126 replies to this topic

[Siegegun]

Prototelis, on 07 October 2019 - 07:49 AM, said:

The VIP isn't AI.

Its just a bot following nodes; It doesn't respond, adapt, or exhibit any intelligent action.

Every game in the series has had trash AI, expect MW5 will be no different.

My point was that AI can be comprised of scripts, and in a lot of cases in a lot of engines it is.

Did not know the VIP was just a node follower though, I thought there was some kind of choice making going on. That makes me think even worse of PGI abilities. I am not expecting a lot of MW5 AI.

Edit- Now I am curious, did the VIP follow just one predetermined path, or did it get assigned one of a few different paths at games beginning? I suppose it doesn't matter, just curious. Also as an aside how in the world did it get stuck so often if it was path following?!? That makes PGI even worse in this regard, it just path follows and it still gets stuck, who made these paths and path nodes? Just wow...

Edited by Siegegun, 07 October 2019 - 08:07 AM.

[JediPanther]

Siegegun, on 07 October 2019 - 08:02 AM, said:

My point was that AI can be comprised of scripts, and in a lot of cases in a lot of engines it is.

Did not know the VIP was just a node follower though, I thought there was some kind of choice making going on. That makes me think even worse of PGI abilities. I am not expecting a lot of MW5 AI.

Edit- Now I am curious, did the VIP follow just one predetermined path, or did it get assigned one of a few different paths at games beginning? I suppose it doesn't matter, just curious. Also as an aside how in the world did it get stuck so often if it was path following?!? That makes PGI even worse in this regard, it just path follows and it still gets stuck, who made these paths and path nodes? Just wow...

It had two at most randomly chosen. Players had no control over it. Even as defenders trying to shoot off a leg or put another fully stoped atlas infront of it did nothing. It was extremely one sided to favor the attackers as only invisible walls or glitches would stop that pos unless killed.

I think I already posted the screen shots I had of it in my rvn and how even a win was piss poor rewarded. Hardly enough to cover costs of any uavs/strikes used. The only good thing about it was no nascar but if you knew the two routes it took it was way to easy to set up a fire line and win.

[Prototelis]

Siegegun, on 07 October 2019 - 08:02 AM, said:

My point was that AI can be comprised of scripts,

I don't care about your point; the VIP is not AI.

[General Solo]

Siegegun, on 07 October 2019 - 07:37 AM, said:

I will break it down. You nor I nor other players know what the license says, thus unless you have any actual quotes or evidence you do not know if they are/were multiple contracts. You are guessing without actual evidence.

You seem to think there is a difference between something being "scripted" or an "AI". AI can be scripted or hard coded into the engine or a combination. ALL of them are an AI. Just because something is scripted does not mean it is not an AI. AI is and can be made with nothing but scripts, and as a player you will not know the difference. I.E. it doesn't matter how the "VIP" AI was made, it didn't suck because it was scripted (if it was), it sucked because PGI is bad at implementing AI. Also I hope they do not use some stock AI with unreal, most "stock" AI solutions are super simplistic, to do it right PGI still needs to learn how to make more than a FSM AI.

I'll break this down for you.

Edit: My guess is:
Their are two licensing aggreements,
one for MWO done ages ago and another for MW5 done years later.

So it was my guess, are we done?

Edited by OZHomerOZ, 07 October 2019 - 08:48 AM.

[General Solo]

JediPanther, on 07 October 2019 - 08:13 AM, said:

..... or put another fully stoped atlas infront of it did nothing....

You needed two or more mechs standing in front to bring it to a very very slow crawl.
Even won a game that way
ONCE

[Siegegun]

Prototelis, on 07 October 2019 - 08:36 AM, said:

I don't care about your point; the VIP is not AI.

I never said it was. I simply said you could have an AI that is scripted and usually you do. The VIP was just being used as an example because it was insinuated because it was "scripted" it was not an AI. The VIP itself is not, but that is because it node follows, takes no input, and makes no decisions, thats what makes it not an AI, that has nothing to do with how it is implemented either via scripts or an engine compiled part of the engine itself.

OZHomerOZ, on 07 October 2019 - 08:43 AM, said:

I'll break this down for you.

Edit: My guess is:
Their are two licensing aggreements,
one for MWO done ages ago and another for MW5 done years later.

So it was my guess, are we done?

Yes we are done. I am not so sure this is the case. But again this is all guessing. The reason I questioned what you claimed in the first place, you said it WAS two contracts not that you thought it was that way. One is fact the other is opinion. You presented your opinion as fact.

