[jr2]

Stumbled Upon this.  Some good points, I guess.  What do you think?

[Fineus]

Heh, since I just started working at Game I've gained quite an insight into perspectives of gaming that aren't restricted to my own. However there's quite a lot of similarity between what a lot of people seem to think...

1. Spot on. To pass the time I've been reading the back of game boxes and am actually sick of them claiming "realistic AI that will use cover to outsmart you!". What this translates as is that there are some scripted sequences and a few little tricks - but the enemy AI is nowhere near realistic. Of course, it wouldn't be much fun if you played a game where the AI from minute one actually shot you to **** - so there's a possibility that it's deliberately dummed down.

2. Why take risks when people will pay money for the same tired NHL game with some new charachters and a slightly altered interface? Why indeed?

3. I agree with the article of course. We had a guy from Activision in showing us Quake Wars: Enemy Territory and it was actually refreshing to be shown the ingame graphics from the word "go" rather than some shiny cutscene that'd give no hint of what the game actually looks like.

4. Meh, too often games have been sent back by a ratings standards group and never see the light of day. Why would developers take that risk?

5. To be fair, the article picks on what looks manga/anime based gameplay. Of course the hero is going to have big breasts and revealing outfits. There are games out there where the main charachter is "in proportion" but sadly right now all I can think of is Lara Croft and that doesn't do my point any justice at all...That said I've seen 2 Nintendo DSs sold to middle aged women in the last couple of days - so there's clearly a female fan base out there.

6. Meh, nothing to comment on here.

7. Agreed here, loading takes far too long.

8. Don't care.

9. Agreed.

10... it's at this point that I can't be bothered to respond. The article does make for an interesting read though!

[CP5670]

Some of that stuff only applies to consoles. For PC gaming, there are more serious problems at the moment. PC developers seem to have become incapable of optimizing and debugging their games properly these days.

On the first point, better AI would be useless in a lot of modern games simply because of how their combat mechanics work. Many games I've seen in the last year or two have you up against large numbers of enemies and equipped with quasi-realistic weapons (infinite projectile speed and heavy damage). In these situations, it doesn't matter if the AI is better since you aren't going to notice it anyway.

Yeah, that's what she wears into battle. Thong-length kimono, no bra for those flopping DDD breasts.

So true.

[NGTM-1R]

About the AI; I'm not certain it hasn't already been done honestly. The problem is the cover systems currently in place more than anything. If you could combine, say, the Covenant Elite's abilities to hide from you when it's smart to do so and a cover system like Gears of War, then we'd be talking.

[Fineus]

Well, untill I see the following, I won't be convinced:

A single AI should do a number of things upon encountering you. It should "visually" check what you're carrying - if the AI has a pistol and you have a rocket launcher, it should run for support or dive for cover. If it has a better weapon or at least one it thinks it has a chance with, it should shout for support if it knows there's any close then engage you. It should look for cover if you open fire, as well as scanning the area for interactive objects you may be near such as exploding gas cans that could hurt you - if there's anything like that nearby then it should use that against you. In short, it should be as capable as a human in analyzing the in-game world around it.

A group of AI should shout to eachother, plan attacks and so forth. They could be using radios or telepathy or verbal commands but they should communicate. If you're waiting them out, they should start chucking grenades at you etc. to smoke you out. If you're going in all guns blazing then they should find cover and retaliate. Again - human logic applied to AI.

If you're still relying on scripts to make this happen - as good to see as they were in the likes of Half Life - they're not good enough.

[Roanoke]

correct me of I'm wrong but that seems to be asking an awful lot due to both current hardware and software limitations ?

[Sarafan]

I totally agree with the article. Does someone knows from what game is that woman? I've seen it once but cant remember the name, I think its for the PS2.

[achtung]

http://www.pointlesswasteoftime.com/games/crash.html

Another interesting article from the same place.

[Sarafan]

http://www.pointlesswasteoftime.com/games/crash.html

Another interesting article from the same place.

That one also is really good like you say. IMO one of the "triumphs" PC gaming has is the fact that you can mod the games, thus greatly expanding their longevity unlike console games.

[Polpolion]

IMO one of the "triumphs" PC gaming has is the fact that you can mod the games, thus greatly expanding their longevity unlike console games.

Huzzah for computer games!

[Mr. Vega]

5.

*points eagerly at Beyond Good and Evil and TLJ*

[CP5670]

correct me of I'm wrong but that seems to be asking an awful lot due to both current hardware and software limitations ?

It's certainly doable. Some of what he said is already implemented in a few games. The real question is whether those things would impact the gameplay enough for the player to actually notice them.