. Why make a AI system and leave out one of the major parts of the game, combat? Have you even read the link below?
The difference here is I am not talking about the story bricks AI. I am talking about specifically emergence AI and it's definition. So you are the one who seems to be misunderstanding here.
Storybricks is pretty much a full AI engine that consists of many parts which includes an emergence AI, and combat AI.
I don't think anyone here is denying that. So please try and read my post again, and stop misunderstanding.
For some reason you keep linking the 2 things together as if they are the same thing. Emergence AI doesn't equal Storybricks. Story bricks just has emergence AI. It's not the first time it's been done, the word has been around for a while. Maybe if you actually read the links I posted you would know this and wouldn't misunderstand.
As for the rest of my post beyond that point, I posted info about how video game AI is actually not really AI by it's definition. I also posted how making an AI too intelligent would make a game too hard and unfun to play.
As far as I am aware, I am not wrong about anything I pointed on in that area.
Oh and btw .. I read the link you posted, and it doesn't say I am wrong about anything as far as i am aware.
This thread seriously made me feel like my IQ was stabbed several times -.-
People need to learn to use Google and look up definitions.
First of all, Emergence AI has little to do with combat. Let's break this down and define the word emergence. The act of becoming known or coming into view : the act of emerging. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/emergence <--- Seriously .. use this more often please. Dictionaries exist for a reason.
In scientific use the word emergence tends to be talking about behaviors how a larger entity would react toward a smaller entity. It's all a bit more complicated but it essentially means how these entities would interact through the world and how other entities would change their behaviors. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergence
With that said, Emergence AI isn't the same as Combat AI. Emergence AI has to do with NPC Spawning, World pathfinding, and general npc behaviors through interactions in the environment and other players. However, Combat AI may interact with the Emergence AI. All AI systems can be broken down into groups to describe a particular part of the AI.
I suggest you give that a read over. Game AI is not even really AI to begin with. Meaning no matter how many variety of tasks they give to the NPCs, it doesn't actually make them smarter. Once you learn what they are capable of, you will find a work around and they will be just as easy as any other AI. You just have to learn their habits. This kind of AI is nothing new and has been used since the 1970s. The only thing really new in more recent AI is the processing power, which allows us to increase the amount of variety in the AI. More choices based on certain triggers.
If you where to add an actual smart AI into the game, it would be too hard for most people. The only reason we can take down 10 npcs with 1 character is because these npcs are not smart and we can figure out their patterns. Taking on 10 who are much smarter will make the game very difficult. This is assuming you are of equal level. It may even make the game next to impossible. That is like taking on 10 people in real life. 1 person against 10, even if you are a good fighter is extremely hard to do. Even against 5 is a challenge.
Playing in a mutliplayer game is a great example. Taking on 5 other opponents isn't always easy. Most people die more often that they get kills. Keeping in mind, playing against a player doesn't mean it's harder. Not all players are all that smart. Imagine playing against 5 players but they all have knowledge on tactical warfare. Against 1 person, they would probably win every time. Now picture that in a PVE situation.
This would mean if you wanted true AI, smarter NPCs, you would have to dumb down the quantity of encounters. In the end, it just would not be all that fun for most people.
TL;DR: Some of you are expecting way to much from the AI combat. You are setting yourself up for disappointment. No matter how much variety they add, all it changes is the amount of time it takes to learn the patterns. Some of you have unrealistic expectations of what this AI will do.
Thanks for reiterating everything I already said. It's nice to know there's someone else on here that understands what's going on.
I suggest you both take time to read this link below in full as you both are only partly right and allot wrong. Storybricks AI has so many applications to how a NPC would respond in combat, from class, race and class its epic. Why make a AI system and leave out one of the major parts of the game, combat? Have you even read the link below?
The difference here is I am not talking about the story bricks AI. I am talking about specifically emergence AI and it's definition. So you are the one who seems to be misunderstanding here.
Storybricks is pretty much a full AI engine that consists of many parts which includes an emergence AI, and combat AI.
I don't think anyone here is denying that. So please try and read my post again, and stop misunderstanding.
For some reason you keep linking the 2 things together as if they are the same thing. Emergence AI doesn't equal Storybricks. Story bricks just has emergence AI. It's not the first time it's been done, the word has been around for a while. Maybe if you actually read the links I posted you would know this and wouldn't misunderstand.
