KUDO's on a well written article explaining your position on AI.. However..... Regardless what you call the type of AI, from a players perspective the combat encounter will either be controlled or random (aka chaotic).. Each have their own pros and cons, depending on your preference of play.. Using the common example of class roles vs. smart AI.. If we are using roles, each person has restrictive duties to fill, whether it be tanking, crowd control, healing, DPS, etc etc.. With this form of combat the encounter is often controlled by the players, such as mezing, taunting.. The players have the ability to control the fight of who is killed, and in what order.. (normally).. There is nothing wrong with this type of play.. Professional sports have used roles for decades..
Then we have smart AI, where the MOB is so called in control of it's actions.. At this point, the players are unable to dictate the fight.. Instead the players must go into "response" mode.. This is more chaotic then what most want to accept or admit.. Given the fact that a smart AI will sometimes target soft targets (isn't that their purpose?), you either have to make the soft target durable enough to withstand a beating, or give them abilities to avoid damage.. What you normally end up with as this point are classes that are all able to mitigate damage, and often the best playstyle once that happens is zerg.. Except a few encounters that devs might require more strategy, but this will have to be isolated (instanced?).. Once the combat is out in the open, it's the players vs. the mobs as it is in GW2 and other games..
The 3 mobs too smart to defeat by 2 players, go get some buddies and make it a 5 on 3 fight then.. ZERG.. Power of numbers will always trump smart AI.. But that doesn't mean that smart AI is wrong either.. They are just 2 different styles , hamburger or hot dog.... I prefer burgers myself..
IMO the smart AI is to simulate PvP type of mechanics, which also encompasses MOBA games.. I don't enjoy that type of gaming, it's why I never played Call of Duty, and don't care for Planetside or LoL.. For me a trinity style is like playing football, whereas smart AI is like playing rugby..
NCAA football for the win... I hope Johnny Football wins the Heisman again, just to upset the critics.. LOL
From what I've read/ listened to. Smart AI does not mean that they will excell in combat.
It's like GW2 taken three steps further. Instead of scripted DE's the mobs will "script their own" DE's based on factors. So If you have a large zerg that is constantly farming a orc camp. The orcs will move away to a area where there are less players/smaller towns.
Lets just hope they pull it off. As for combat AI, thats a whole other area than the AI that decides where mobs will spawn, what they will atack and when to retreat.
GW2 has quests that are triggered at certain time intervals and players talking to NPCs. Leading into new quests.
All events in GW2 are pretty much like this
> 1 2 3 2 1.
Look at the numbers as players vs mobs. It's a line of events that go back and forth. Theres no real dynamic in them. Just a repeatable quest line that goes from 1 where the players are pushed back/start of the event, to 3 where the enemies have been pushed as far as it gets. Then a new event will trigger where the mobs try to push back to event 2 then to 1.
What they want EQN to have, is for the mobs to respond to the players and other factors. Not the other way around.
I dunno, thats the impression I have of their AI, or atleast what they want it to be.
Not sure if this came out the way I visioned it in my mind but oh well.
KUDO's on a well written article explaining your position on AI.. However..... Regardless what you call the type of AI, from a players perspective the combat encounter will either be controlled or random (aka chaotic).. Each have their own pros and cons, depending on your preference of play.. Using the common example of class roles vs. smart AI.. If we are using roles, each person has restrictive duties to fill, whether it be tanking, crowd control, healing, DPS, etc etc.. With this form of combat the encounter is often controlled by the players, such as mezing, taunting.. The players have the ability to control the fight of who is killed, and in what order.. (normally).. There is nothing wrong with this type of play.. Professional sports have used roles for decades..
Then we have smart AI, where the MOB is so called in control of it's actions.. At this point, the players are unable to dictate the fight.. Instead the players must go into "response" mode.. This is more chaotic then what most want to accept or admit.. Given the fact that a smart AI will sometimes target soft targets (isn't that their purpose?), you either have to make the soft target durable enough to withstand a beating, or give them abilities to avoid damage.. What you normally end up with as this point are classes that are all able to mitigate damage, and often the best playstyle once that happens is zerg.. Except a few encounters that devs might require more strategy, but this will have to be isolated (instanced?).. Once the combat is out in the open, it's the players vs. the mobs as it is in GW2 and other games..
The 3 mobs too smart to defeat by 2 players, go get some buddies and make it a 5 on 3 fight then.. ZERG.. Power of numbers will always trump smart AI.. But that doesn't mean that smart AI is wrong either.. They are just 2 different styles , hamburger or hot dog.... I prefer burgers myself..
