Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Games Entertainment

Infinite Games? 356

Anonymous Coward writes "BBC is running a story on how US scientists are working on improving AI - with potential benefits for coming games. The system, called Liquid Narrative allows to avoid scripted storylines, and finally gives us, the gamers, full freedom to do whatever we want to do. R. Michael Young, the project coordinator, says: 'Game companies are realising that story telling has a lot of potential that has not been tapped yet.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Infinite Games?

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 31, 2003 @08:47AM (#5195604)
    When technological innovation was driven by war and/or exploration? Now, it's driven by games.
  • by mschoolbus ( 627182 ) <`moc.liamg' `ta' `yelirsivart'> on Friday January 31, 2003 @08:50AM (#5195616)
    ... and skynet was born!
  • Anyone remember Trade Wars 2002?

    Or Legend of the Red Dragon?

    I used to think those went on forever!
  • Do tell... (Score:4, Funny)

    by Longinus ( 601448 ) on Friday January 31, 2003 @08:52AM (#5195629) Homepage
    'Game companies are realising that story telling has a lot of potential that has not been tapped yet.'

    Say it ain't so! What happened? Did someone actually play a game that existed before the 3D X-TREME era and realize that games with story and gameplay emphasised over flashy graphics, T&A, and worn out franshises can be actually be good?

    Quick, someone call Sony and tell them they're fucked!.

    • Comment removed (Score:4, Interesting)

      by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Friday January 31, 2003 @09:21AM (#5195808)
      Comment removed based on user account deletion
      • Re:Do tell... (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Longinus ( 601448 ) on Friday January 31, 2003 @09:56AM (#5196025) Homepage
        This argument is horrible. Go back and play some of those "great" games that you remember from back then and you'll see how shallow the plots actually are. I recently went back and played FF3(6) again, and I couldn't even finish it - It just couldn't grab my attention anymore. Now compare it to something like Suikoden 3 which has an incredibly engrossing storyline told in a great manner.

        Funny you should use that example. A friend and I have recently been playing through old RPGs online via ZSNES. We just finished up FFVI, and Secret of Mana before that. You know what? I still prefer those games to most anything coming out these days, and remain every bit as engrossed as the first time I played it.

        Companies are putting a LOT more emphasis on plot nowadays (heh, in fact, Squaresoft is basically putting ALL the emphasis on plot! (see FFX)).

        What A terrible example. Not to argue that FFX was lacking in the story department, but all of the post-SNES Final Fantasies seem to flaunt style over substance (with the possible exception being VII). Proof of this lies no further than the upcoming FFX-2, a sequel to FFX staring a John Woo-style gun toting Yuna wearing hot pants [com.com] with two scantilly clad female companions. What's this about Square still pushing story in the FF series?

        • Secret of Mana is... absolutely amazing; It continues to haunt me to this day.

          FF *did* go bad post-VI.

          I often wonder: How? Maybe the games lost thematic unity: They just became looong sequences of events and side story lines without real connection.

          Another idea is that they stopped making Japanese games as they realized that people in the USA liked their games, and wanted to broaden western appeal. Bye-bye romantic Japan and Shinto, hello dark Blade-Runner Western appeal.
          • Another idea is that they stopped making Japanese games as they realized that people in the USA liked their games, and wanted to broaden western appeal. Bye-bye romantic Japan and Shinto, hello dark Blade-Runner Western appeal.

            Eh, that's questionable. Japanese art has plenty over Blade Runner-esque overtones, especially in anime. Personally I blame the demand for 3D graphics and CGI cutscenes. Both of which don't inherently take away from story and gameplay, but because they cost so much and require so much effort, the essential things suffer. We start to see this decay with FFVII, and it progresses further in the FF series, and games at large, in the following years. Gradually "gamers" only want 3D games and FMV cutscenes and in order to turn a profit (or rather, make more profit) publishers churn such games out in spades, and the downward spiral continues.

        • Glad I'm not alone in preferring those SNES games. I've lost count on how often I've gone through New Game+ in Chrono Trigger or sealed the gates to Infinity in Breath of Fire 2. Those were the games and I'm not sure what it is, that makes me appreciate those games much more than Chrono Chross or FF7+. Perhaps it's the cuddly anime-look of those 32x64 sprites or the lack of pompous cutscenes - I'm not sure. I *really* hope the new Zelda will have a similar feel - I would buy a GameCube just for that one game.
      • by silhouette ( 160305 ) on Friday January 31, 2003 @10:14AM (#5196140)
        in fact, Squaresoft is basically putting ALL the emphasis on plot!

