Originally posted by zymurgeist The "advanced" AI exists. It has always existed. Chess programs are more complicated by far than any RPG AI. Hobbyists used to write routines for AI in basic in the late seventies. Sony won't be using it for the same reason all the other companies who claim to have had it haven't. It's extremely CPU intensive. Great for single player games but way too slow and expensive for a MMO.
IDK about CPU intensive on end user side. Most complex calculations would take place serverside. A couple Sun microsystems/Oracle Super clusters would do the trick.
Coming from the software development world I know for a FACT that SOE is not employing people from MIT's AI department for their game. This would be the only way to produce AI even close to challenging enough to make the "Trinity" system obsolete. However, even MIT hasn't created AI advanced enough to make this claim.
I am amused by this. As were my game AI colleagues over at MIT when I mentioned it.
In other news, someone -- despite "coming from the software development world" -- doesn't know the first thing about game AI. Be that as it may...
Glad to see you all are interested! Keep up the chatter!
And that's all I can say... for now... ;-)
President & Lead Designer of Intrinsic Algorithm, Author of Behavioral Mathematics for Game AI, Game AI consultant, GDC AI Summit advisor, co-founder of AIGPG | IntrinsicAlgorithm.com
I mostly agree with the OP here. I can not think of that statement other than a PR bla bla. I am a HUGE fan of the Trinity, because so far I have not seen ANY system that allowes teamwork other than the Trinity. Abandoning it means *everyone* playes the FotM DPS type. See GW2. People just running and jumping and dish out DPS. It's just zero tactics in a group and a chaotic mess.
I prefer a good developed, flexible Trinity system over everyone being a jack of all trades without a real profile.
People don't ask questions to get answers - they ask questions to show how smart they are. - Dogbert
Just another EQN rant. This guy has no idea what he is talking about and just said these things because he doesn't like the game. SOE please hurry and release the game I don't want to have to see this crap for another 2 years.
Experience demands that man is the only animal which devours his own kind, for I can apply no milder term to the general prey of the rich on the poor.
I have to agree with the points made on existing AI. I think the reason companies don't use full-fledged AI for monster opponents is that it would be too much for the players to contend with.
Try playing Dragon Age, the Bioware RPG, on hard mode WITHOUT using the space-bar to pause the action. In many encounters the human is simply overwhelmed - people cannot hit the keys on a keyboard fast enough to match the AI.
Imagine a smart monster with appropriate AI in EQN:
- Let's say an ancient Liche who has survived ages. A party of adventurers shows up to claim his treasure. Usually this means fighting through predictable encounters of steadily increasing difficulty with the Liche's followers until you reach the inner sanctum, where said Liche obligingly makes his final stand.
Now imagine...
- the adventurers show up at the Liche lair to find - no one. Unbeknownst to them, the Liche knew they were coming and decided to prepare a surprise. As the adventurers head out, disappointed, he springs his trap as he and his followers emerge en masse from a hidden passage and steamroll the adventurers.
This would be way, way out of most MMO players comfort zones. People want to relax and bash keys while the bodies of the enemy (and the treasure loot) piles up. Not have to out-think Skynet...
Yeah but the thing about Dragon Age is that you aren't just controlling one character, one kind of attack pattern like you do in an MMO. Dragon Age wouldn't need a Pause menu if it were designed from the ground up to be much more solo friendly, where only your character is necessary - such as in an MMO.
I don't think anyone is concerned about enemy AI that alters the scripted sequences like if a boss springs a trap. I think what they want is to have enemies that are a little more self aware, have a more natural reaction pattern, have a much more realistic cone of vision based on sound/lightness/darkness instead of an aggro radius... things like this.
If a game company could somehow find a way to bring the enemy AI from a game like Blade of Darkness into their MMO... it would be my wish come true.
Coming from the software development world I know for a FACT that SOE is not employing people from MIT's AI department for their game. This would be the only way to produce AI even close to challenging enough to make the "Trinity" system obsolete. However, even MIT hasn't created AI advanced enough to make this claim.