IMO the smart AI is to simulate PvP type of mechanics, which also encompasses MOBA games.. I don't enjoy that type of gaming, it's why I never played Call of Duty, and don't care for Planetside or LoL.. For me a trinity style is like playing football, whereas smart AI is like playing rugby..
NCAA football for the win... I hope Johnny Football wins the Heisman again, just to upset the critics.. LOL
From what I've read/ listened to. Smart AI does not mean that they will excell in combat.
It's like GW2 taken three steps further. Instead of scripted DE's the mobs will "script their own" DE's based on factors. So If you have a large zerg that is constantly farming a orc camp. The orcs will move away to a area where there are less players/smaller towns.
Lets just hope they pull it off. As for combat AI, thats a whole other area than the AI that decides where mobs will spawn, what they will atack and when to retreat.
GW2 has quests that are triggered at certain time intervals and players talking to NPCs. Leading into new quests.
All events in GW2 are pretty much like this
> 1 2 3 2 1.
Look at the numbers as players vs mobs. It's a line of events that go back and forth. Theres no real dynamic in them. Just a repeatable quest line that goes from 1 where the players are pushed back/start of the event, to 3 where the enemies have been pushed as far as it gets. Then a new event will trigger where the mobs try to push back to event 2 then to 1.
What they want EQN to have, is for the mobs to respond to the players and other factors. Not the other way around.
I dunno, thats the impression I have of their AI, or atleast what they want it to be.
Not sure if this came out the way I visioned it in my mind but oh well.
I'm hoping they go farther than this sort of overall game plan, and add AI into the fighting. Not just a possible retreat after beat downs, but possible retreats in the middle of a fight. They can also have "retreat to defensive position" of they mark those positions. They can also have randomized but weighted reactions of spell casters, do they heal a companion MOB and when. (Does that spell casting MOB even like it's companions that much?) (Does it hate a player enough?) Do archers all attack anyone who attacks their healer(s)? Do they set traps on the ground as they retreat, or do they fire attacks or heals?
The whole point, in my mind, should be to randomize the NPC "choices", but maintain some form of "intelligence" to them. Maybe with a Faux Pas here and there, after all, wouldn't that just be "realistic"?
That's my point. I simply don't believe what EQN is hinting at. I don't believe that EQN AI would be in any way whatsoever different than any other AI - because while they are "hinting" and promising miracles and marvels, nothing that they actually show is in any way different than what was already done a thousand times.
If you want to see utility AI in mmorpg monsters - GW2 has it. If you want to say "yeah, but EQN is hinting at so much more" - they can hint at anything they want, but what we'll get is, at best, GW2 level AI, no more - simply because there are limitations on what can be done in reasonable time with reasonable manpower resources with current "utility AI" - and there is no indication whatsoever that EQN has anything esle in stores.
This where I am on the other side of the fence. I believe the devs for the most part and think they are really trying to bring something new to the genre, maybe not mind blowing, but at least a bit more creative then what has been. Could I be proven wrong, yes, I'm not an blind fool. I'm just trusting them until I have a reason not to. To basically call them liars (which many tend to do) and that it is all just hype, does have some merit, but isn't any more insightful then those that choose to believe.
They could be completely lying, but I don't see the point in it. They aren't making vague statements about AI. They are flat out saying and describing it as something we haven't seen before. They have given clear examples to get our imaginations going. Which will either turn out to be truth or a lie, they aren't leaving themselves a lot of grey or back peddling room.
As far as GW2 is concerned, I don't remember anything that was "new" or outside the norm of AI I have seen from the last 18 years. Didn't help that everything was Zerged to death, but never did I go "Woah, what did that mob just do." Honestly, GW2 is one of the easiest PVE games I've ever played and never felt really challenged. Which is why I think a lot of people dislike it, most of the PVE requires no teamwork or effort beyond DPS DPS DPS. Which is the exact opposite of how the devs are explaining EQN's combat.
Originally posted by Grahor
But I may be wrong here, and it is quite possible that EQN has the solution for database lag, for the bottleneck here is not an AI implementation (which is trivial, as, again, is shown in any single player rpb since before Fallout), but database connections.
They again have stated that the game will remember what players do and actions will follow them through the lifetime of a character. Maybe you don't know how they are able to do it, but it seems they do and have a way where data can be collected from all actions and be accessed all the time. This has been done to some degree in single player games, so nothing too ground breaking, but it would appear they have figured out how to bring this concept to the mmo world. Only time will tell how well it works out. The concept of voxels and a destructible world didn't seem possible a short time ago as well.
Really it boils down to your first comment. If you don't have any faith in the devs and what they are clearly saying EQN will be like, then there is not further discussion. I have some faith in SOE (against my best gamer judgment) and until they do something to change my mind, I will keep believing in them. You are free to continue disbelieving them, but it seems silly to follow a game/company that you believe is misguiding or lying to customers.