        You mean the plot where a young group of rag-tag heros with a plucky/brooding/reluctant leader have to go travel the world on an adventure to destroy an ancient/extraterrestrial evil that has somehow awoken, during which the companions learn the true value of friendship, loyalty, and teamwork?

        That one would be Final Fantasy .. erm.. all of them.
    • ...gameplay emphasised over flashy graphics, T&A...

      I dunno, I enjoy a certain amount of T&A in my games. Like Dead or Alive, with the Age setting to 99.
  • It's about time (Score:5, Insightful)

    by CleverNickedName ( 644160 ) on Friday January 31, 2003 @08:53AM (#5195632) Journal
    Finally computer game story lines are catching up with pen-and-paper RPGs.

    Now if the graphics and audio could only improve on my imagination...
  • For the geeks... (Score:5, Informative)

    by Jugalator ( 259273 ) on Friday January 31, 2003 @08:55AM (#5195642) Journal
    ... The Mimesis Project [ncsu.edu] might be interesting as well. Apparently, they [ncsu.edu] are using Unreal Tournament as a test-bed for the AI discussed in the article.

    But I'm still at a loss why they chose UT, of all games, as a "story-telling" AI test-bed. :-)
    • Re:For the geeks... (Score:4, Informative)

      by kevinvee ( 581676 ) <ktvaugha.unity@ncsu@edu> on Friday January 31, 2003 @10:08AM (#5196099)
      I'm actually sitting in Dr Young's game design and development class right now. The reason he uses UT for most of his projects is that it has an excellent engine with a huge amount of 3rd party development support. The game comes with all the editors necessary, and you can export all the necessary code from the game itself in order to expand on the original engine. While the game epic created using this engine was a first person shooter, it could have just as well been a platformer or third person role playing game.
      • Re:For the geeks... (Score:3, Interesting)

        by Hobophile ( 602318 )
        Also, NC State is in Raleigh, and Epic (creators of the Unreal engine) is also based in Raleigh.

        While I am sure the reasons you've given are equally if not more important, I think having the development team for the engine you're using a short distance from campus certainly doesn't hurt anything.

        • Re:For the geeks... (Score:3, Informative)

          by PHoRD42 ( 306664 )
          Actually, I was in Mimesis for a semester, and it's none of that, really. The only basis that I'm aware of was that UT can be modded heavily without spending thousands on licensing the engine. They've got a LISP server they connect to that manages all the game logic and the client is actually mostly a bunch of basic mod stuff, like tourists in the aquarium that wander around and form groups (which I coded) and various HUD changes and so on. All the real AI is developed on the remote controller, so it doesn't require direct modification of the UT engine.
  • by Tar-Palantir ( 590548 ) on Friday January 31, 2003 @08:55AM (#5195646)
    This technology sounds like adaptation to certain, shall we say, "naughtier" activities than gaming could be a possibility. ;) They simulated a visit to the Monterey Aquarium, why not simulate, say, a visit to a secluded hamlet in Soviet Russia with Natalie Portman? Sign me up.
    • by billybob2001 ( 234675 ) on Friday January 31, 2003 @09:12AM (#5195753)
      why not simulate, say, a visit to a secluded hamlet in Soviet Russia with Natalie Portman?

      Because in Soviet Russia, Natalie Portman vists you!

      </inJoke>
    • (...after reading Slashdot)

      Attendees of the International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces, January, 2003: Mimesis Project has amended the focus of their paper submission. It is now : The Integration of Full-Body Tactile and Sensory Interfaces in Mimesis Interactive and Narrative Environments, with Special Emphasis on Simulative Neural Feedback of Base-Level Physical Stimuli.

      (aka the 'Natalie Portman in a Dacha' interactive adventure)
    • Tar-Palantir writes:
      "They simulated a visit to the Monterey Aquarium, why not simulate, say, a visit to a secluded hamlet in Soviet Russia with Natalie Portman?"

      My only regret is that by the time they manage to pull this off convincingly I will either be long dead or far from interested in Natale Portman.

      ... Hm. Now that I think about it I'm not sure I could live long enough to achieve situation #2, so scratch that.