Coming from software development as well and i can tell you that a AI dumb as a piece bread is more than enough to make "trinity" obsolete.. you don't need almost any AI at all to make "trinity" obsolete.
Unfortunately, coming from the soft development world hardly makes you an expert on it.
The quality of AI atm can be debated, but what you are saying is pure nonsense.
Not only is it extremely easy to make AI that would make Trinity obsolete. The vast majority of systems out there make Trinity obsolete. Trinity is obsolete by default.
AI has to forcibly be dumbified and scripted to work in a very specific way for Trinity to function at all.
Favorite MMO: Vanilla WoW Currently playing: GW2, EVE Excited for: Wildstar, maybe?
Either way, don't believe this nonsense about EQ:N. They're following the current "trend" of PR buzz phrases to catch people's eyes. They should just come out and say that they want to move away from selective roles like Tank/Healer/Dps/Control. After all, we all know dungeons in Everquest 1 cannot be done without that specific setup right guys? (In before I post about constantly doing DPS only dungeon runs etc in EQ1, or before someone else does)
And then again.. learn to read.. noone want to make selective roles obsolete, but the taunt/aggro mechanism from the "tank" is a flawed mechanism from the very beginning, and the so called "holy trinity" is based upon those mechanism... and it has to die. Or to put it simplier.. anything not working in pvp should never be used in pve, too. It is just lazy design.. nothing else.
Originally posted by zymurgeist The "advanced" AI exists. It has always existed. Chess programs are more complicated by far than any RPG AI. Hobbyists used to write routines for AI in basic in the late seventies. Sony won't be using it for the same reason all the other companies who claim to have had it haven't. It's extremely CPU intensive. Great for single player games but way too slow and expensive for a MMO.
Blizzard did an interview, or wrote an article several years ago talking about the combat AI. I'm paraphrasing, but they basically said writing a good combat AI would be easy. The AI could have all the abilities that a player would have, it would be situationally aware and wouldn't get excited and make mistakes. It would use the ideal combination of abilities for any given situation. They need that kind of AI for testing.
They didn't use the more advanced AI because it wouldn't be fun for players. The AI was too good to be used against players. It would be good for testing though.
SOE is doing something completely different with the Story Bricks AI. That gnoll will attack because it is angry with you for killing his brothers. Or the gnoll will move to a less populated part of the world so it is easier to attack adventurers. The combat AI is going to be a version of that kind of behavior. It won't make perfect decisions, but if it's attacking someone, and another player heals that someone, it'll attack the healer instead of making the right decision at the beginning of the fight and attacking the healer right away. Something like that anyway. Or even better, mobs in groups will act like they are a group, repositioning themselves, healing each other and possibly running away.
The group AI has been done years ago in single player games. At least a single player game. Groups of mobs would have a leader and they would have the ability to do things as a group. If the leader was killed, the group would be disorganized unless another one of the mobs moved into the position of leader, and they would again act as an organized group.
"Intelligent" AI isn't smoke and mirrors, and it's not science fiction. It is well within the realm of what can be done. The only important part is that is has to be fun. Keep in mind that mobs don't exist to replace players, they are there to provide a challenge, and ultimately drop loot.
Originally posted by faxnadu make mmo these days too hard or even challenging majority wont play it.
Exclusion is a inherently bad policy for any company attempting to make money. Which frustrates chestthumpers enormously.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
Either way, don't believe this nonsense about EQ:N. They're following the current "trend" of PR buzz phrases to catch people's eyes. They should just come out and say that they want to move away from selective roles like Tank/Healer/Dps/Control. After all, we all know dungeons in Everquest 1 cannot be done without that specific setup right guys? (In before I post about constantly doing DPS only dungeon runs etc in EQ1, or before someone else does)
And then again.. learn to read.. noone want to make selective roles obsolete, but the taunt/aggro mechanism from the "tank" is a flawed mechanism from the very beginning, and the so called "holy trinity" is based upon those mechanism... and it has to die. Or to put it simplier.. anything not working in pvp should never be used in pve, too. It is just lazy design.. nothing else.
Now,go out,find a dog,lion,tiger,cat whatever.