Really it boils down to your first comment. If you don't have any faith in the devs and what they are clearly saying EQN will be like, then there is not further discussion. I have some faith in SOE (against my best gamer judgment) and until they do something to change my mind, I will keep believing in them. You are free to continue disbelieving them, but it seems silly to follow a game/company that you believe is misguiding or lying to customers.
You know, I wanted to answer your post, but then I've thought - why bother? You've completely missed or misunderstood all my points, you'll just do the same with my reply. I'll just add that first, I don't follow EQN and is not really interested in it - there is a nifty feature "recent posts" on the front page, and the words "AI" caught my eye, which is the pretty much only thing that interests me; and second, I actually read what developers say, while you read what you want to hear into what they actually say.
For example: "They again have stated that the game will remember what players do and actions will follow them through the lifetime of a character." - yeah. And what does it actually means? Why, EvE's (and every other game which implements faction standings, say, Fallen Earth, Allods, you name it) does exactly that: whatever you do, every mob you kill, every mission you finish - game remebers it and it follows players through the lifetime of a character. So what _exactly_ groundbreaking have they said here?
Really it boils down to your first comment. If you don't have any faith in the devs and what they are clearly saying EQN will be like, then there is not further discussion. I have some faith in SOE (against my best gamer judgment) and until they do something to change my mind, I will keep believing in them. You are free to continue disbelieving them, but it seems silly to follow a game/company that you believe is misguiding or lying to customers.
You know, I wanted to answer your post, but then I've thought - why bother? You've completely missed or misunderstood all my points, you'll just do the same with my reply. I'll just add that first, I don't follow EQN and is not really interested in it - there is a nifty feature "recent posts" on the front page, and the words "AI" caught my eye, which is the pretty much only thing that interests me; and second, I actually read what developers say, while you read what you want to hear into what they actually say.
For example: "They again have stated that the game will remember what players do and actions will follow them through the lifetime of a character." - yeah. And what does it actually means? Why, EvE's (and every other game which implements faction standings, say, Fallen Earth, Allods, you name it) does exactly that: whatever you do, every mob you kill, every mission you finish - game remebers it and it follows players through the lifetime of a character. So what _exactly_ groundbreaking have they said here?
In deed.. even the original EQ was all about factions.. Everything you did either gained faction or pissed someone off.. I love games like that, and I hope EQN does it proper.. BUT, It isn't anything new, and to hype it with sugar is unneeded.. And as to Allein.. you mention you have faith until there is a reason not to.. Well.. I been around the block a few times, especially with SOE, so I have numermous reasons to not trust a single thing they say.. I have not met a dev yet that doesn't treat games as used cars and will sell anything to put food on that table..
For example: "They again have stated that the game will remember what players do and actions will follow them through the lifetime of a character." - yeah. And what does it actually means? Why, EvE's (and every other game which implements faction standings, say, Fallen Earth, Allods, you name it) does exactly that: whatever you do, every mob you kill, every mission you finish - game remebers it and it follows players through the lifetime of a character. So what _exactly_ groundbreaking have they said here?
I think you're missing the point. It's not that "the game" will remember it's that each NPC will remember what they know about you and act according to that particular NPC's world view. It's a subtle but very important difference:
In most titles, reputation is little more than a bar you fill by completing quest after quest for certain members of the organization in question, and there's often little-to-no variation. A faction either hates you or loves you without any exception. With Storybricks, however, you could end up on the wrong side of the city guard faction, but what if you did a favor for one of those guards? While the faction as a whole would continue to view you distastefully, that single guard would remember your good deed and treat you with respect and gratitude.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
I think what they are hinting at has more to do with mob behavior than combat AI.
there might be enhanced combat ai but I think what well see the most is that mobs don't spawn like in past games and are instead generated in their "headquarters" and "set free".
This means that it is unlikely that something will "pop" into existence right in front of you on a timer. This will also mean that the conquering of a place like crushbone will be extremely difficult even with an army.
in my opinion that's the best way to do it. No more static spawns or encounters. Mobs unleashed onto the world from "their" safe spot.
For example: "They again have stated that the game will remember what players do and actions will follow them through the lifetime of a character." - yeah. And what does it actually means? Why, EvE's (and every other game which implements faction standings, say, Fallen Earth, Allods, you name it) does exactly that: whatever you do, every mob you kill, every mission you finish - game remebers it and it follows players through the lifetime of a character. So what _exactly_ groundbreaking have they said here?