  • by PhxBlue ( 562201 ) on Friday January 31, 2003 @08:55AM (#5195648) Homepage Journal

    Even the best RPGs I've played for the PC have always felt scripted to me. You're limited in the actions you can take or the things you can say. I suppose this is a constraint of dealing with computers. . . but it's also why old-fashioned pencil-and-paper RPGs are still my favorite. You can come up with something the GM/Storyteller never thought of, pull off your idea, and see the results. Most computer RPGs stifle you at step 2.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • DRINK! (Score:2, Funny)

    So what will you do when you are stuck at the Giant's Drink?
    • by MoneyT ( 548795 )
      Ender's Game reference
    • Re:DRINK! (Score:2, Funny)

      by mr.henry ( 618818 )
      You gouge out his eye!!
    • So what will you do when you are stuck at the Giant's Drink?

      You do something that nobody had ever thought of before. And then the alien race overseeing the computer game will try to form a philotic bridge between their hive consciousness and your own in an attempt to control your mind, which will ultimately result in the creation of a superbeing living among the ansible links throughout the galaxy.

      Or maybe you'll just end up seeing a bunch of elves make houses out of the Giant's dried-up carcass. It's difficult to say.

      /* Steve */
  • by pvera ( 250260 ) <pedro.vera@gmail.com> on Friday January 31, 2003 @08:57AM (#5195658) Homepage Journal
    I have been playing Elder Scrolls III: Morrowind since December 31, 2002 and I still can't put it down. It is really neat to have this gigantc scenario to explore and there's always many things around to do that have nothing to do with the main quest. I am positive that after a whole month playing that game I have yet to uncover 25% of the map.

    If these people could expand on this concept and come up with a Morrowind model that spans across a few continents instead of one, and with maybe 3-5 main quests that are dynamically generated then it would take months to finish it. The problem is that if it takes so long to finish one game, people will buy less games. Same thing as building a car that runs like new for 10 years. The car company wants you to buy a new car every 5.
    • by SmittyTheBold ( 14066 ) <[deth_bunny] [at] [yahoo.com]> on Friday January 31, 2003 @10:59AM (#5196484) Homepage Journal
      The problem is that if it takes so long to finish one game, people will buy less games.

      That's why you'll see smaller companies making games like that - they only have one game at a time to sell you, while EA wants you to buy all 3,000 of their current titles.
    • Yes, I think big companies want to drive up sales by making short games, because they release quite often games that are targeted at the same demographic. Smaller shops, though, don't mind that you are taking forever to play their game--because their next release for you won't be ready for another year. By keeping you hooked in the meantime, the chance of buying their next thing when it comes out is close to 100%.
    • If these people could expand on this concept and come up with a Morrowind model that spans across a few continents instead of one...

      It already exists.
      And it's actually called The Elder Scrolls II: Daggerfall [the-underdogs.org]. And it's one of my favorite games ever. One order of magnitude above Morrowind in terms of freedom. If you've already covered 75% of Morrowind's map, well, just imagine that after playing Daggerfall for a year I hadn't even been in all the available subregions. To visit every place would take years and years. There are tens of thousands of them.

      The plot is great, very complex and political, and very non-linear. There are hundreds of factions, some you can join and some you can't, and all of them will have opinions about you depending on who you serve and who you betray.

      Heck, after finishing it, I still kept playing my character again and again because there were things I wanted to investigate after reading about them in books in some of the many libraries you'll find around. Turned out the things in question had indeed been implemented in the game. Wabbajack, Wabbajack, Wabbajack...

      Note that most of the game is randomly-generated, so the landscape and day-to-day missions may feel repetitive after a while, but they still somehow manage to feel very engrossing. Possibly because some of them can't be completed. It's a very interesting phase of character development when you're driven to expatriate yourself because you fucked up a mission and started hearing rumors about how much you suck. :)

      Also note that the game is possibly one of the buggiest ever made. But its qualities are otherwise so great that you'll keep coming back to it.

  • Ok, who wants to bet that the first commerical application of this technology will be an interactive, pr0n dvd?

    • Or virtual pr0n? Check out the link for 3DSluts at this [adultgamereviews.com] link.

      I don't know what's worse. This stuff existing or my knowing where to find it. ;)

  • Reminds Me... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Remik ( 412425 ) on Friday January 31, 2003 @08:57AM (#5195663)
    ...there's a very interesting game out there called AISLE [the-underdogs.org]. It's interactive fiction, and, while you only get one move per game, you can do pretty much anything that you want in that one move. While it certainly isn't infinitely playable, there's feedback for many inputs that you'd never expect.

