Google+

26 comments

  • D0CCON - April 10, 2014 3:13 p.m.

    This article made me immediately think of Oblivion's "Radiant" AI. It was neat how each character had their own daily schedules, but I also remember seeing videos of NPCs raking the carpets of their houses (still loved the game to death).
  • Eightboll812 - April 7, 2014 6:58 p.m.

    I thought Farcry 2 had a pretty decent AI as far as shooters go. For example, you go to clear out one safe house, and the enemies take cover and hide behind the building and so forth...so you go stealthily around trying to find them and they sometimes surprise you. Another time, they'll immediately head out toward you in the jungle and try to flank you on multiple sides. Some enemies will snipe from their posted location, others will try to stalk you through the jungle. It wasn't perfect, but I thought it was pretty darn good.
  • CitizenWolfie - April 4, 2014 3:45 p.m.

    I'd argue that Uncharted (1) did more for decent AI companions than Bioshock Infinite did. It felt like Elizabeth pretty much walked round on a loop when exploring and worked as an automated ammo dispenser when you were low. Even the tears you had to activate yourself. Whereas Elena and Sully (and later Chloe) really felt like they were doing their own things and actually getting involved in combat. I think that's what made Last of Us' Ellie such a great companion - ND laid down the AI groundwork in Uncharted. I was quite impressed with the AI in MGS:GZ. I noticed a lot of little realistic touches such as calling CP before investigating stuff, moving in pairs, using flashlights to check behind shadows etc. At one point I was holding up a guard when his commander radioed in for a sitrep. I was too slow in reacting and suddenly I had lots of guards coming my way. And when the guards changed shift patterns after finding Paz it really threw me off my game. Hopefully they can expand upon all of that in MGS:TPP.
  • john-kemery - April 3, 2014 1:58 a.m.

    Was surprised you didn't mention the AI from Unreal, the Skaarj used to dive away from your fire and try and find cover. Sometimes they would retreat and find another way to hit you.
  • universaltofu - April 2, 2014 10:56 p.m.

    Fable 2's dog was pretty cool, of all the outlandish promises of that series, I think the dog was the one that delivered.
  • Unoriginal - April 3, 2014 1:44 a.m.

    There was a dog in Fable 2? How come Peter Moleneux never mentioned this?
  • winner2 - April 3, 2014 10:57 a.m.

    Dude that dog took that from a good-great game to a great game, I think most of us chose him at the end. If you havn't played fable 2, go play it. Definitely the best since the first one I think, I have yet to play the first. That reminds me I got it the other day for like 3$ on steam, need to find some time to get to that.
  • Balaska - April 2, 2014 10:55 p.m.

    I like to be a pedant. In Halo 1 you had to drive, the AI couldn't. Also combat tactics in FEAR, yeah it was impressive, but what about the spec ops in Half-Life? Predates FEAR but 8 years, yet shows amazing squad tactics.
  • yonderTheGreat - April 3, 2014 9:06 a.m.

    The fact that he talks about the Halo AI like that instead of Half-Life AI makes me cry because he obviously hasn't played Half-Life. I thought that people who haven't played Half-Life weren't allowed to talk about games.
  • Balaska - April 3, 2014 9:30 a.m.

    Go back and play Chapter 5, We've got hostiles. Then tell me I haven't played Half-Life. Also read my comment, I am talking about the Spec ops guys, not the aliens. I also never said the AI in Halo was bad, I simply stated that the AI in halo 1, on the original Xbox, cannot drive.
  • pl4y4h - April 2, 2014 8:23 p.m.

    I really should take some time out and see what this FEAR business is all about
  • mafyooz - April 3, 2014 7:38 a.m.

    You could definitely do worse than giving them a bash, especially with how cheap they are these days. I'm not a huge FPS fan but I really enjoyed them, the first looks a little ropey these days but is still pretty creepy in places, and the AI really is some of the best.
  • AdonisX82 - April 3, 2014 7:48 a.m.

    I tried it, I REALLY tried to give it a chance. I don't know, I got bored. but I will say this, there are few things in gaming as cool as shooting a guy point blank with a shotgun in slow-mo in fear.
  • AdonisX82 - April 3, 2014 7:49 a.m.

    I tried it, I REALLY tried to give it a chance. I don't know, I got bored. but I will say this, there are few things in gaming as cool as shooting a guy point blank with a shotgun in slow-mo in fear.
  • Earthbound_X - April 2, 2014 5:32 p.m.

    I don't agree about Elizabeth from Infinite feeling like a real person. There were too many times, where story dialog was happening, but she still walked around looking at stuff while talking to you, not even looking at you, to feel real. Alyx Vance has been the only AI in any game, for just a second or two, I forgot they were not real. That's the closest any AI has come to feeling real to me so far.
  • AdonisX82 - April 3, 2014 7:47 a.m.

    There were too many times, where story dialog was happening, but she still walked around looking at stuff while talking to you, not even looking at you, to feel real. that's all just scripted events though. that's not on the fly "this is what's happening so this is how the character reacts to it" a.i
  • codystovall - April 2, 2014 5:31 p.m.

    Elizabeth AI was nothing special imo, if she cant be hurt she might as well be hiding or not even there and id rather have items spawn then have to wait for her to give them to me. With all the hype(even a video praising how "advanced" her ai was) she seemed pretty robotic, she was expressive and had good dialogue though. Ashley from resi 4 was more real to me and id like to see that expanded upon. A true advancement to me personally would be more spontaneous interaction with the environment and intereaction with the player, being able to take down enemies on their own and in their own way and a good balance of them aiding you and you aiding them.
  • derpinainreallife - April 3, 2014 11:01 a.m.

    Would you prefer that she could be hurt and you had to babysit her the whole time? I think the appeal of Elizabeth for a lot of people was that you could have a constant companion who wouldn't threaten your progress by constantly dying in firefights. I think Elizabeth is the first step toward real spontaneous AI interaction with their environment. If you haven't seen the interview the Irrational team did about creating Elizabeth, it's worth a watch, especially the parts about how her AI was designed to respond to specific "tags" within the areas you're exploring.
  • codystovall - April 3, 2014 10:06 p.m.

    You clearly didnt read my comment.... No, like I said the best would be for her to handle herself and interact with alongside you on the field and not disappear completely or delegated to following your orders to spawn things, and does better in battle the more the player does better in battle. But irrational was incapable of making the game spontaneous as it was thought to be in its e3 "gameplay" trailer which wouldve been great, but they didnt, so it wasnt. I also watched that video, it was also pretentious and just shows me why it took so many years for this game to come out and left me unimpressed, and explains to me why so many people have now lost their jobs. Also elizabeth wasnt interactive, she was just well programmed to follow the script accordingly and be where the developers wanted her to be, sometimes not if you had a bug.
  • derpinainreallife - April 3, 2014 11:07 p.m.

    Yes, interactive AIs tend to follow a script they're given. We're not talking HAL here.

Showing 1-20 of 26 comments

Join the Discussion
Add a comment (HTML tags are not allowed.)
Characters remaining: 5000

OR…

Connect with Facebook

Log in using Facebook to share comments, games, status update and other activity easily with your Facebook feed.