As for the rest of my post beyond that point, I posted info about how video game AI is actually not really AI by it's definition. I also posted how making an AI too intelligent would make a game too hard and unfun to play.
As far as I am aware, I am not wrong about anything I pointed on in that area.
Oh and btw .. I read the link you posted, and it doesn't say I am wrong about anything as far as i am aware.
Exactly. This nanfoodle guy and a few others on here don't seem to understand that Emergent AI is a part of the Storybricks system. I think some people on these forums are so invested in trying to prove other people wrong they don't even comprehend the subject at hand or take the time to understand the vocabulary of the subject matter.
Emergent AI is a part* of Storybricks. It's not the generic name of the entire system and the Emergent AI objects, methods, data members and algorithms are separate from the combat AI, which is another, and different, part of the Storybricks system. Objects between 2 subsystems can interact through methods and take each other's data members into consideration for their own algorithms, subroutines and methods. But they are 2 different parts of the Storybricks system and not to be confused with each other.
People on here seem to think Storybricks is a synonym for Emergent AI for some reason. This is factually incorrect.
This may seem like semantics to a laymen, but to programmers it's a very important distinction. Encapsulation, inheritance and polymorphism, core components of OOP, are very important aspects of game programming. You don't just create one giant monster function that does everything lol.
Exactly. This nanfoodle guy and a few others on here don't seem to understand that Emergent AI is a part of the Storybricks system. I think some people on these forums are so invested in trying to prove other people wrong they don't even comprehend the subject at hand or take the time to understand the vocabulary of the subject matter.
Emergent AI is a part* of Storybricks. It's not the generic name of the entire system and the Emergent AI objects, methods, data members and algorithms are separate from the combat AI, which is another, and different, part of the Storybricks system. Objects between 2 subsystems can interact through methods and take each other's data members into consideration for their own algorithms, subroutines and methods. But they are 2 different parts of the Storybricks system and not to be confused with each other.
People on here seem to think Storybricks is a synonym for Emergent AI for some reason. This is factually incorrect.
This may seem like semantics to a laymen, but to programmers it's a very important distinction. Encapsulation, inheritance and polymorphism, core components of OOP, are very important aspects of game programming. You don't just create one giant monster function that does everything lol.
Well, I personally am not a programmer, but I am in game design. However, even if you where not in either, I don't think it's really all that hard to understand. I think, just as you said, these people just do not want to be wrong ... even though they clearly are.
Also, this is the first game to take Emergence AI as far as this. So I am pretty intrigued by how it all will work out and look in a finished product. It could essentially become a new standard for AI if it works as well as it sounds on paper.
Also, this is the first game to take Emergence AI as far as this. So I am pretty intrigued by how it all will work out and look in a finished product. It could essentially become a new standard for AI if it works as well as it sounds on paper.
I disagree with this. Black&White did it years ago. The creature AI was designed using the same principles that you find in Storybricks (BDI, decisions trees. It even had a neural network). The player was raising his creature while playing (it is a child at first). You have to teach it what to eat (plants, wildlife...people), play with it (destroying everything is optional), punish it if it did something bad/good, etc.
The difference with Storybricks is that Black&White had a single creature with the AI and it started has a kid with no past.
Also, this is the first game to take Emergence AI as far as this. So I am pretty intrigued by how it all will work out and look in a finished product. It could essentially become a new standard for AI if it works as well as it sounds on paper.
I disagree with this. Black&White did it years ago. The creature AI was designed using the same principles that you find in Storybricks (BDI, decisions trees. It even had a neural network). The player was raising his creature while playing (it is a child at first). You have to teach it what to eat (plants, wildlife...people), play with it (destroying everything is optional), punish it if it did something bad/good, etc.
The difference with Storybricks is that Black&White had a single creature with the AI and it started has a kid with no past.
While I understand where you are coming from, I have to point out I did say specifically "as far as this".
Yes Black and White does use an emergence AI on it's creature but it's no where near as in depth and world changing as the emergence AI in Storybricks. The emergence AI in black and white was designed around 1 creature. Storybricks is designed for entire games. Meaning it doesn't just effect npcs. It effects the whole in game world.
Originally posted by Tyggs We don't even have a solid release date for Landmark yet.
