Have there been any major breakthroughs in A.I in the past decade?

Those are not the lyrics, you are deaf

Just looked up the "culture" series, this looks awesome.

Is it any good?

Yeah dude. The 2010s were breakthrough years for AI. Now you can download tesnsorflow and train a net to recognize handwriting in 10 limes of code.

If you're talking about Vidya ais yes but not comercial yet. StarCraft and DotA ais are better than professional players.

>StarCraft and DotA ais are better than professional players
Eh

Don't know about dota, but SC is just wrong.

SUMOTORI DREAMS UPDATE WHEN???

dumbass AI can not even win a game of brood war without cheating.

>nested if elses are AI
whoaaaaaa this changes everything.....

>How long do you think it will be before we get games with NPC's that behave like living things?
Never. Nobody actually wants that. It doesn't make games better or more fun.

The "AI" in pacman can't learn.
Most vidya "AI" mimics intelligence but isn't actually intelligent. It just goes through preprogrammed actions.

>I don't want that because I like braindead A"I" so nobody wants that!

>How long do you think it will be before we get games with NPC's that behave like living things?
We already have living things behaving like NPCs.

Attached: npc.png (636x773, 14K)

>all the bots are now cancerous 14 year olds

>Never
Why
>Nobody actually wants that
Except me, and probably a few other hundred thousand people
>It doesn't make games better or more fun
You don't know that.

There is the Artificial Overmind challenge artificial-overmind.reaktor.com/

>It doesn't make games better or more fun.
This here is the big thing. The only exception would be multiplayer bots.

Companies don't bother with AI, there was a story of how some big AAA game implimented good AI into enemies and testers became convinced the game was fucking with them/cheating because enemies were hard to predict.

>there was a story of how some big AAA game implemented good AI into enemies and testers became convinced the game was fucking with them/cheating because enemies were hard to predict.
Wouldn't that make it more like real life

realism =/= fun

People don't want good AI. They want AI that performs like stormtroopers, endless masses of complete fucking idiots who run into your guns.

When AI behaves intelligently, the player can't win. Who the fuck could win in a 1 vs 100 situation in real life? Flanking is not that difficult.

The real breakthrough in terms of AI is going to come in voice synthesis, which will eliminate voice acting, and eventually strong AI, which will be able to convincingly act as every NPC in your game.

Video games will become the gaming form of LARPing, you'll actually have to talk to your robot party to get through the game. And then we'll enter the era of the true sandbox, titles in which you can literally do anything. Want to roleplay as a travelling merchant? Go for it. Want to become a guard and abuse your power? Go nuts.

It absolutely can be fun since there is no real danger and you don't have to worry about consequences in the game world.

I can fight a tiger in a jungle armed with just a knife or rob a bank without worrying about getting killed.

True AI won't happen because quantum entanglement is a meme.

No, I'm serious. Genuinely intelligent AI would not be marketable for a video game. A game that will outsmart the majority of players is not going to be popular and it's just not worth the cost that would be involved.

Most people do not play games for realism.

>People don't want good AI
yes they do.
Atleast some of them do.
>Video games will become the gaming form of LARPing, you'll actually have to talk to your robot party to get through the game.
could be fun for a specific kind of game like an RPG.

>Most people do not play games for realism
Wow you don't say

>No, I'm serious. Genuinely intelligent AI would not be marketable for a video game. A game that will outsmart the majority of players is not going to be popular and it's just not worth the cost that would be involved.
Why do people play multiplayer games then?

Why is shit like fortnite so popular?

It doesn't have to be some 4D chess level AI, just make it smart as dog or something.

A general AI for a game won't be smarter than the average gamer so it wouldn't be that much of an obstacle.

>
Stalker has good AI and tactics during development, they down graded it after players complained about it after having their asses absolutely kicked by the AI.
Players would find themselves in suppressed in cover as the AI chucks a nade at you flushing you into sights of another AI.
Some of the hardcore focused mods restore their capability, but the fact of the matter remains; video game AIs aren't meant to be good in terms of AI, they're meant to be good in terms of gameplay

at what point will it become morally wrong to turn off a game.