[General Solo]

While we are guessing, my guess is:

PGI,

https://www.igdb.com...anha-games/best

The makers of famous titles like Bass Pro Shops The Strike and Duke Nukeem forever didn't have the games industry clout or standing to negotiate a single agreement that covered both MWO and MW5

Their best rating game at the time was Bass Pro Shops The Strike

So my guess is PGI ask MS for license, Microsoft said hey PGI, take license, if successfull we talk again, if not we take license back.

Some thing like that.

Now But back to AI

My guess MWO contract PVP only no AI allowed (So not to compete with MS Mech Assualt 25)

and

My guess MW5 contract, Single Player game with AI because MWO successfull and MS not really interested in franchise.

My guess

Edited by OZHomerOZ, 07 October 2019 - 09:40 AM.

[Siegegun]

OZHomerOZ, on 07 October 2019 - 09:35 AM, said:

While we are guessing, my guess is:

PGI,

https://www.igdb.com...anha-games/best

The makers of famous titles like Bass Pro Shops The Strike and Duke Nukeem forever didn't have the games industry clout or standing to negotiate a single agreement that covered both MWO and MW5

Their best rating game at the time was Bass Pro Shops The Strike

So my guess is PGI ask MS for license, Microsoft said hey PGI, take license, if successfull we talk again, if not we take license back.

Some thing like that.

Now But back to AI

My guess MWO contract PVP only no AI allowed (So not to compete with MS Mech Assualt 25)

and

My guess MW5 contract, Single Player game with AI because MWO successfull and MS not really interested in franchise.

My guess

That is possible, contracts and licensing can be odd or convoluted sometimes. And yes PGI game making up until this title and soon to be mw5, has been "awesome". All those "great" games up until this one lol.

I always thought MWO had to be released by a certain year or they would lose the contract which is why we saw MWO "released" when it was and how it was. I.E. They literally just took off the "beta" tag without changing anything just before the new year. Seems like they were not done and just pushed a release just in time for the new year at that time, with no more development and ta da! Released game, even though anyone playing it at the time would know it was not out of beta, most of the stuff they were shooting for game wise was not implemented then, but later (or never at all, or not even working on it. FP im looking at you).

Makes me wonder bout HBS BattleTech, was this sub licensed from MS, or PGI? Because IGP obviously had some sort of license for their turn based "game", when PGI bought out IGP did they get those or was such a license negotiated directly with MS? It is these things that make me think there is not multiple contracts. I could of course be completely wrong, like we said, all guessing.

Believe it or not I am not nor was I trying to rip on you, and I am curious about what you think. I am not trying to argue with anyone, forums are hard to see/show that. Limitations on text only discussions, sometimes things do not convey well.

[Prototelis]

Siegegun, on 07 October 2019 - 09:11 AM, said:

but that is because it node follows,

Node following does not exclude something from being AI.

[General Solo]

Siegegun, on 07 October 2019 - 10:05 AM, said:

Makes me wonder bout HBS BattleTech, was this sub licensed from MS, or PGI? Because IGP obviously had some sort of license for their turn based "game", when PGI bought out IGP did they get those or was such a license negotiated directly with MS?

All good mang, thanks for correcting me on my stating as facts wae's.

I guess that all licensing is done thought the license owner Microsoft.

Edit: MWO's relative success demonstrated to both MS and Jordan/HBS that their was still a demand for the franchise, so negotiating a licensees with the creator of the Franchise was a no Brainer, as their was profits in dem dar mechs

Edited by OZHomerOZ, 07 October 2019 - 10:23 AM.

[Dimento Graven]

PhoenixFire55, on 09 September 2019 - 11:47 PM, said:

Or instead of being ret@rded we can actually go back to 8v8, i.e. the way this game was always meant to be played.

It was never "meant" to ONLY be played 8v8, that was just all PGI could manage at the time.

Comments from Russ, and other sources at PGI at the time, consistently showed the intent was always 12v12 (or more - if possible).

I'd honestly hate going back to 8v8.

[Siegegun]

Prototelis, on 07 October 2019 - 10:14 AM, said:

Node following does not exclude something from being AI.

Again never said that. Read the rest of the sentence. See edit 2, did not proofread! It does indeed look like I implied this. Sorry Prot, should have written it out better.

Siegegun, on 07 October 2019 - 09:11 AM, said:

The VIP itself is not, but that is because it node follows, takes no input, and makes no decisions, thats what makes it not an AI, that has nothing to do with how it is implemented either via scripts or an engine compiled part of the engine itself.

Look at the entire sentence not a small fraction of it taken out of context.