I think you're missing the point. It's not that "the game" will remember it's that each NPC will remember what they know about you and act according to that particular NPC's world view. It's a subtle but very important difference:
In most titles, reputation is little more than a bar you fill by completing quest after quest for certain members of the organization in question, and there's often little-to-no variation. A faction either hates you or loves you without any exception. With Storybricks, however, you could end up on the wrong side of the city guard faction, but what if you did a favor for one of those guards? While the faction as a whole would continue to view you distastefully, that single guard would remember your good deed and treat you with respect and gratitude.
*sigh* Eve has that implemented already: agents, for example, have faction bars and personal bars, and you can get great status with one agent but be in bad favor with his greater faction.
And the only difference is that the number of faction bars will increase; each guard will have his own personal "faction bar" and the combination of bars will modify his response; and, as I've pointed out earlier, that means the huge relationship tables and The Great Database Bottleneck.
EvE gets around the Great Database Bottleneck through heavy (and I mean HEAVY) instancing of relationships data (sometimes you have to restart your game to renew your relationships data, because it's heavily cached on all levels to avoid the overload), which goes pretty much unnoticeable due to the nature of EvE's world and its server-farm architecture.
My opinion is that they will not do it this way, but rather a small number of specific NPCs will have their own bars you could fill; for example, a city may be closed for you usually, but one specific guard (and not all the others) will have his own faction bar and will have his own personal quest to fill that bar.
Sure, it adds flavor and has value and I'm all for that, but it's hardly anything new or exciting.
StoryBricks is an actually powerfull enough interface allowing barely trained monkeys to build enough such small quests for every guard and every person in the city, but calculation and database overload will destroy the server - unless, again, heavily instanced. Or at least that's my somewhat-educated opinion.
P.S. Oh, I forgot: "It's not that "the game" will remember it's that each NPC will remember" - there are no NPCS to remember anything. It's all the game. It's all the database and tables in it. I'm sorry, but you are a big boy already, certainly over 12 years old - there is no Santa. Sorry, but that's how it is.
For example: "They again have stated that the game will remember what players do and actions will follow them through the lifetime of a character." - yeah. And what does it actually means? Why, EvE's (and every other game which implements faction standings, say, Fallen Earth, Allods, you name it) does exactly that: whatever you do, every mob you kill, every mission you finish - game remebers it and it follows players through the lifetime of a character. So what _exactly_ groundbreaking have they said here?
I think you're missing the point. It's not that "the game" will remember it's that each NPC will remember what they know about you and act according to that particular NPC's world view. It's a subtle but very important difference: In most titles, reputation is little more than a bar you fill by completing quest after quest for certain members of the organization in question, and there's often little-to-no variation. A faction either hates you or loves you without any exception. With Storybricks, however, you could end up on the wrong side of the city guard faction, but what if you did a favor for one of those guards? While the faction as a whole would continue to view you distastefully, that single guard would remember your good deed and treat you with respect and gratitude. http://massively.joystiq.com/2012/05/14/storybricks-demo-and-interview-with-brian-psychochild-green-an/
*sigh* Eve has that implemented already: agents, for example, have faction bars and personal bars, and you can get great status with one agent but be in bad favor with his greater faction.And the only difference is that the number of faction bars will increase; each guard will have his own personal "faction bar" and the combination of bars will modify his response; and, as I've pointed out earlier, that means the huge relationship tables and The Great Database Bottleneck.EvE gets around the Great Database Bottleneck through heavy (and I mean HEAVY) instancing of relationships data (sometimes you have to restart your game to renew your relationships data, because it's heavily cached on all levels to avoid the overload), which goes pretty much unnoticeable due to the nature of EvE's world and its server-farm architecture.My opinion is that they will not do it this way, but rather a small number of specific NPCs will have their own bars you could fill; for example, a city may be closed for you usually, but one specific guard (and not all the others) will have his own faction bar and will have his own personal quest to fill that bar.Sure, it adds flavor and has value and I'm all for that, but it's hardly anything new or exciting.StoryBricks is an actually powerfull enough interface allowing barely trained monkeys to build enough such small quests for every guard and every person in the city, but calculation and database overload will destroy the server - unless, again, heavily instanced. Or at least that's my somewhat-educated opinion. P.S. Oh, I forgot: "It's not that "the game" will remember it's that each NPC will remember" - there are no NPCS to remember anything. It's all the game. It's all the database and tables in it. I'm sorry, but you are a big boy already, certainly over 12 years old - there is no Santa. Sorry, but that's how it is.
We don't know if they found a way to get around that bottleneck you talk about. It's just assuming that they can't handle it by the amount of data needed and that in the past with older technologies it wasn't possible(your example with EVE). But the same would go for a destructible world. This has massive data too. So far SOE didn't talked about how mechanics work. Not combat mechanics or such mechanics like communications for AI and destructible environment. Maybe they found a way to handle massive data traffic.