David said. We have some good suprizes... you will not be saying "When will you be building EQN" after SoE live. Sounds like we getting a release date for EQN, and who knows maybe Landmark.
I don't know, sounds more like "We'll be showing you all the work we've done on EQN since last year" more than anything else.
Comments
Guess it's just a different way to approach it. Been doing this way too long to stay negative or critical beforehand. I give them a chance, they either make me happy or not.
We can assume a lot for others, but until they have a chance to experience it themselves, we won't know.
EQN seems to be an attempt to bridge many different styles of play and even genres to some degree. But I think it is about the overall game, not one particular element that may bring people in or scare them off.
EQ had a lot of scary things in it for people that want the easy ride. WoW has become so easy, people want harder content. It doesn't have to be either or. EQN could offer enough variance to make the "masses" happy. Only time will tell though.
Only played the WS/ESO betas, but no idea how they could be considered "hard" at least on the solo end beyond being boring. Haven't really followed them either, but if EQN can offer group content that is easy to get into, challenging, and rewarding, maybe people won't have to worry about being able to solo and how easy/hard a game is based on that one aspect. Next month needs to hurry up.
Thank you for telling me what I want. You know me best I guess. You might have missed some of the conversation as well.
http://eqn.junkiesnation.com/2013/09/10/storybricks-and-soe-answer-some-questions/
First there is that. Which they talk about making AI challenging, yet keeping it fun. "Smart" AI would/could be harder, doesn't have to be entirely be the case though. Or it just comes down to your personal definition. A mob throwing up a shield to defend itself is "smarter" and makes it "harder" to kill, but doesn't make it god like. If you think "smarter" means an Orc only attacks with 100 friends or kiting or some other unbalanced action, well that's your deal.
I believe I said earlier, that no I would not want to get owned by a mob I have no chance at defeating, pretty much how most game AI is in reverse. We have a huge tool set to win while they are just meat sacks to beat on.
I would enjoy mobs having even a tiny bit more options then just swing or run. As you said, throwing up defense, CC, healing, etc.
Still want a decent chance at winning, just not a 100% for sure that I could just spam 1 and pick my nose with the other hand and win.
Smarter doesn't have to equate to being super overpowered never going to lose. Just like PVP. Those that utilize their tools better have more options and better chance at winning. Playing smart. Doesn't mean one side is always going to win without any chance of losing. Both continue to act and react until the end. Mobs can screw up just like players if the AI allows for it (read the article).
As they say, making "hard" AI is not difficult. Making challenging, engaging, fun content is a bit more to take on and is supposed to be their secret sauce.
I quit playing all mmorpg's so i was hoping this was going to be a great game to get me back but SOE scares me.
They have become super cheap with all the xpacs for EQ2 i mean like none of them have been worth a dime,more like all of them should have been combined to form one actual good xpac.
What it tells me is SOE is going to split up work and nickle and dime us and they have already done this with EQNext by dividing the Landmark part into it's own IP to double the sales from what SHOULD be one complete game.What i fear is SOE is going to keep going down this road,as soon as they think they have enough to sell us they will release Next even if only 30% done.
I know SOE has not cheapened their product from EQ1 then EQ2 i was happy with those products but the xpacs since have been awful.Point is no matter what they announce i am going to be forever skeptical of anything they do because everything with them has been sneaky since Smedley decided cash shop plus a join the club fee is the way to go.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
Can't disagree with what you say, but with Landmark and EQN both being F2P (at release) and following more the PS2 model (hopefully), not sure how they will nickle and dime us too much. PS2 is playable completely F2P, but it doesn't feel like I "have" to pay anything or am being ripped off when I do pay for things. That is the sign of a good cash shop and F2P model. EQ/EQ2 were more "have" to pay to play in the F2P model, which I'm crossing my fingers doesn't happen in EQN.
Legends of Kesmai, UO, EQ, AO, DAoC, AC, SB, RO, SWG, EVE, EQ2, CoH, GW, VG:SOH, WAR, Aion, DF, CO, MO, DN, Tera, SWTOR, RO2, DP, GW2, PS2, BnS, NW, FF:XIV, ESO, EQ:NL
As much as I love to theorycraft and let my imagination go wild, I do appreciate when companies slap real facts in my face and let me come down to earth a bit. Will be nice to see some more details, hopefully they are a bit more to the point then the vagueness so far.