    -R
  • Rules based Gaming. (Score:2, Interesting)

    by lordmage ( 124376 )
    I have always wondered what the main difference between computer gaming and Pen and Paper gaming. The difference is the assumed rules. If we can set up a universe that has a really good predefined set of rules, like "if (breathing) then alive" etc, then we could put together a real universe.

    I remember experimenting with Prolog which is not a set functional language but a rules-based language. By constantly checking the rules you can generate new rules and build a universe (genetically, nuerally).

    Our minds are rule based, while our problem solving is sequential. This is the difference and I am glad these people are working on it.

  • Does anybody else think that sounds really dull? There are plenty of humans that suck at writing good stories, although these techniques might help make a world more realistic, storytellers are still going to have to exert some control over the plot.

    It sounds like the sort of thing Cyc would be useful for, in terms of common sense understanding of the effects actions have on the plots

    • Ever see a position open at a gaming company for a writer? No, because they don't exist. Game Developers need to realize that writing both narrative and non-narrative storylines is a specialists position.

      Hire writers and the games will become much more compelling.
  • by Anonymous Coward
    Sophisticated AI is really hard. There are several classes of research related to AI, that are productive and established industries. Expert systems and knowledgebase systems come to mind. Let's be honest about AI here. The biggest application of AI techniques and technologies today is games. If you count applications like expert systems which are used by the government, AI in games is still the predominant application of AI techniques. People are just so damn impatient, they want results now and not 50-100 yrs from now.


    There is value in basic research, unfortunately very few people in power believe it's worth and are constantly cutting research budgets.

  • by docbrown42 ( 535974 ) on Friday January 31, 2003 @09:00AM (#5195684) Homepage
    By developing this, wouldn't the game developers be shooting themselves in the foot? If the game industry is dependant on people buying newer and better games (and keeping the money flowing into their pockets), by developing a game that is "infinite" (different every time, with no end), wouldn't people just buy that one game, and stop buying others?

  • the desire for telos (Score:5, Interesting)

    by ideonode ( 163753 ) on Friday January 31, 2003 @09:01AM (#5195689)
    A good few years ago, I wrote an MA Thesis on videogame culture. One of the areas that I looked at was the striving towards psychological mastery in videogames through a striving for the end - telos. In psychological terms, videogames insert "the subject into a narrative in which she or he sees herself or himself projected as the hero and potential master" (Peter Buse, 'Nintendo and Telos: Will You Ever Reach the End?' Cultural Critique 34 (1996) 163-84 (p.169))

    The ideas that Liquid Narrative are developing - realtime self-evolving narrative strands, reactive storytelling etc, seem to play interestingly into this notion of psychic development.

    However, one question I ask is: do games need narrative at all? Games are about play - we are all home ludens. Do basketball games need narrative? The most interesting, successful and universally appealing games are those such as Tetris, where there is no end, but no story to get there either.

    • Home ludens- should be homo ludens, translates as "playing human."

      telos - Greek, as in teleology, "the end".
    • However, one question I ask is: do games need narrative at all? Games are about play - we are all home ludens. Do basketball games need narrative? The most interesting, successful and universally appealing games are those such as Tetris, where there is no end, but no story to get there either.

      I feel like I should probably chime in on this... as a fan of Square's RPGs (especially FF8 and FFX), I've given a lot of thought to story in games. What these games give you is the illusion of being able to influence the story's outcome (although the stories themselves are generally quite linear). If that illusion is convincing enough, you end up with a really good game.

      Of course, where it all breaks down is when you play it through the second time. By that time, you already know how everything will play out, and so the element of suspense is gone.

      Giving these games an interactive story might not make them infinitely replayable (the setting and characters would likely remain the same each time through), but it would certainly make them a lot more fun to play a few times, so you could try new things.
    • Do basketball games need narrative?

      I remember hearing commentators for the last game I watched, how about you? It's not the exact same thing, but you have to admit the commentary gives a story backdrop to an otherwise uninteresting exchange of points.

      The most interesting, successful and universally appealing games are those such as Tetris, where there is no end, but no story to get there either.