We don't know if they found a way to get around that bottleneck you talk about.It's just assuming that they can't handle it by the amount of data needed and that in the past with older technologies it wasn't possible(your example with EVE). But the same would go for a destructible world. This has massive data too. So far SOE didn't talked about how mechanics work. Not combat mechanics or such mechanics like communications for AI and destructible environment. Maybe they found a way to handle massive data traffic.
*shrug* I look at videos they post. I look at their devs' post and listen to their words. They are very careful in what they say, but they clearly didn't go for "destructible world" - certainly not persistent destructible world. They talk about procedural generation and noise maps - but those are NOT changeable. They talk about voxels on top of that - and immediately mention "and then we heal those voxels to lower the amount of data".
I don't think "destructible world" as they mean it and "destructible world" as you mean it have a lot in common.
As for bottlenecks, certainly current leaders in that technology are CCP with EvE - that's where their effort were concentrated for the last, like, 10 years. I'm sorry, but Smedley is not going to improve on that. If they have found any novel way of handling massive data transfers - they are hiding it like real ninjas. Not even a hint.
We don't know if they found a way to get around that bottleneck you talk about.It's just assuming that they can't handle it by the amount of data needed and that in the past with older technologies it wasn't possible(your example with EVE). But the same would go for a destructible world. This has massive data too. So far SOE didn't talked about how mechanics work. Not combat mechanics or such mechanics like communications for AI and destructible environment. Maybe they found a way to handle massive data traffic.
*shrug* I look at videos they post. I look at their devs' post and listen to their words. They are very careful in what they say, but they clearly didn't go for "destructible world" - certainly not persistent destructible world. They talk about procedural generation and noise maps - but those are NOT changeable. They talk about voxels on top of that - and immediately mention "and then we heal those voxels to lower the amount of data".
I don't think "destructible world" as they mean it and "destructible world" as you mean it have a lot in common.
As for bottlenecks, certainly current leaders in that technology are CCP with EvE - that's where their effort were concentrated for the last, like, 10 years. I'm sorry, but Smedley is not going to improve on that. If they have found any novel way of handling massive data transfers - they are hiding it like real ninjas. Not even a hint.
Really it boils down to your first comment. If you don't have any faith in the devs and what they are clearly saying EQN will be like, then there is not further discussion. I have some faith in SOE (against my best gamer judgment) and until they do something to change my mind, I will keep believing in them. You are free to continue disbelieving them, but it seems silly to follow a game/company that you believe is misguiding or lying to customers.
You know, I wanted to answer your post, but then I've thought - why bother? You've completely missed or misunderstood all my points, you'll just do the same with my reply. I'll just add that first, I don't follow EQN and is not really interested in it - there is a nifty feature "recent posts" on the front page, and the words "AI" caught my eye, which is the pretty much only thing that interests me; and second, I actually read what developers say, while you read what you want to hear into what they actually say.
Sorry, missed the disclaimer that you were just a passing through doom and gloomer. I actually read what developers say, while you read what you want to hear into what they actually say.... pretty pointless statement. I'll take my own opinion (someone following EQN in everywhere) over someone not interested. That's the great thing about opinions.
For example: "They again have stated that the game will remember what players do and actions will follow them through the lifetime of a character." - yeah. And what does it actually means? Why, EvE's (and every other game which implements faction standings, say, Fallen Earth, Allods, you name it) does exactly that: whatever you do, every mob you kill, every mission you finish - game remebers it and it follows players through the lifetime of a character. So what _exactly_ groundbreaking have they said here?
Maybe you haven't read as much as you think you have. The way they've explained the AI and consequences following a player is a step above factions, not groundbreaking, but not exactly EQ style factions that you can just grind by killing 1000 mobs in a day to raise it. I don't know the ins and outs of EVE's systems (not my cup of tea), but I don't know of another mmorpg that allows players to make choices that can have consequences much further down the road that aren't very obvious (Not, Option A will make you Evil, Option B will make you Good, pick one). We don't fully know what they have designed, unless you have some insider knowledge, not "I know, because I know." So it is all subjective, but I'll keep believing what I wish, you are free to do the same.
In deed.. even the original EQ was all about factions.. Everything you did either gained faction or pissed someone off.. I love games like that, and I hope EQN does it proper.. BUT, It isn't anything new, and to hype it with sugar is unneeded.. And as to Allein.. you mention you have faith until there is a reason not to.. Well.. I been around the block a few times, especially with SOE, so I have numermous reasons to not trust a single thing they say.. I have not met a dev yet that doesn't treat games as used cars and will sell anything to put food on that table..
