Rune wrote:
> It's a bit fuzzy. Let's take rendering engines as an example. Let's say we 
> have the engines A, B and C. Each of them support a set of features, 
> including state-of-the-art features, but none of them have it all.

Sure. Nothing but economics stops someone from putting them all in, 
right? Economics and processing power?

> This means that it's not very easy to summarize.

OK.

> To a high degree yes, but it's also:
> - how to attack the enemy while keeping oneself in minimum danger (seeking 
> cover)
> - how to cooperate to best take out the enemy while not getting in each 
> other's way
> - how to percieve and correctly use the environment, like elevators, 
> sidewalks, terminals, cannons...

Ah, OK. I guess that makes sense.

> ....and that's just in FPS-games. These task sound simple, but in reality 
> they're far from "not especially difficult".

No, actually, it sounds pretty visciously difficult to get right, to me. :-)

> In games like Oblivion and Grand Theft Auto, NPC's must evaluate their needs 
> and plan ways to satisfy them - like go to a shop and buy some food, then 
> return home, sit at your table and eat the food. If the shop keeper has been 
> killed, another shop must be found - or there is the option of stealing 
> food. Every decision must furthermore be based on the NPC's knowledge of the 
> world, which may be outdated. An internal model of the world must be kept in 
> the NPC's memory, so it doesn't seem to know things it isn't supposed to be 
> able to know.

Hmmm. Yah, I can see that, where you have something more than what you 
get in (say) Half-life in terms of plottiness. :-)

> Other types of games have completely different requirements for AI. For 
> example race-simulations and fighter games.

Certainly.  OK, I guess all that makes sense.  Thanks!

-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     Remember the good old days, when we
     used to complain about cryptography
     being export-restricted?

Post a reply to this message