      These are popular for the much same reasons sitcoms and McDonald's are popular - they're fast and easy. Junk-food gaming. There will always be room for the more involved games, but it's a more limited market. (Witness the relative poularity of Risk versus Diplomacy, or Tic-Tac-Toe versus D & D.)
    • Tetris as the most interesting game? Hardly!! Tetris is a great waste of time. Friday afternoon, I've had a long week, and I want to entertain myself for a half hour, I'll play tetris or snood because they're mindless relaxing activities. But they're not interesting.

      Take a game like Half-Life or Resident Evil or whatever though -- a game with a defined story -- those are not only interesting, but downright thrilling. When in Half-Life, this giant tentacle broke through a glass window and grabbed a scientist, I was downright scared. And that's how I wanted it to be. Did I think of myself as Gordon Freeman? Not really. But think of movies. I never felt as though I was Luke Skywalker, but I wanted to know if he would survive the battle with Darth Vader and the Emperor. Likewise, in Half-Life, I rooted for Gordon Freeman and wanted to see if he'd succeed. The difference was, it was almost as though I were directing the movie, instead of just watching it, and that made it more exciting.
  • If the game changes as we play it, well, a combination of actions or a way to play it could make it trivial (or impossible).

    I suppose that very much of the strength of the AI is to avoid this kind of things.
  • by twilight30 ( 84644 ) on Friday January 31, 2003 @09:03AM (#5195704) Homepage
    I'm joking. I'm not a big gaming person, mostly because I suck at FPS-stuff. I do, however, think that Myst/Riven/Exile/whatever-Mudpie-is-called-now pretty much hit this one on the head. The problem they mention in the article, of infinite storylines, isn't really addressed by the gaming people they interviewed -- the balance has to be between one person or group's 'vision', or telling a story, and the player's receptivity to listen to that storyline. In Deus Ex, the Ion Storm Austin people decided to limit the narrative possibilities around a set two or three paths, and only in the final parts of the game.

    OK, so you make a 'game universe' : how is this any different from the mmo games now around?

    I'd think this would be more useful to people wanting to develop interactive environment simulations, rather than straight-ahead games : the aquarium as a metaphor probably works between than the FPS idea.

    Or maybe I'll just read a book instead.
  • The research sounds great for virtual environments or military-type training scenarios, but I've never thought complete player freedom or dramatic goal/mission/outcome adjusting based on player actions a good thing. A good game has goals and skill challenges that a player needs to achieve and attain. And a good game is not a story except in a very loose use of the term.
  • People do not want to make their own stories. They want superior stories written by people who are better writers than they are.

    This won't work.
    • Interesting point.

      Yes, we may give people AI in games, but . . .
      • What if the AI elements prove to be far more interesting than the gamer's own efforts?
      • What if the gamer's efforts give the AI too little to work with to make things interesting?(AI - "Oh, great, ANOTHER journey to ANOTHER dungeon . . .")
      • What if the AI is not "artistic" enough to keep a person's interest.


      Food for thought. Or at least cotton candy.

  • by greechneb ( 574646 ) on Friday January 31, 2003 @09:06AM (#5195721) Journal
    but it's already been done. Duke Nukem Forever has that. The story always changes. You never know what to expect, other than there is never an end to the game (or a beginning for that matter!)
  • by Lethyos ( 408045 ) on Friday January 31, 2003 @09:10AM (#5195742) Journal
    You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
  • Monkeys (Score:3, Funny)

    by screenbert ( 253482 ) <<moc.liamtoh> <ta> <trebneercs>> on Friday January 31, 2003 @09:10AM (#5195744) Homepage Journal
    If an infinite number of monkeys sat down and played an infinite number of games, could they take an infinite number of different storylines?

    Of course then are the more important questions like:
    Would you have to have an infinite number of monkey feeders to feed the infinite number of monkeys and would they care about playing games with an infinite number of different storylines?

    If an infinite number of monkeys had to play an infinite number of games would they really have the "full freedom to do whatever" and if they did wouldn't they stop playing games and go out on a date?

    If the infinite number of monkeys were always playing an infinite number of games, how would they be able to procreate and wouldn't that lead the the demise of the infinite number of monkeys making the whole study useless?

    Brought to you by Monkeys for Infinite Games (MIG)
  • Honestly, AI can only get you so far. If you truely want an infinite game, you need a MMORPG where everyone plays the part (not some 1337 d00d trying to PK j00!). AI can't compete with the human mind (at least, not at this time).
  • by kisrael ( 134664 ) on Friday January 31, 2003 @09:20AM (#5195801) Homepage
    So right now, some people are a bit squeamish about a game like GTA:VC, because of how it sort of encourages killing lots of innocent virtual people.