I've been online gaming for almost 18 years, I'm not exempt from having dealt with devs/companies and all their BS. But even after all the disappointment and flat out lies that have been told (I would still be playing XYZ game if I was happy), I still have a little faith left.
If not, I would be forced to be negative about everything and find no joy or have any anticipation. I enjoy having something to look forward to, even if I know it isn't going to measure up to my high expectations. EQN isn't my "dream" mmo, not by a long shot, but it has a lot of what I'm looking for. A game doesn't have to be 100% original or groundbreaking for it to be good.
It is easy to just dismiss the devs and those that are looking forward to EQN, but it is rather pointless. Waiting around being negative seems like a waste. Waiting around being positive isn't much better, but at least it is positive and builds constructive conversations, instead of pointless debates and arguments leading no where.
No worries Allein.. I have faith that SOE will do what they do best.. "CHANGE the game" when it doesn't meet their standards.. The changed EQ, EQ2, SWG and even revamped EQNext twice already.. Personally I think if they get enough criticism, they will revamp it again.. Launch for this game is WELL OVER A YEAR away, and a lot can change by then
We don't know if they found a way to get around that bottleneck you talk about.It's just assuming that they can't handle it by the amount of data needed and that in the past with older technologies it wasn't possible(your example with EVE). But the same would go for a destructible world. This has massive data too. So far SOE didn't talked about how mechanics work. Not combat mechanics or such mechanics like communications for AI and destructible environment. Maybe they found a way to handle massive data traffic.
*shrug* I look at videos they post. I look at their devs' post and listen to their words. They are very careful in what they say, but they clearly didn't go for "destructible world" - certainly not persistent destructible world. They talk about procedural generation and noise maps - but those are NOT changeable. They talk about voxels on top of that - and immediately mention "and then we heal those voxels to lower the amount of data".
I don't think "destructible world" as they mean it and "destructible world" as you mean it have a lot in common.
As for bottlenecks, certainly current leaders in that technology are CCP with EvE - that's where their effort were concentrated for the last, like, 10 years. I'm sorry, but Smedley is not going to improve on that. If they have found any novel way of handling massive data transfers - they are hiding it like real ninjas. Not even a hint.
We don't know if they found a way to get around that bottleneck you talk about.It's just assuming that they can't handle it by the amount of data needed and that in the past with older technologies it wasn't possible(your example with EVE). But the same would go for a destructible world. This has massive data too. So far SOE didn't talked about how mechanics work. Not combat mechanics or such mechanics like communications for AI and destructible environment. Maybe they found a way to handle massive data traffic.
*shrug* I look at videos they post. I look at their devs' post and listen to their words. They are very careful in what they say, but they clearly didn't go for "destructible world" - certainly not persistent destructible world. They talk about procedural generation and noise maps - but those are NOT changeable. They talk about voxels on top of that - and immediately mention "and then we heal those voxels to lower the amount of data".
I don't think "destructible world" as they mean it and "destructible world" as you mean it have a lot in common.
As for bottlenecks, certainly current leaders in that technology are CCP with EvE - that's where their effort were concentrated for the last, like, 10 years. I'm sorry, but Smedley is not going to improve on that. If they have found any novel way of handling massive data transfers - they are hiding it like real ninjas. Not even a hint.
Start at 21:22 - watch the whole thing from there, as they explain the technical aspects of how they built the world.
*rolls eyes* I've watched that video. From technical point of view, they explain NOTHING there in any way related to what I say.
Yeah because that is what we need. A barren desolate world that have been permanently reduced to the bare ground. The purpose of a healing environment is so that we all have a place to place. If they truly made it only permanent destruction then after a short while everyone would up and quit.
As far as the data traffic, your client program will already know what the destruction should look like. Your computer will procedurally create the destruction for you. All the server needs to send is location information and the type of destruction.
I think there will be two types of changes though. Youll have your everyday stuff like you affecting the world on your own and they'll have earthquakes that "heal" that after a time to erase that data.
then they'll have the "calls" or larger events which introduce permanent change to the server.
im sure they'll have some other things in place so you can build yourself a house or tower or guildhall, but I think single player permanence will be kept to a minimum for data reasons.
Comments
From what I've read/ listened to. Smart AI does not mean that they will excell in combat.
It's like GW2 taken three steps further. Instead of scripted DE's the mobs will "script their own" DE's based on factors. So If you have a large zerg that is constantly farming a orc camp. The orcs will move away to a area where there are less players/smaller towns.
Lets just hope they pull it off. As for combat AI, thats a whole other area than the AI that decides where mobs will spawn, what they will atack and when to retreat.
GW2 has quests that are triggered at certain time intervals and players talking to NPCs. Leading into new quests.
All events in GW2 are pretty much like this
> 1 2 3 2 1.