I have coded different AI. I am not an expert as I said before I am a hobbyist, have been for more than a decade. I have done FSM AI, behavior tree based AI,

and I would love to attempt a GOAP based AI, gearing up for that. I do this for fun sometimes.

I know how AI in games work. I have done node based pathing AI for navigation, I have done pathfinding AI for navigation. Considering i have coded all these things, I am well aware of the differences in all of this.

edit- formatting got ALL messed up
edit 2- You are right Prot, it does look like I am saying that or implying it in the sentence, I should have proof read it. As you said node following is used often in actual AI and does not mean something is not an AI. Navigation itself does not determine an AI, but the other highlighted points in my response. Taking no input, making no decisions, implementing nothing, just following a path.

Edited by Siegegun, 07 October 2019 - 10:41 AM.

[Christophe Ivanov]

YES...time for bots or in my opinion, AI Mechwarriors. The quality of players lately has finally gotten to me and it's more annoying to play in QP than anytime in the past. Just yesterday, Map=Canyon playing Conquest. Not ONE mech was doing any capping. all were our trying to kill the enemy while the enemy was out capping mostly. Me being in an assault, you usually don't go capping and instead fight the enemy while your Lights and Mediums take on the capping and supporting the big meches.

End result? The enemy was more organized and had capped all but one and were on their way to win this match from both kills an capping. Never mind I asked for capping to be done...it's like I'm talking to a brick wall.

[General Solo]

Prototelis, on 07 October 2019 - 10:14 AM, said:

Node following does not exclude something from being AI.

To me AI is reactive, yes?
It reacts to events, like FPS AI uses cover when shot at.

The VIP Atlas seemed to just follow a path and was non reactive to any stimulus.
You could shoot it block it but no reaction.

So I think it was scripted.

[General Solo]

Christophe Ivanov, on 07 October 2019 - 10:29 AM, said:

YES...time for bots or in my opinion, AI Mechwarriors. The quality of players lately has finally gotten to me and it's more annoying to play in QP than anytime in the past. Just yesterday, Map=Canyon playing Conquest. Not ONE mech was doing any capping. all were our trying to kill the enemy while the enemy was out capping mostly. Me being in an assault, you usually don't go capping and instead fight the enemy while your Lights and Mediums take on the capping and supporting the big meches.

End result? The enemy was more organized and had capped all but one and were on their way to win this match from both kills an capping. Never mind I asked for capping to be done...it's like I'm talking to a brick wall.

I agree we need bots.

Now don't take this the wrong way.

We could have T2 bots that cap on canyon

And Casual T1 bots that clear the field and recap over the enemy teams dead smoking husks on canyon.
(Hint-Small maps make recapping easy, and really uncap is enough)

I do agree Quick play has become more frustrating due to skill gap within the team.

And bots can help with that, if it's done well.

Edited by OZHomerOZ, 07 October 2019 - 10:40 AM.

[The pessimistic optimist]

OZHomerOZ, on 07 October 2019 - 10:30 AM, said:

To me AI is reactive, yes?
It reacts to events, like FPS AI uses cover when shot at.

The VIP Atlas seemed to just follow a path and was non reactive to any stimulus.
You could shoot it block it but no reaction.

So I think it was scripted.

It's very simple rudimentary AI it's AI but so simple it can barley be called AI

[General Solo]

Path following AI

[Prototelis]

Siegegun, on 07 October 2019 - 10:29 AM, said:

Again never said that. Read the rest of the sentence.

You literally did, I quoted it.

The rest of the sentence is mostly correct; that part is not and doesn't drive your point any further.

SirSmokes, on 07 October 2019 - 10:36 AM, said:

It's very simple rudimentary AI it's AI but so simple it can barley be called AI

No, it is not AI. It does not adapt, react, or display any intelligent behavior.

Edited by Prototelis, 07 October 2019 - 10:43 AM.

[The pessimistic optimist]

Prototelis, on 07 October 2019 - 10:42 AM, said:

You literally did, I quoted it.

The rest of the sentence is mostly correct; that part is not and doesn't drive your point any further.



No, it is not AI. It does not adapt, react, or display any intelligent behavior.

Do you under stand the word rudimentary it's still a AI just so simple it can barley be called one yes

[Prototelis]

SirSmokes, on 07 October 2019 - 10:44 AM, said:

Do you under stand the word rudimentary it's still a AI just so simple it can barley be called one yes

Do you understand that "Game AI" is a defined term with criteria?

It can't be "rudimentary" AI because it doesn't meet whatsoever the basic criteria of being AI.

Edited by Prototelis, 07 October 2019 - 10:48 AM.