1)steal his meal,bone,whatever ,kick him in the balls.
2)get aggro.
or
Give him
1)bone,meat ,whatever ,pet him.
2)calm him
not really a flawed mechanism.
So, did ESO have a successful launch? Yes, yes it did.By Ryan Getchell on April 02, 2014. **On the radar: http://www.cyberpunk.net/ **
Originally posted by Tiller BTW google MIT+AI+gaming and read some of those articles.... pretty much ends the debate in this thread right away xD
My favorite is the one where they did a test where they had the AI "read the manual" for Civilization and its victory rate jumped from 46 to 79 percent. Pretty freaky that we are at a point in technology where AI can not only read the manual, but can apply what it learned.
Unfortunately, coming from the soft development world hardly makes you an expert on it.
The quality of AI atm can be debated, but what you are saying is pure nonsense.
Not only is it extremely easy to make AI that would make Trinity obsolete. The vast majority of systems out there make Trinity obsolete. Trinity is obsolete by default.
AI has to forcibly be dumbified and scripted to work in a very specific way for Trinity to function at all.
The aggro system was created so different classes in fantasy rpgs can play their role, correct. When you remove the underlying logic that allows these classes to play their roles, you end up with chaos. Chaos is not good, or fun. Even the best case scenario tends towards evasion tanking (kiting) and zerg combat.
It exists for a reason, and I laugh every time another one of you "programmers" rear your head in ignorance.
The aggro system was created so different classes in fantasy rpgs can play their role, correct. When you remove the underlying logic that allows these classes to play their roles, you end up with chaos. Chaos is not good, or fun. Even the best case scenario tends towards evasion tanking (kiting) and zerg combat.
It exists for a reason, and I laugh every time another one of you "programmers" rear your head in ignorance.
And I laugh whenever one of you trinity-evangelists uses the above logic.
You can develop much more advanced AI while still allowing for classes to play specific roles. The key is to make sure that each class is given the tools it needs in order to better perform those roles without having to rely on the completely "dumb" version of AI where tanks can "taunt" and thus mobs stick to them.
Just as an example, if AI is smart enough to learn who the healers are, then the tanks need skills that allow them to impede the ability of the mob to get to those healers. Put in line of sight for ranged attacks such that if the tank imposes himself between mob and healers the healer gets a cover bonus. Give melee classes "opportunity attack bonuses" for wailing on mobs which are ignoring them in order to do ranged attacks. Etc. Etc. Etc.
There are a hundred different tools you can throw at classes to augment those "roles" while still having AI that actually performs like a thinking opponent. If mobs are smart enough to target healers when they recognize them, but other classes have tools which make them doing so suffer badly for it, then the intelligent response is not just as simple as "go after the healers first".
The problem with the aggro system is that it oversimplifes the mechanics to the point that EVERY FIGHT feels the same. Better AI should mean that each fight ebbs and flows based on the knowledge and intelligence of the opponent you are facing, and it is entirely doable and can even be done in a way that preserves the trinity (if developers so desire). It is just a matter of changing the tools that we expect as standard for the various roles for tools that make sense within the environment of a more intelligent opponent.
This also has the upside of the tools being there in a PVP environment as well, where the current state of games makes PVP pretty lame. People don't fight intelligently in MMO PVP because available tools are very limited. The skill setup for classes in a standard threat-based MMO tends to lead to PVP that is more like packs of rabid dogs fighting than rationale human beings. All of the pack gangs up on whichever target they decide needs to go down first, end of strategy. (Obviously I'm oversimplifying a bit, but that is mostly the extent of it)
Either way, don't believe this nonsense about EQ:N. They're following the current "trend" of PR buzz phrases to catch people's eyes. They should just come out and say that they want to move away from selective roles like Tank/Healer/Dps/Control. After all, we all know dungeons in Everquest 1 cannot be done without that specific setup right guys? (In before I post about constantly doing DPS only dungeon runs etc in EQ1, or before someone else does)
And then again.. learn to read.. noone want to make selective roles obsolete, but the taunt/aggro mechanism from the "tank" is a flawed mechanism from the very beginning, and the so called "holy trinity" is based upon those mechanism... and it has to die. Or to put it simplier.. anything not working in pvp should never be used in pve, too. It is just lazy design.. nothing else.