Look at the numbers as players vs mobs. It's a line of events that go back and forth. Theres no real dynamic in them. Just a repeatable quest line that goes from 1 where the players are pushed back/start of the event, to 3 where the enemies have been pushed as far as it gets. Then a new event will trigger where the mobs try to push back to event 2 then to 1.
What they want EQN to have, is for the mobs to respond to the players and other factors. Not the other way around.
I dunno, thats the impression I have of their AI, or atleast what they want it to be.
Not sure if this came out the way I visioned it in my mind but oh well.
I'm hoping they go farther than this sort of overall game plan, and add AI into the fighting. Not just a possible retreat after beat downs, but possible retreats in the middle of a fight. They can also have "retreat to defensive position" of they mark those positions. They can also have randomized but weighted reactions of spell casters, do they heal a companion MOB and when. (Does that spell casting MOB even like it's companions that much?) (Does it hate a player enough?) Do archers all attack anyone who attacks their healer(s)? Do they set traps on the ground as they retreat, or do they fire attacks or heals?
The whole point, in my mind, should be to randomize the NPC "choices", but maintain some form of "intelligence" to them. Maybe with a Faux Pas here and there, after all, wouldn't that just be "realistic"?
Once upon a time....
This where I am on the other side of the fence. I believe the devs for the most part and think they are really trying to bring something new to the genre, maybe not mind blowing, but at least a bit more creative then what has been. Could I be proven wrong, yes, I'm not an blind fool. I'm just trusting them until I have a reason not to. To basically call them liars (which many tend to do) and that it is all just hype, does have some merit, but isn't any more insightful then those that choose to believe.
They could be completely lying, but I don't see the point in it. They aren't making vague statements about AI. They are flat out saying and describing it as something we haven't seen before. They have given clear examples to get our imaginations going. Which will either turn out to be truth or a lie, they aren't leaving themselves a lot of grey or back peddling room.
As far as GW2 is concerned, I don't remember anything that was "new" or outside the norm of AI I have seen from the last 18 years. Didn't help that everything was Zerged to death, but never did I go "Woah, what did that mob just do." Honestly, GW2 is one of the easiest PVE games I've ever played and never felt really challenged. Which is why I think a lot of people dislike it, most of the PVE requires no teamwork or effort beyond DPS DPS DPS. Which is the exact opposite of how the devs are explaining EQN's combat.
They again have stated that the game will remember what players do and actions will follow them through the lifetime of a character. Maybe you don't know how they are able to do it, but it seems they do and have a way where data can be collected from all actions and be accessed all the time. This has been done to some degree in single player games, so nothing too ground breaking, but it would appear they have figured out how to bring this concept to the mmo world. Only time will tell how well it works out. The concept of voxels and a destructible world didn't seem possible a short time ago as well.
Really it boils down to your first comment. If you don't have any faith in the devs and what they are clearly saying EQN will be like, then there is not further discussion. I have some faith in SOE (against my best gamer judgment) and until they do something to change my mind, I will keep believing in them. You are free to continue disbelieving them, but it seems silly to follow a game/company that you believe is misguiding or lying to customers.
You know, I wanted to answer your post, but then I've thought - why bother? You've completely missed or misunderstood all my points, you'll just do the same with my reply. I'll just add that first, I don't follow EQN and is not really interested in it - there is a nifty feature "recent posts" on the front page, and the words "AI" caught my eye, which is the pretty much only thing that interests me; and second, I actually read what developers say, while you read what you want to hear into what they actually say.
For example: "They again have stated that the game will remember what players do and actions will follow them through the lifetime of a character." - yeah. And what does it actually means? Why, EvE's (and every other game which implements faction standings, say, Fallen Earth, Allods, you name it) does exactly that: whatever you do, every mob you kill, every mission you finish - game remebers it and it follows players through the lifetime of a character. So what _exactly_ groundbreaking have they said here?
In deed.. even the original EQ was all about factions.. Everything you did either gained faction or pissed someone off.. I love games like that, and I hope EQN does it proper.. BUT, It isn't anything new, and to hype it with sugar is unneeded.. And as to Allein.. you mention you have faith until there is a reason not to.. Well.. I been around the block a few times, especially with SOE, so I have numermous reasons to not trust a single thing they say.. I have not met a dev yet that doesn't treat games as used cars and will sell anything to put food on that table..
