Newsgroups: comp.ai.games
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!bb3.andrew.cmu.edu!newsfeed.pitt.edu!gatech!newsfeed.internetmci.com!btnet!news.compulink.co.uk!cix.compulink.co.uk!usenet
From: glennc@cix.compulink.co.uk ("Glenn Corpes")
Subject: Re: Why is action AI so poor?
Message-ID: <Dnyp5q.CCy@cix.compulink.co.uk>
Organization: Compulink Information eXchange
References: <4hksk5$jns@engr.orst.edu>
Date: Fri, 8 Mar 1996 18:39:25 GMT
X-News-Software: Ameol32
Lines: 30

> Cool. This kind of stuff seems fairly difficult to pull off in a 
> realtime
> environment, and is rarely done well (Hell, I can't think of a realtime
> game that does; I know both Warcraft 2 and Mechwarrior 2 suck at it).
> I don't think it's particularly hard, but I'd be interested in seeing
> how you guys make your algorithm effiecient enough to use in real time.

It is easily fast enough for real time use, One guy spent most of a year 
coding it, reading every reference he could think of and creating a 
unique new method (with some 'true' AI).
> 
> However, this doesn't really constitute impressive AI, even if other 
> games
> can't do it.

 The point I was trying to make is that you can't write the rest of the 
AI if you haven't solved the navigation problem, I can talk about the nav 
as it came from my department (R & D (usually graphics to be honest)), 
the rest is written by the syndicate wars/dungeon keeper teams, the 
chararters in syndicate wars are doing cool stuff like dodging weapons, 
defending areas, reacting to strange drugged gasses and your 'troops' in 
dungeon keeper have tunable agression, hunt in packs, will eat each other 
if you don't keep them fed and will even pass information to each other.


_\/   __
  \  /  \  gcorpes@ea.com
|\ \/   /     Bullfrog
| \/   /___/_Productions
||    /___ \