If you watched the combat presentation at SOE live it was made crystal clear that they wanted to make healer and tank roles obsolete. Noone has to be healer or tank because to them those roles weren't about fun so that's why you should be able to clear all content without them.
Iselin: And the next person who says "but it's a business, they need to make money" can just go fuck yourself.
I can't believe people are actually buying all this hype about smart AI's.. Can we have more complex AI's that take other things into consideration instead of just standing in one place acting as a punching bag? Sure we can.. BUT.. All things created equal, the computer AI will OWN a player at every turn.. This game is based on twitch combat of being IN RANGE or in the right direction to hit their target.. The computer will NOT make mistakes like a human would.. The computer will ALWAYS be in range for a sword swing, or face the right direction for a "cone of fire" range shot.. The only way you can allow for a vast number of players to defeat this combat fight is to NERF the shit out of the mob both in combat numbers and AI..
If anything a class role (trinity) system would actually work BETTER in a smart AI .. When you have multiple mobs, each with an agenda who to kill, it makes CC and other roles much more important and fun.... A trinity system is MORE exciting when all hell breaks loose.. Been there, done that and it gets your blood pumping.. But if you remove class roles and everyone is homogenized down into a dps hybrid like GW2.. There is no excitement or threat of failure.. It's just zerg.. Each time I'm in the open world attacking a "Champion" or "Boss" mob with the 10-20 people, people ignore the ADDS.. They are easily ignored and killed in the AOE's of the players.. I assume EQN will be no different..
Coming from the software development world I know for a FACT that SOE is not employing people from MIT's AI department for their game. This would be the only way to produce AI even close to challenging enough to make the "Trinity" system obsolete. However, even MIT hasn't created AI advanced enough to make this claim.
Additionally, we had "difficult" AI back in 2004 during EQ2's closed beta. We started testing AI that would dynamically choose, on the fly, whom to attack based on class & actions they were taking. Mobs would randomly scream out "Kill the healer! It is keeping the weaklings alive!" (an undead skeleton within the instanced orc dungeon in Commonlands outside Freeport). I don't know what happened to it as mobs stopped doing that kind of stuff shortly before launch. Nothing was said about it, and launch went on without a further word on it.
The thing is, it made the game actually difficult and fun to play even with trinity. Tanks had to constantly watch their aggro or risk a healer or nuker being fried. It most certianly did NOT make Trinity obsolete.
ps: wtf with this whole "Trinity" name? CC (ie: control from enchanters, etc) has always been a critical role in Everquest. So why only pick Tank/Healer/DPS and call it Trinity???
Anyways, we've had basic-advanced AI since 2004, but no one has been using it. In the instances it was attempted it never made the game impossible, but from what I've been told by developers in the industry it made it that much harder to make new content for the game as they always had to consider how the AI would be used in that situation. This is the only reason I can guess as to why they stopped using it????
Either way, don't believe this nonsense about EQ:N. They're following the current "trend" of PR buzz phrases to catch people's eyes. They should just come out and say that they want to move away from selective roles like Tank/Healer/Dps/Control. After all, we all know dungeons in Everquest 1 cannot be done without that specific setup right guys? (In before I post about constantly doing DPS only dungeon runs etc in EQ1, or before someone else does)
Seriously, it really is getting frustrating reading about this "Advanced AI" when it doesn't exist. It's like the CEO of Spandex coming out to tell everyone we have conquered the effects of "Gravity" to a room that has at LEAST one Physicist/Engineer that knows for a fact we haven't yet.
/endRant
/agree...i think that the EQN class system without roles is maded only to appeal new players that want to play everything without restrictions and that want more simpler and casual game, so i dont think that this "advanced AI" will lead to a more challenging PvE contents toward the old trinity MMORPGS but exactly on the contrary.
"Brute force not work? It because you not use enought of it" -Karg, Ogryn Bone'ead.