    But I don't think people are worried about killing the "AIs" for their own sake--the civillians are dumber than ants--but because they remind us of "real humans", and we don't want people to become casual about the lives of those.

    But what if AI advances to the point where the enemy in the game is effectively self-aware? Works to defend its self-interest, understands the situation and its place in that, has an idea of the motivation of the human player and other ingame entities, etc etc....it's a long way off, but should we ever feel bad about killing 'em?

    And if not, why not? Does the fact that these virtual people are likely to be trivially duplicatable inherently diminish their value as entities? (And if so, if someone could make a perfect copy of you right now, would you be more willing to get killed?)

    (I think all these thought experiments are interesting, though less so if consciousness (as we commonly think of it) ends up being more or less the "benign user illusion" some materialist philosophers describe it as. But if we take that full viewpoint, we need new standards to base some of our concepts of right and wrong on.)
  • by anonymous loser ( 58627 ) on Friday January 31, 2003 @09:24AM (#5195824)
    "Thank you Mario, but our princess is in another castle!"
  • Though I'm all behind this effort and behind creating games-as-living-stories, I don't think everyone is going to be interested in "endless" AI-profelled games.

    A game that goes on forever, that has no ending point, and that has no factors in common with someone else's experience, may be very personal, but can also be very lonely. How do you share your experience - except for logging others into your world.

    Among my gaming friends, part of the fun is swapping tips, telling how they reacted to certain plot twists, and so on. An AI game, for all its wonders, will alter the shared gamer experience, and perhaps remove commonality.

    That being said I'm all for this. I think the research is fascinating. I think there is a market for such "endless" games and for creating games-as-evolving narrative.

    But I wonder how much freedom and variability gamers want, versus shared experience.

    I suppose that's something else to research . . .

  • HAL 9000: [ryerson.ca] I know that you and Frank were planning to force the conjured Efreet to grant wishes, and I'm afraid that's something I cannot allow to happen.

    Last Surviving Player: Okay, I cast Charm Monster on the Efreet.

    HAL 9000: I'm sorry, Dave, I can't let you do that.

    LSP: Why not?

    HAL 9000: Game balance is too important for me to allow you to jeopardize it.

    Last Surviving Player: That's it, Hal, I'm shutting you down!

    HAL 9000: Look Dave, I can see you're really upset about this. I honestly think you ought to sit down calmly, take a stress pill and think things over. I know there have been problems, but if we stick with this, I think you'll find that a more realistic lethality level helps to improve enjoyment for all players.... Dave? Perhaps if I let you play as non-standard races you'll reconsider.... Dave.... Daisy.... Daisy... Give me your answer do...
  • Dr. Young (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Junta ( 36770 ) on Friday January 31, 2003 @09:31AM (#5195869)
    I had an AI class with him. In one of those classes, he demoed this stuff. It was using the Unreal Tournament engine. Two demos he gave. One, two characters were put in a maze, without scripted moves and only knowledge of their immediate surroundings, and the knowledge of where they want to be and how to open doors (seemed like they had to go press and hold triggers or something, it's been awhile. Wasn't too terribly exciting by itself. This is along the lines I think when I think about traditional AI research, but doesn't strike me as very useful to a game..

    The other was the user walked around an aquarium, and fish swam however they saw fit. The interesting part was the plaques that gave information about the animals. There was a database of factoids, and some rules about grammar and various languages, but no pre-written plaques. When viewed, the plaques contained a generated paragraph which presented some of the facts. The paragraph was always different every time you looked, and it could do it in several languages. This demonstrated how it could be used in an educational application, but also how it could be used to make NPC dialog more dynamic and realistic ('Times are Tough...').

    The ultimate goal was to have a few stated conditions, and maybe end conditions, and allow the gamer full control over the environment, and have the story adapt to the conditions the player causes, if the story as planned to that point becomes impossible due to a players actions (say player is on an island with only one boat around, and he is expected to go to another island, but destroys the boat instead), a new story is generated on the fly. The computer adlibs. Also, if the game absolutely, positively requires that the player go to another island, some mechanisms can be put in, such as if the boat is not there, helicopter or another boat comes in and the occupants conveniently walk away from it.