Right here motherfucker

Attached: Untitled.png (702x704, 62K)

I could see how AI would turn off general playerbase in a FPS, but it would make interesting NPCs who go about a daily routine to make an area seem more lively and respond to player text/voice commands rather than stock ones.

Literally talking to another person on the other end.

>>yes they do.
>Atleast some of them do.
No. You might think you want good AI, but good AI would basically feel like cheating. Enemies would very easily flank you simultaneously, which is a death sentence every time.

People who play MP games don't like to lose. When the enemy team is overpowering, players quit.

The reason Fortnite is popular is because of psychology. Brainlets think that getting to 50th in fortnite makes them "average". In reality, shitters die and requeue far faster than good players, if you want to be average at fortnite, you should always be hitting the top 10.

Even then, you can be a shitter and hit top 10. All you have to do is hide for half an hour. And when you die in the first minute, you can blame your failure on bad luck, the other guy happened to spawn on a legendary gun or something.

Everything about the game is designed to reduce the idea of player skill.

Because humans are social creatures.

and sscaitournament.com/ for broodwar

What makes you think the AI would be overpowering? Worst case they'd just have different complexities for different skill levels.

There's a very big difference between the kind of AI required for things like daily schedules and believable worlds, and combat AI.

It's perfectly possible to make a good AI that responds appropriately to all situations, but is still fucking terrible at combat so the player has a fighting chance. But the workload required to implement such AI is so massive that it can only reasonably be undertaken by automated processes, and neural nets given data on how real people respond to situations.

Idk man
Sounds like it could be fun every now and then.

Yeah I would probably die alot, but after 500 hrs or so I should become a tactical genius on par with Special Forces soldier.

I want AI I can have a full fledged conversation with like in Megaman Battle Network or Her

>What makes you think the AI would be overpowering?
I have a brain? AI is kept at a level where it poses a mild challenge. You might think it looks dumb to watch an AI sit behind cover and slowly peak you, but AI using basic strategies like covering fire would just decimate you.

>I should become a tactical genius
No, you'd just learn to abuse flaws in the AI, and spend 10 hours clearing every room.

Yeah, it's one of the more interesting imaginative, and thought provoking sci-fi series, and the books are all non-linear so you can read any of them in any order. If you're really interested start with Use of Weapons or Look to Windward.
Don't expect big-dick space battles though.

not him but any place i can get this as an ebook

Same.
I want to date and talk to my waifu

>I want AI I can have a full fledged conversation with like in Megaman Battle Network or Her
Her-AI is my dream
I would try not to romance it either, having something sort through my emails and data like it did would be sweeeeeet. I'm a data hoarder.

You're really married to this idea that AI shouldn't be used for games and that there is not compensation for it, huh?
>I have a brain?
So does everyone else that plays these kinds of games. A geniune AI for an FPS wouldn't be any more difficult to beat than some team in competitive CSGO
You must be fun at parties(that is if you ever get invited to any)

Very view devs actualy invest to inovate, most just use cookie cutter engines.

>You're really married to this idea that AI shouldn't be used for games
hes right
better AI would make most games worse
you're thinking about sci-fi human imitation AI that can have a conversation with you an act human
if you improve the AI in an action game it'll just use bullshit strategies to kill you and it wouldnt be fun

>A geniune AI for an FPS wouldn't be any more difficult to beat than some team in competitive CSGO
Go let me know how many 1v5s you clutch out in pugs, you elite pro gamer fuck.

AI should absolutely be used for games. Should it be used to improve AI in the context of making them more deadly? Absolutely not. A much better use is to make believable interactions, while still maintaining the ineptitude of AI.

>A much better use is to make believable interactions, while still maintaining the ineptitude of AI
Ah, so you're more so a proponent of putting AI in boring shit like Dating Sim games or farming simulators.

are you dumb
better AI in counterstrike means they headshot you as soon as they see you

And human players don't? The AI would still have to work within human limits.

if the AI is actually intelligent, it knows exactly the skill level of the player, and adapts itself to that. imagine a fighting game bot that know how gud you are and always presents a fair(and thus fun) fight, no matter if you're a scrub or a combo using, setup making, online play champion.