This is different from which MMO? Which single player game? Here is a clue it is not AI it is scripted and based on hard number thresholds. The NPC has no choice, X has more threat than Y, nevermind he is kiting me.
Let's all come back to this red herring topic once we see more AI in action.
Black pot... How do you play PVP. You determine which players have the highest amount of threat and ??? Oh, you're a real person so instead of eliminating them you randomly choose someone else to attack, right?
So your solution to improving artificial intelligence is to encourage the NPC's to make poor choices? I think we have differing view on what 'intelligence' means. The mobs have to decide what action to take, who to attack, whether to run, when to heal, when to use AOE attacks etc.... it's not that hard to simulate those decisions to what a player would do.
The problem is, when you do that, the game isn't any fun.
"Hey man, what did you do today?",
" I chased orcs around."
"Really, get any loot?"
"Uh, no, the orcs could see I was powerful, so I literally just chased them for three hours"
"Wow, that sounds like a lot of fun, see you tomorrow?"
You know what happens when you PVE players in a non-consensual PVP game? They'd quit. That's what Orcs would do it your ideal AI world, they'd all leave Norrath.
The solution is to create a fatigue system so that the orcs and you eventually get tired. And yeah, sounds like a really fun game actually, where you have to think to catch those orcs.
EQ1 had more advanced AI than any other mmo by a mile.
Just a few examples of how things used to work back when games didn't cater to children and the mentally handicapped:
If you aggroed a mob, every mob within like a certain radius based on level would assist. There was no mobs chained to other mobs, so you could use tactics to actually split them. It was very common for someone to accidently pull dozens of mobs at a time because they would assist each other. Lineage 2 had this
In EQ1, mobs would actually cast target based AE spells on you if you were standing near other party members (they'd never cast those spells otherwise). They would run up to you and point blank ae as well. GW1 had this
If you were high on aggro list and you sat down, mobs would run up to you and get a free max damage round off on you, often 1 shotting you.
If you had high aggro as say, a wizard, and went within melee range, a mob would often switch to attack you simply because of proximity. Lots of MMOs have this, including WoW.
If you were low health, regardless of anyone elses threat, the mob would go for you and attempt to finish you off and unless the mob was rooted or mezed, no amount of taunting would stop it. Going below 20% on a boss meant you were the next to die if you weren't healed immediately. Lineage 2 had something like this
Mobs would flee at low life if they were alone. If they reached friendly mobs aggressive to you, they'd turn around. If the mob was a caster and you pulled him away from his spawn area, he would teleport (gate) back at low health. Lineage 2 had this
Mobs would roam around buffing each other. They would heal each other as well. Lineage 2 had this, on the very rare mobs that had buffs/heals
In EQ1, there was no ability that forced aggro on a tank without substantial threat. The taunt ability only worked permitted you already established considerable threat, and if someone else only slightly out-aggro'd you. If, say, a caster nuked or debuffed a mob early, taunt was worthless. This has nothing to do with AI, this is just a game lacking a hard "taunt" skill we see in lots of other games.
The best threat tanks were hybrid tanks, but they were the weaker of the tanks. The warrior which was the superior tank class, had to rely on weapons that procced spells or magic items with expendable charges. There was no easy way of generating threat as a warrior in EQ.
Those are just a few things that come to mind regarding aggro in classic Everquest. Its no wonder people hate so hard on threat management systems when all modern MMOs provide their tank classes with surefire ways of keeping aggro with very little risk involved.
This is different from which MMO? Which single player game? Here is a clue it is not AI it is scripted and based on hard number thresholds. The NPC has no choice, X has more threat than Y, nevermind he is kiting me.
Let's all come back to this red herring topic once we see more AI in action.
Yes, you are right, they are all the same. Oh wait, no there not. Having played every major and most minor MMOs in the last 15 years, nothing was even vaguely similar to AI in EQ.
These aren't very good examples of AI. A mob forced to attacking something that reaches a set health (below 20%) regardless of other things going on is terrible AI. And I don't know how you could have missed these mechanics in all those MMO you've played, these mobs scripts are very common in the few MMOs I've played.