I think you're missing the point. It's not that "the game" will remember it's that each NPC will remember what they know about you and act according to that particular NPC's world view. It's a subtle but very important difference:
In most titles, reputation is little more than a bar you fill by completing quest after quest for certain members of the organization in question, and there's often little-to-no variation. A faction either hates you or loves you without any exception. With Storybricks, however, you could end up on the wrong side of the city guard faction, but what if you did a favor for one of those guards? While the faction as a whole would continue to view you distastefully, that single guard would remember your good deed and treat you with respect and gratitude.
http://massively.joystiq.com/2012/05/14/storybricks-demo-and-interview-with-brian-psychochild-green-an/
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
I think what they are hinting at has more to do with mob behavior than combat AI.
there might be enhanced combat ai but I think what well see the most is that mobs don't spawn like in past games and are instead generated in their "headquarters" and "set free".
This means that it is unlikely that something will "pop" into existence right in front of you on a timer. This will also mean that the conquering of a place like crushbone will be extremely difficult even with an army.
in my opinion that's the best way to do it. No more static spawns or encounters. Mobs unleashed onto the world from "their" safe spot.
*sigh* Eve has that implemented already: agents, for example, have faction bars and personal bars, and you can get great status with one agent but be in bad favor with his greater faction.
And the only difference is that the number of faction bars will increase; each guard will have his own personal "faction bar" and the combination of bars will modify his response; and, as I've pointed out earlier, that means the huge relationship tables and The Great Database Bottleneck.
EvE gets around the Great Database Bottleneck through heavy (and I mean HEAVY) instancing of relationships data (sometimes you have to restart your game to renew your relationships data, because it's heavily cached on all levels to avoid the overload), which goes pretty much unnoticeable due to the nature of EvE's world and its server-farm architecture.
My opinion is that they will not do it this way, but rather a small number of specific NPCs will have their own bars you could fill; for example, a city may be closed for you usually, but one specific guard (and not all the others) will have his own faction bar and will have his own personal quest to fill that bar.
Sure, it adds flavor and has value and I'm all for that, but it's hardly anything new or exciting.
StoryBricks is an actually powerfull enough interface allowing barely trained monkeys to build enough such small quests for every guard and every person in the city, but calculation and database overload will destroy the server - unless, again, heavily instanced. Or at least that's my somewhat-educated opinion.
P.S. Oh, I forgot: "It's not that "the game" will remember it's that each NPC will remember" - there are no NPCS to remember anything. It's all the game. It's all the database and tables in it. I'm sorry, but you are a big boy already, certainly over 12 years old - there is no Santa. Sorry, but that's how it is.
*shrug* I look at videos they post. I look at their devs' post and listen to their words. They are very careful in what they say, but they clearly didn't go for "destructible world" - certainly not persistent destructible world. They talk about procedural generation and noise maps - but those are NOT changeable. They talk about voxels on top of that - and immediately mention "and then we heal those voxels to lower the amount of data".
I don't think "destructible world" as they mean it and "destructible world" as you mean it have a lot in common.
As for bottlenecks, certainly current leaders in that technology are CCP with EvE - that's where their effort were concentrated for the last, like, 10 years. I'm sorry, but Smedley is not going to improve on that. If they have found any novel way of handling massive data transfers - they are hiding it like real ninjas. Not even a hint.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DR3NEsJzP_o
Start at 21:22 - watch the whole thing from there, as they explain the technical aspects of how they built the world.
I've been online gaming for almost 18 years, I'm not exempt from having dealt with devs/companies and all their BS. But even after all the disappointment and flat out lies that have been told (I would still be playing XYZ game if I was happy), I still have a little faith left.
If not, I would be forced to be negative about everything and find no joy or have any anticipation. I enjoy having something to look forward to, even if I know it isn't going to measure up to my high expectations. EQN isn't my "dream" mmo, not by a long shot, but it has a lot of what I'm looking for. A game doesn't have to be 100% original or groundbreaking for it to be good.
It is easy to just dismiss the devs and those that are looking forward to EQN, but it is rather pointless. Waiting around being negative seems like a waste. Waiting around being positive isn't much better, but at least it is positive and builds constructive conversations, instead of pointless debates and arguments leading no where.
*rolls eyes* I've watched that video. From technical point of view, they explain NOTHING there in any way related to what I say.
Yeah because that is what we need. A barren desolate world that have been permanently reduced to the bare ground. The purpose of a healing environment is so that we all have a place to place. If they truly made it only permanent destruction then after a short while everyone would up and quit.
As far as the data traffic, your client program will already know what the destruction should look like. Your computer will procedurally create the destruction for you. All the server needs to send is location information and the type of destruction.
I think there will be two types of changes though. Youll have your everyday stuff like you affecting the world on your own and they'll have earthquakes that "heal" that after a time to erase that data.
then they'll have the "calls" or larger events which introduce permanent change to the server.
im sure they'll have some other things in place so you can build yourself a house or tower or guildhall, but I think single player permanence will be kept to a minimum for data reasons.