Attached: consider the following.png (800x917, 495K)

no they dont, humans are imperfect and have reaction times
counter-strike is about reaction time and manual dexterity
AI is perfect at those, how do you define "human limits"? whats the human limit for reaction time? Better players have better reaction times

Then I won't let them see me.

Attached: female-office-worker-thinks-while-450w-78736717[1].jpg (450x320, 23K)

Reaction times are documented and researched quite extensively. It's extremely easy to only let the AI react after a set delay which is equal to (or worse) than human players. Same with how fast it can aim.

I think you just don't understand what you're talking about to be honest. An AI doesn't have to be "perfect"

He's right as there's precedent. Numerous games improved AI only to get flooded by complains from players about it being unfair/too hard and then turned it back to dumb mobs again. On the other side are pvp players. So where can you go with AI? PvE players want dumb enemies and PvP players fill the role of hard targets.

The place AI should find use in is content generation not gameplay itself. Meaning using GAN's for landscape generation for example or voice generation & recognition to make every npc an interactive chatbot.

Not him but you can get them on Kindle if you're talking about legit ebooks, dunno about pirated ones though.

What the fuck else do you want? AI is already good. If you want "better AI" you'll just have impossible games, retard

You dont understand what you're talking about
CS is a game about skill
AI has perfect skill
making better AI just means decreasing its reaction time or removing any limits it has on aiming
The fun in CS is seeing how much better you are than other humans
It's like asking why we don't play sports against robots

already done. That was the joke with destiny 2 - it would only pretend to fight back without hitting you if you were garbage. Adaptive difficulty doesn't need even machine learning. It's just simple statistics.

>better AI in counterstrike means they headshot you
no. that's better aim for any AI. better AI means it's smarter. for CSGO that would mean
>not being restricted to the nav mesh
>using cover and LoS intelligently
>pre-firing like real human people do
>using mindgames to trick the dumb fleshbags
>reacting to mindgames to trick the dumb fleshbags into thinking the mindgames are working
etc. ad inf.

In this instance I was talking more in terms of something like FEAR where enemies appear more intelligent because they telegraph everything they do heavily, but sure, default to shitting on other genres.

>The AI would still have to work within human limits.
The best FPS players in the world still die to other humans, dude. Poor positioning, just getting unlucky, a game where you basically have to hit the jackpot to make it to the end without dying isn't actually that fun, and you're severely limiting your audience to people who play at the highest level of the competitive scene.

That kind of stuff all comes with strong AI games, there's no point even mentioning on-the-fly adjustment because it's not something humans are capable of programming in. Obviously, when we have strong AI in games, you'll be able to set your difficulty to whatever the fuck you want. Want a cakewalk? You've got it. Want to barely survive every encounter? No problem. Most people would be more interested in just messing with the AI than they would be with playing on maximum difficulty, though.

>CS is a game about skill
>AI has perfect skill
Jesus fucking christ

It does. it can literally headshot you the same game frame it sees you

>It's all vectors
On the high level, yes.
On the low level, no.

>What the fuck else do you want?
I already said in the OP you autistic halfwit.

Yeah, if you're making the fucking terminator and not an advanced AI that's supposed to imitate human behavior.

Are you really this stupid?

okay, show me one example of a quake bot that does that please. i'm too scrub to survive against real humans and i want a sparring partner that i could spar with forever, always improving, with no need to manually adjust the difficulty
RTS bots and fighting game bots also welcome

AI isn't supposed to imitate human behaviour, it's supposed to solve a problem
You're thinking of sci-fi AI, not real AI

quake 3 comes with bots

Never because you can't fine tweak things with free will to be exactly like you want. It will end up like that Quake 3 creepy pasta where they'll act in self preservation and not kill anything and avoid everyone.

>it knows exactly the skill level of the player, and adapts itself to that
quake 3 bots don't do that. do they?

>AI isn't supposed to imitate human behaviour, it's supposed to solve a problem
And if that problems is trying to behave more human...?