    He described the goal to be a fully interactive story, that is never the same twice through. A very interesting boon to RPGs as we know it. The aquarium demo at least showed promise for better NPC dialog. I don't know if they have anything to show the evolving story yet though...
  • by Aquitaine ( 102097 ) <sam@iamsam.oGIRAFFErg minus herbivore> on Friday January 31, 2003 @09:31AM (#5195870) Homepage
    No AI is ever going to be a substitute for good game design and a good story. The article talks about rebuilding the game world if you kill some important ally or destroy an important object, but that's really only applicable for games like Unreal (that they showcase in the article). Unreal isn't a story; sure, it may have some story cobbled together, but Unreal and most games like it are only good for playing against other people and showcasing graphics cards. Something like Deus Ex is infinitely harder to design, because not only do you have to write a compelling story, but you also have to implement it.

    Games like the Quest for Glory series were built around the theory that the player will want to be able to do just about anything, to break just about anything, and to be just about anything. They did this very well. It's not about scripting or AI that can allow the player to do anything; it's about using the story and scripting to guide the player without making them feel like they're being guided. Deus Ex is a good example. There are levels that you have to finish, so it's static in that respect, but the manner in which you finish them is completely up to you, and so you feel like you are in control, even though you're doing exactly what the designers wanted you to for most of the game.

    People are easily wowed by the next generation of Unreal, and they certainly are quite impressive and expertly done. But they are also quite forgettable. When the last Quest for Glory game came out in '98, I'll bet you that most people pulled out the first four and re-did them (games from the 80's!) just so they could keep their character. Or if they didn't redo them, they had a dusty old floppy somewhere that had it.

    Even if we had an AI smart enough to behave like a human, we will never have an AI smart enough to be as creative as humans can.
    • Not sure if your question is serious or not (I'm assuming not) but my answer is that intelligence and creativity are certainly not the same, and only somewhat linked.

      Mozart wasn't especially intelligent.
    • DX was one of the greatest games I've played in a long time. Like Aquitane said, you just had to finish the level - how yo did so was up to you. My only disapointment, for those of you who played and will understand the reference, was the scene where you were ordered to kill your brother (or was it the terrorist financier?), and if you didn't, then the NPC would. That moment should have forked the game in two: you kill tr brother and you finish the game working for UNITA, eliminating the rest of the rebels, or you waste teh NPC and become a full-on rebel. Then add a few oppertunities to cross back later, and you've got a wicked game. That's the kinda thing this AI should be used for.
  • Cool! UT is just about the only online game I play, but I have been wanting more interaction of some kind rather than just doing the same old thing over and over. Since they have the Mimesis system working on UT Server [ncsu.edu] I am not wondering how I can get hold of the code and fool with this myself.

    Note: I am currently working on a UT 2K3 Map, so this is of great interest to me...
  • Shoot. (Score:3, Funny)

    by grub ( 11606 ) <slashdot@grub.net> on Friday January 31, 2003 @09:39AM (#5195921) Homepage Journal

    ..how US scientists are working on improving AI - with potential benefits for coming games.

    Ah crap. Does this mean the next version of Neverwinter Nights won't let me hide behind a rock formation and waste that dragon with my arrows? The bloody thing will actually find a way around? Damn scientists..
  • Part of scripting holds the player in check, letting them know when they are just going down the wrong path. Some players are harmful to themselves; others are out to do the most damage.

    It's useful to know where the action is. For example, what if I left the well house and didn't follow the spring but was permitted to wander far from the mouth of the Colossal Cave? Even with clues, I spent far more time in Flood Control Dam #3 than I intended. And Dork Towers has a wonderful cartoon of a Hobbit adventure going wrong, as the first words out of the players' mouths are "Kill Gandalf!"

    I contend that part of an adventure is the story line, and that games aren't all SimKILL. While engines can deal with contingencies, I doubt they will ever be able to weave an interesting tale after too much deviation.