Everything creates huge amounts of negativity on the internet, that's what the internet is for: Negativity, porn and lolcats.
I am amused by this. As were my game AI colleagues over at MIT when I mentioned it.
In other news, someone -- despite "coming from the software development world" -- doesn't know the first thing about game AI. Be that as it may...
Glad to see you all are interested! Keep up the chatter!
And that's all I can say... for now... ;-)
Every time I see you post something in an AI discussion and the community fails to respond I imagine this whooshing sound, as though something were flying overhead. It was funnier this time because someone had previously linked to an AI Summit video you were in. Keep up the good work, I'm enjoying your book!
Coming from the software development world I know for a FACT that SOE is not employing people from MIT's AI department for their game. This would be the only way to produce AI even close to challenging enough to make the "Trinity" system obsolete. However, even MIT hasn't created AI advanced enough to make this claim.
Im a curious person....so your not working at the EQN project , but claim you to know for a fact they dont work with MIT and claim they're not capable to create a system that could render the trinity system as unnecessary.
Bear dont get me wrong theyre are uncountable selfproclaimed Programmers and Softwaredevs on various gaming Forums who claim to be in the Job, in the 'scene' ,having the ultimate insight about the industry overall .While in truth theyre nothing but wiki educated cellar-dwellers.I sincerly hope youre not one of them
I am amused by this. As were my game AI colleagues over at MIT when I mentioned it.
In other news, someone -- despite "coming from the software development world" -- doesn't know the first thing about game AI. Be that as it may...
Glad to see you all are interested! Keep up the chatter!
And that's all I can say... for now... ;-)
Every time I see you post something in an AI discussion and the community fails to respond I imagine this whooshing sound, as though something were flying overhead. It was funnier this time because someone had previously linked to an AI Summit video you were in. Keep up the good work, I'm enjoying your book!
Which is why you both have 1 post?
Obvious troll is obvious.
Originally posted by Icewhite
Originally posted by faxnadu make mmo these days too hard or even challenging majority wont play it.
Exclusion is a inherently bad policy for any company attempting to make money. Which frustrates chestthumpers enormously.
Which is why exclusive resorts only make billions every year... That is why every company selling exotic and expensive products, such as caviar & yachts, are out of business.
It is called niche marketing. You might want to look that up.
Originally posted by Apraxis
Originally posted by BearKnight
Coming from the software development world I know for a FACT that SOE is not employing people from MIT's AI department for their game. This would be the only way to produce AI even close to challenging enough to make the "Trinity" system obsolete. However, even MIT hasn't created AI advanced enough to make this claim.
Coming from software development as well and i can tell you that a AI dumb as a piece bread is more than enough to make "trinity" obsolete.. you don't need almost any AI at all to make "trinity" obsolete.
So why did every game that has attempted it failed miserably to replace it with anything but zergs?
Comments
IDK about CPU intensive on end user side. Most complex calculations would take place serverside. A couple Sun microsystems/Oracle Super clusters would do the trick.
I am amused by this. As were my game AI colleagues over at MIT when I mentioned it.
In other news, someone -- despite "coming from the software development world" -- doesn't know the first thing about game AI. Be that as it may...
Glad to see you all are interested! Keep up the chatter!
And that's all I can say... for now... ;-)
President & Lead Designer of Intrinsic Algorithm,
Author of Behavioral Mathematics for Game AI,
Game AI consultant, GDC AI Summit advisor, co-founder of AIGPG | IntrinsicAlgorithm.com
I mostly agree with the OP here. I can not think of that statement other than a PR bla bla. I am a HUGE fan of the Trinity, because so far I have not seen ANY system that allowes teamwork other than the Trinity. Abandoning it means *everyone* playes the FotM DPS type. See GW2. People just running and jumping and dish out DPS. It's just zero tactics in a group and a chaotic mess.
I prefer a good developed, flexible Trinity system over everyone being a jack of all trades without a real profile.
People don't ask questions to get answers - they ask questions to show how smart they are. - Dogbert
Experience demands that man is the only animal which devours his own kind, for I can apply no milder term to the general prey of the rich on the poor.