Is Landmark development really slow? The game has been like one year in development now and most games takes at the minimum three years before they are released, five isn't out there for MMOs.
Games are made in chunks of features. They focused on harvesting and building early on because Landmark and the devs working on EQNext needed these (well building mostly). Now these two features are quite polished, so they moved to other features and add those once they are quite close to their final design.
Some features require final server structures: VOIP, guilds, final chat system, seeing all the island and connecting oceans, even combat because SOE talked about a server handling the monster AI.
Some features require 3rd parties work: water.
Some features are simply technological hurdles: combat and AI
Some features are just low on the priority list because they are more like nice-to-have and not really required: merchants, player's vendor stalls, revamped chats, lots of social stuff.
Landmark has a very cheap entry fee especially compared to something like AA so I am not sure it qualifies as milking.
I believe that Landmark came about because of what they were doing with EQN and not the other way around. I would not be surprised if there were an early access announcement at SOE Live this year.
exactly Bill.. I expect we are still years away from a EQN release date.. lol
Don't hold your breathe pal, SOE only do things which benefits them we are a secondary thought and it's always been like that since the early days. Leopard never changes it's spots and he's done well to fool many people yet again by using the we are listening line and sucks people in.
I've played EQI for ten years and all that happened in that time is the game went down the pan through greed, all $oE care about is $$$ They have made some shocking decisions over the last ten years or so and EQL & EQN need to work to keep them all in jobs. I guess they will announce the start of H1Z1 at the show at some point as they need another cash cow to keep what staff they have left.
Asbo
This thread seriously made me feel like my IQ was stabbed several times -.-
People need to learn to use Google and look up definitions.
First of all, Emergence AI has little to do with combat. Let's break this down and define the word emergence. The act of becoming known or coming into view : the act of emerging. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/emergence <--- Seriously .. use this more often please. Dictionaries exist for a reason.
In scientific use the word emergence tends to be talking about behaviors how a larger entity would react toward a smaller entity. It's all a bit more complicated but it essentially means how these entities would interact through the world and how other entities would change their behaviors. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergence
With that said, Emergence AI isn't the same as Combat AI. Emergence AI has to do with NPC Spawning, World pathfinding, and general npc behaviors through interactions in the environment and other players. However, Combat AI may interact with the Emergence AI. All AI systems can be broken down into groups to describe a particular part of the AI.
I hope this settles that little dispute.
As for AI being "smarter?" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_intelligence_(video_games)
I suggest you give that a read over. Game AI is not even really AI to begin with. Meaning no matter how many variety of tasks they give to the NPCs, it doesn't actually make them smarter. Once you learn what they are capable of, you will find a work around and they will be just as easy as any other AI. You just have to learn their habits. This kind of AI is nothing new and has been used since the 1970s. The only thing really new in more recent AI is the processing power, which allows us to increase the amount of variety in the AI. More choices based on certain triggers.
If you where to add an actual smart AI into the game, it would be too hard for most people. The only reason we can take down 10 npcs with 1 character is because these npcs are not smart and we can figure out their patterns. Taking on 10 who are much smarter will make the game very difficult. This is assuming you are of equal level. It may even make the game next to impossible. That is like taking on 10 people in real life. 1 person against 10, even if you are a good fighter is extremely hard to do. Even against 5 is a challenge.
Playing in a mutliplayer game is a great example. Taking on 5 other opponents isn't always easy. Most people die more often that they get kills. Keeping in mind, playing against a player doesn't mean it's harder. Not all players are all that smart. Imagine playing against 5 players but they all have knowledge on tactical warfare. Against 1 person, they would probably win every time. Now picture that in a PVE situation.
This would mean if you wanted true AI, smarter NPCs, you would have to dumb down the quantity of encounters. In the end, it just would not be all that fun for most people.
TL;DR: Some of you are expecting way to much from the AI combat. You are setting yourself up for disappointment. No matter how much variety they add, all it changes is the amount of time it takes to learn the patterns. Some of you have unrealistic expectations of what this AI will do.
Thanks for reiterating everything I already said. It's nice to know there's someone else on here that understands what's going on.