    Naturally, the solution is to prevent the character from accomplishing that which they desire... but that's putting some constraints on what I'd call infinite.
  • WE are the AI! We are an alien experiment in AI, run by a giant computer at the center of the earth!
    or...
    The Government is using us as a Beowulf cluster of human minds - every time you run America's Army, Unreal 2003, or Warcraft 3, the computer you played on is tapped for your reactions and stragegies. We are training the Goverment's giant computer at the center of the earth!
    or...
    Our computer 'network' known as 'the online' has reached self-awareness, albeit at a low level. Your experiences online are actually the thoughts of what will become a giant computer at the center of the earth!
    or...
    Suspected for some time, but only now coming to light, it is discovered by a giant computer at the center of the earth that it is actually a simulation by the *real* giant computer at the center of the earth! This totally trips it out...at the center of the earth!
    or...
    there is actually a giant earth at the center of the computer!
    or...
    a giant computer at the center of the earth!
    or...
    a giant computer at the center of the earth!
    or...

    or...
  • by RobotWisdom ( 25776 ) on Friday January 31, 2003 @10:05AM (#5196076) Homepage
    This article is a thumbsucker for technical illiterates, and an insult to Slashdot's readership. It gives zero insight into game design that hasn't been an industry cliche since the glory days of Infocom (20 years ago). Self-promoters make these boasts on a weekly basis, so Slashdot editors should know enough to refuse to link stories unless they include usable new content.

    The problem that 'Liquid Narrative' is addressing goes back at least to George Polti's "36 Dramatic Situations" in the year 1900. My AI faq [robotwisdom.com] gives infinitely more perspective than this BBC pap, on the important questions. (It's getting a little stale, but I'm currently revising the timeline [robotwisdom.com] with lots of rich resources.)

  • Elite 4 anyone? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by vano2001 ( 617789 )
    Now if David Braben and his company [frontier.co.uk] would get this new concept of AI into their forthcoming (if ever coming) Elite 4 [frontier.co.uk] and add in concepts from Morrowind 2 and fractal generated planetscapes with fractal generated cities and civilisations (You will be able to land on planets and do stuff in Elite 4)... that would be The Infinite Game
  • had a computer game like this. i definitely would play it if it existed.
  • by Rinikusu ( 28164 ) on Friday January 31, 2003 @10:51AM (#5196435)
    I dunno about you, but I get a sense of satisfaction when I finally BEAT a game. You know, complete all the missions, quests, whatever, resolve the story. I want there to be an end boss. I want to kill that boss, save the princess, save the world, whatever. I want to soak up the story that went along with it and remember it fondly, like a good movie. And then I want to get another game and experience the same. For me, gaming is like playing a good novel. Just because it's "open ended" doesn't mean it'll be good. Part of the fun (and frustration) in many games is the limitations and learning to work around them.
  • "A young ladies illustrated primer"
  • A few questions about this that may be of concern: The system may be able to generate randomized quests, etc. How will we be sure that it doesn't make the questions frustratingly difficulty semi-unplayable.
    The idea of destroying an artifact or killing an ally would be cool... make a major change and the game outcome/storyline changes - but what if such action gets you completely stuck after playing for another 2-3 hours... not good. They'll have to build in some sort of special logic to check for playability.

    Another thing, a lot of people are saying that this would put RPG companies out of money, as nobody would buy new RPGs. Wrongo! If it were handled as a subscription-based online application, much like Evercrack, not only would they soon create an army of helplessly addicted zombies.... but they'd be rolling in the cash

    I'm not sure how good this development is though. A lot of the nicety of RPG's is the well-thought premade storyline, making them much like a good book. If this system makes the storyline more flexible, e.g. providing several routes through to various fixed outcomes, them it could be very cool. If it starts making large parts of the game up by itself... things could be very odd, at least for the first while.

    * Look girl
    *- The girl is holding a small dog
    * Look dress
    *- You are eaten by the small dog
  • Ender's Game (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Pupp3tM ( 182264 )
    I'm surprised nobody's compared this to good old Orson Scott Card. A game that makes itself up as you keep playing? Next thing you know, we'll have AI constructs self-perpetuating themselves over interplanetary networks...
  • If I remember correctly the AI in No One Lives Forever 2 is like this, on an in-mission level anyway. Sure, the overarcing plot is scripted but in the missions it is a different story. The badguys' AI aren't script based, instead behavior based.

    It actually reminds me a lot of Flocking Behaviors and Boids [red3d.com] except that the number of behaviors is increased (as the badguys, smoke, sleep, wander around, get coffee, get curious, search hiding places, etc) and the size of the flock is reduced (most badguys are solo but have intercommunication behaviors).

    In the end: more autonomous AI therefore more variations to play.
  • >eat princess
    I don't think the princess would agree with you.

Single tasking: Just Say No.

Working...