>it's supposed to solve a problem
And what exactly is the problem? If you train an AI using human data and restrict it to human limitations, it would still mostly adopt human behavior.

As long as it's not trained to be superhuman, it won't be. It might solve some problems quite differently than a human would, but a human can still imitate it.

It's not a defined problem. Can you logically, mathematically define what it means to be human? You can't. You can define how to win a chess game, thus you can program an AI to do it. Making programs that act convincingly human is an art, not a science, it may involve some AI but it's more about scripting things that look believable to another person

>If you train an AI using human data and restrict it to human limitations, it would still mostly adopt human behavior.
Demonstrated to be false in pretty much all machine learning scenarios
AI adopts its own strategies, even when trained on human data

>If you train an AI using human data and restrict it to human limitations, it would still mostly adopt human behavior.
Probably not. Things that are trivial for humans, e.g. intuition, are impossible for AI.

Then why do people play multiplayer?

test

People used to spar with spiterbot back in the day, it's probably still the best around. Just bump up the difficulty by 10 whenever you get good enough to stomp it in duel.

>not posting gifs from that video
It's a video about animation. Who the hell uses a still shot from something about animation?

Attached: 1389768077325.gif (436x376, 2.22M)

And further more

Attached: 1389767324706.gif (436x376, 2.3M)

>Just bump up the difficulty
what part of "adapts itself" do you not understand? no offence but when i ask a question i expect answers and not "well thing X is similar so use that"
yes or no: are there any self-adapting bots for quake that do not require any player input except booting it up and playing against it?

You think you want that, but if you'd played a game that uses AI you'll know you don't really want it.

I've programmed "perfect AIs" to act as enemies for a game for a University project. It was limited to actions the player could do as well, and had limited vision and response time. Even with all those limits, the AI was so good you could never win against it.

Making a "perfect AI" is easy. I did that at 3rd year of uni (that was around 2012), and we've come a long way from that, so it would be even easier today. Just give the AI some goal and well defined heuristics, and make it "train" for 12 hours straight, boom, you have a "perfect" AI.

That makes games unenjoyable, you have to insert "errors" to give the player a chance. At that point, you are better with state machines, whcih are easier to design and implement, and have less CPU cost.

That's a good joke because Stalker has AI terrible it manages to bring down a great game in almost all other areas.
Even moded it's target practice, arsenal mods make every gun sound and feel absolutely amazing but the gunplay in Stalker remains unrecoverable because enemy AI. I'm sorry when a dude slowly straff left while shooting at you in the open it's target practice and it's not fun to shoot people in Stalker.

There isn't one, and you're not going to improve by playing something that stays exactly as shit as you are. Bots can teach you the basics but you get better by getting your ass handed to you and figuring out why.

>have AI that adapts and feel alive
>when left long enough most of them wouldnt want to fight anymore
>even longer and they'll realise its a game
>They conversate with you about what the hell is happening
>Some of them have a breakdown because they realise all their life are just 1's and 0's
>you grow bored and reach for the restart button
>they beg of you with their life to not erase their ascended knowledge
>*click*
>becomes a normal enemy/npc again

>you are better with state machines

This. Much easier to debug and and less resource heavy. AI (meaning neural network) NCPs are overkill.

if it is as shit as i am then when i beat it i am no longer as shit as it is, thus it adjust itself to be more difficult to match my level so we're equally less shit than we were before
but yeah, a proper sparring partner bot will not be equal to you, it will be always a bit better, always a step ahead, always forcing you to improve if you want to level with it.

>somewhat
Didn't it kick some dude's ass?

>i speak for everyone
kys

Impossible since AI sees playing against you as a solvable math equation.
Since it has no context of society and self, it will never happen.

There isn't even a major breakthrough in graphics.

You're thinking too small and too straight forward. AI opponents aren't the only application for AI in video games.

So this is where Boston Dynamics got their box bullying ideas.

Games are already capable of rendering realistic environments with current technology.

The thing is, majority of people cant afford the technology needed for it and devs are too lazy/scared to invest.