Legends of Kesmai, UO, EQ, AO, DAoC, AC, SB, RO, SWG, EVE, EQ2, CoH, GW, VG:SOH, WAR, Aion, DF, CO, MO, DN, Tera, SWTOR, RO2, DP, GW2, PS2, BnS, NW, FF:XIV, ESO, EQ:NL
I suggest you both take time to read this link below in full as you both are only partly right and allot wrong. Storybricks AI has so many applications to how a NPC would respond in combat, from class, race and class its epic. Why make a AI system and leave out one of the major parts of the game, combat? Have you even read the link below?
http://www.junkiesnation.com/2013/09/10/storybricks-and-soe-answer-some-questions/
The difference here is I am not talking about the story bricks AI. I am talking about specifically emergence AI and it's definition. So you are the one who seems to be misunderstanding here.
Storybricks is pretty much a full AI engine that consists of many parts which includes an emergence AI, and combat AI.
I don't think anyone here is denying that. So please try and read my post again, and stop misunderstanding.
For some reason you keep linking the 2 things together as if they are the same thing. Emergence AI doesn't equal Storybricks. Story bricks just has emergence AI. It's not the first time it's been done, the word has been around for a while. Maybe if you actually read the links I posted you would know this and wouldn't misunderstand.
As for the rest of my post beyond that point, I posted info about how video game AI is actually not really AI by it's definition. I also posted how making an AI too intelligent would make a game too hard and unfun to play.
As far as I am aware, I am not wrong about anything I pointed on in that area.
Oh and btw .. I read the link you posted, and it doesn't say I am wrong about anything as far as i am aware.
Exactly. This nanfoodle guy and a few others on here don't seem to understand that Emergent AI is a part of the Storybricks system. I think some people on these forums are so invested in trying to prove other people wrong they don't even comprehend the subject at hand or take the time to understand the vocabulary of the subject matter.
Emergent AI is a part* of Storybricks. It's not the generic name of the entire system and the Emergent AI objects, methods, data members and algorithms are separate from the combat AI, which is another, and different, part of the Storybricks system. Objects between 2 subsystems can interact through methods and take each other's data members into consideration for their own algorithms, subroutines and methods. But they are 2 different parts of the Storybricks system and not to be confused with each other.
People on here seem to think Storybricks is a synonym for Emergent AI for some reason. This is factually incorrect.
This may seem like semantics to a laymen, but to programmers it's a very important distinction. Encapsulation, inheritance and polymorphism, core components of OOP, are very important aspects of game programming. You don't just create one giant monster function that does everything lol.
Legends of Kesmai, UO, EQ, AO, DAoC, AC, SB, RO, SWG, EVE, EQ2, CoH, GW, VG:SOH, WAR, Aion, DF, CO, MO, DN, Tera, SWTOR, RO2, DP, GW2, PS2, BnS, NW, FF:XIV, ESO, EQ:NL
Well, I personally am not a programmer, but I am in game design. However, even if you where not in either, I don't think it's really all that hard to understand. I think, just as you said, these people just do not want to be wrong ... even though they clearly are.
Also, this is the first game to take Emergence AI as far as this. So I am pretty intrigued by how it all will work out and look in a finished product. It could essentially become a new standard for AI if it works as well as it sounds on paper.
I disagree with this. Black&White did it years ago. The creature AI was designed using the same principles that you find in Storybricks (BDI, decisions trees. It even had a neural network). The player was raising his creature while playing (it is a child at first). You have to teach it what to eat (plants, wildlife...people), play with it (destroying everything is optional), punish it if it did something bad/good, etc.
The difference with Storybricks is that Black&White had a single creature with the AI and it started has a kid with no past.
blog devoted to gaming AI
http://aigamedev.com/open/editorial/2013-awards/
EQ2 fan sites
We're talking about SOE here....history should say enough.
"going into arguments with idiots is a lost cause, it requires you to stoop down to their level and you can't win"
While I understand where you are coming from, I have to point out I did say specifically "as far as this".
Yes Black and White does use an emergence AI on it's creature but it's no where near as in depth and world changing as the emergence AI in Storybricks. The emergence AI in black and white was designed around 1 creature. Storybricks is designed for entire games. Meaning it doesn't just effect npcs. It effects the whole in game world.
This is assuming it ends up working out that way.
It will be a beta date