Thomas Jefferson
Yeah but the thing about Dragon Age is that you aren't just controlling one character, one kind of attack pattern like you do in an MMO. Dragon Age wouldn't need a Pause menu if it were designed from the ground up to be much more solo friendly, where only your character is necessary - such as in an MMO.
I don't think anyone is concerned about enemy AI that alters the scripted sequences like if a boss springs a trap. I think what they want is to have enemies that are a little more self aware, have a more natural reaction pattern, have a much more realistic cone of vision based on sound/lightness/darkness instead of an aggro radius... things like this.
If a game company could somehow find a way to bring the enemy AI from a game like Blade of Darkness into their MMO... it would be my wish come true.
Coming from software development as well and i can tell you that a AI dumb as a piece bread is more than enough to make "trinity" obsolete.. you don't need almost any AI at all to make "trinity" obsolete.
Unfortunately, coming from the soft development world hardly makes you an expert on it.
The quality of AI atm can be debated, but what you are saying is pure nonsense.
Not only is it extremely easy to make AI that would make Trinity obsolete. The vast majority of systems out there make Trinity obsolete. Trinity is obsolete by default.
AI has to forcibly be dumbified and scripted to work in a very specific way for Trinity to function at all.
Favorite MMO: Vanilla WoW
Currently playing: GW2, EVE
Excited for: Wildstar, maybe?
And then again.. learn to read.. noone want to make selective roles obsolete, but the taunt/aggro mechanism from the "tank" is a flawed mechanism from the very beginning, and the so called "holy trinity" is based upon those mechanism... and it has to die. Or to put it simplier.. anything not working in pvp should never be used in pve, too. It is just lazy design.. nothing else.
QFT.
3 post. /thread closed.
Exclusion is a inherently bad policy for any company attempting to make money. Which frustrates chestthumpers enormously.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
Now,go out,find a dog,lion,tiger,cat whatever.
1)steal his meal,bone,whatever ,kick him in the balls.
2)get aggro.
or
Give him
1)bone,meat ,whatever ,pet him.
2)calm him
not really a flawed mechanism.
So, did ESO have a successful launch? Yes, yes it did.By Ryan Getchell on April 02, 2014.
**On the radar: http://www.cyberpunk.net/ **
My favorite is the one where they did a test where they had the AI "read the manual" for Civilization and its victory rate jumped from 46 to 79 percent. Pretty freaky that we are at a point in technology where AI can not only read the manual, but can apply what it learned.
The aggro system was created so different classes in fantasy rpgs can play their role, correct. When you remove the underlying logic that allows these classes to play their roles, you end up with chaos. Chaos is not good, or fun. Even the best case scenario tends towards evasion tanking (kiting) and zerg combat.
It exists for a reason, and I laugh every time another one of you "programmers" rear your head in ignorance.
And I laugh whenever one of you trinity-evangelists uses the above logic.
You can develop much more advanced AI while still allowing for classes to play specific roles. The key is to make sure that each class is given the tools it needs in order to better perform those roles without having to rely on the completely "dumb" version of AI where tanks can "taunt" and thus mobs stick to them.
Just as an example, if AI is smart enough to learn who the healers are, then the tanks need skills that allow them to impede the ability of the mob to get to those healers. Put in line of sight for ranged attacks such that if the tank imposes himself between mob and healers the healer gets a cover bonus. Give melee classes "opportunity attack bonuses" for wailing on mobs which are ignoring them in order to do ranged attacks. Etc. Etc. Etc.
There are a hundred different tools you can throw at classes to augment those "roles" while still having AI that actually performs like a thinking opponent. If mobs are smart enough to target healers when they recognize them, but other classes have tools which make them doing so suffer badly for it, then the intelligent response is not just as simple as "go after the healers first".
The problem with the aggro system is that it oversimplifes the mechanics to the point that EVERY FIGHT feels the same. Better AI should mean that each fight ebbs and flows based on the knowledge and intelligence of the opponent you are facing, and it is entirely doable and can even be done in a way that preserves the trinity (if developers so desire). It is just a matter of changing the tools that we expect as standard for the various roles for tools that make sense within the environment of a more intelligent opponent.
