http://www.aiseek.com/index.html
I`m still getting into the details of it, but apart from the money, game development delays, SPACE ON A MOBO issues..theres more.
Artificial Intelligence. If these ppl can somehow write code to allow A.I. in computer games, they`ve just solved the massive problems of A.I. for the real world, as the "thinking" is the same. Adapt to a situation with "unique" train of thought and independent problem solving.
Problem is...they wont have done that. The "A.I." will be a set of rules that say..if situation A happens, use reaction 1 and so on. Its not artificial intelligence, they will be preset reactions to problems.
The demo (i`ve not seen it yet) shows 2 armies charging each other, with rubble scattering across the terrain in a random fashion. Apparently. Well..for it to be "random" that`ll need a PPU, and the A.I. idea is not artificial intelligence. the coding can handle a set of instructions that say theres a block in front of you, you cant walk forward, or similar. The coding could be pre-emptive to say theres something travelling with an equation that will put it in the same space as you..dive out the way, or go to subroutine "killed" or similar.
What i`m saying, basically is...waste of money, waste of development time, false advertising and not needed. The coding for "random" and unexpected actions/reactions is good enough in games that the small discrepencies arent really noticed unless the player is looking...and who does that in a fast moving game? Really. Game physics is good enough to give a selection of ways for e.g. a barrel falling over depending on where its hit and what with...we wont notice infinite possibilities. We dont need this.
K
I`m still getting into the details of it, but apart from the money, game development delays, SPACE ON A MOBO issues..theres more.
Artificial Intelligence. If these ppl can somehow write code to allow A.I. in computer games, they`ve just solved the massive problems of A.I. for the real world, as the "thinking" is the same. Adapt to a situation with "unique" train of thought and independent problem solving.
Problem is...they wont have done that. The "A.I." will be a set of rules that say..if situation A happens, use reaction 1 and so on. Its not artificial intelligence, they will be preset reactions to problems.
The demo (i`ve not seen it yet) shows 2 armies charging each other, with rubble scattering across the terrain in a random fashion. Apparently. Well..for it to be "random" that`ll need a PPU, and the A.I. idea is not artificial intelligence. the coding can handle a set of instructions that say theres a block in front of you, you cant walk forward, or similar. The coding could be pre-emptive to say theres something travelling with an equation that will put it in the same space as you..dive out the way, or go to subroutine "killed" or similar.
What i`m saying, basically is...waste of money, waste of development time, false advertising and not needed. The coding for "random" and unexpected actions/reactions is good enough in games that the small discrepencies arent really noticed unless the player is looking...and who does that in a fast moving game? Really. Game physics is good enough to give a selection of ways for e.g. a barrel falling over depending on where its hit and what with...we wont notice infinite possibilities. We dont need this.
K