This also has the upside of the tools being there in a PVP environment as well, where the current state of games makes PVP pretty lame. People don't fight intelligently in MMO PVP because available tools are very limited. The skill setup for classes in a standard threat-based MMO tends to lead to PVP that is more like packs of rabid dogs fighting than rationale human beings. All of the pack gangs up on whichever target they decide needs to go down first, end of strategy. (Obviously I'm oversimplifying a bit, but that is mostly the extent of it)
If you watched the combat presentation at SOE live it was made crystal clear that they wanted to make healer and tank roles obsolete. Noone has to be healer or tank because to them those roles weren't about fun so that's why you should be able to clear all content without them.
I can't believe people are actually buying all this hype about smart AI's.. Can we have more complex AI's that take other things into consideration instead of just standing in one place acting as a punching bag? Sure we can.. BUT.. All things created equal, the computer AI will OWN a player at every turn.. This game is based on twitch combat of being IN RANGE or in the right direction to hit their target.. The computer will NOT make mistakes like a human would.. The computer will ALWAYS be in range for a sword swing, or face the right direction for a "cone of fire" range shot.. The only way you can allow for a vast number of players to defeat this combat fight is to NERF the shit out of the mob both in combat numbers and AI..
If anything a class role (trinity) system would actually work BETTER in a smart AI .. When you have multiple mobs, each with an agenda who to kill, it makes CC and other roles much more important and fun.... A trinity system is MORE exciting when all hell breaks loose.. Been there, done that and it gets your blood pumping.. But if you remove class roles and everyone is homogenized down into a dps hybrid like GW2.. There is no excitement or threat of failure.. It's just zerg.. Each time I'm in the open world attacking a "Champion" or "Boss" mob with the 10-20 people, people ignore the ADDS.. They are easily ignored and killed in the AOE's of the players.. I assume EQN will be no different..
/agree...i think that the EQN class system without roles is maded only to appeal new players that want to play everything without restrictions and that want more simpler and casual game, so i dont think that this "advanced AI" will lead to a more challenging PvE contents toward the old trinity MMORPGS but exactly on the contrary.
"Brute force not work? It because you not use enought of it"
-Karg, Ogryn Bone'ead.
The solution is to create a fatigue system so that the orcs and you eventually get tired. And yeah, sounds like a really fun game actually, where you have to think to catch those orcs.
These aren't very good examples of AI. A mob forced to attacking something that reaches a set health (below 20%) regardless of other things going on is terrible AI. And I don't know how you could have missed these mechanics in all those MMO you've played, these mobs scripts are very common in the few MMOs I've played.
Everything creates huge amounts of negativity on the internet, that's what the internet is for: Negativity, porn and lolcats.
Every time I see you post something in an AI discussion and the community fails to respond I imagine this whooshing sound, as though something were flying overhead. It was funnier this time because someone had previously linked to an AI Summit video you were in. Keep up the good work, I'm enjoying your book!
Coming from the software development world I know for a FACT that SOE is not employing people from MIT's AI department for their game. This would be the only way to produce AI even close to challenging enough to make the "Trinity" system obsolete. However, even MIT hasn't created AI advanced enough to make this claim.
Im a curious person....so your not working at the EQN project , but claim you to know for a fact they dont work with MIT and claim they're not capable to create a system that could render the trinity system as unnecessary.
Bear dont get me wrong theyre are uncountable selfproclaimed Programmers and Softwaredevs on various gaming Forums who claim to be in the Job, in the 'scene' ,having the ultimate insight about the industry overall .While in truth theyre nothing but wiki educated cellar-dwellers.I sincerly hope youre not one of themWhich is why you both have 1 post?
Obvious troll is obvious.
Which is why exclusive resorts only make billions every year... That is why every company selling exotic and expensive products, such as caviar & yachts, are out of business.
It is called niche marketing. You might want to look that up.
So why did every game that has attempted it failed miserably to replace it with anything but zergs?