170 réponses à ce sujet

[WillieStyle]

People often claim that they'd like better AI in games.  But considering that AI have essentially zero reaction time, direct access to the game engine, and perfect knowledge of game mechanics, it probably wouldn't be hard to script enemy AI that were essentially unbeatable.  

 

Fighting Geth: 

-Give a bunch of Geth Infiltrators Javelins set up for penetration.

-Have all of the above Geth Infiltrators focus target Shepard.

-Proceed to instagib Shepard before the player can even react.

 

You can create similar scenarios with all other factions.  People claim they want better AI.  But those claims are sorta like bragging, "look how good I am, I think the AI sucks."  If developers made the AI as effective as they could, very, very few people would be able to finish the game.

[georg2357]

The problem is also that programming a good combat VI is a MASSIVE undertaking. Human perception, interpretation and creative problem solving is, compared to almost every VI, totally out of reach. The more open combat becomes (as opposed to the very restricted setting and limited options of, say, chess), the more superior the human brain will be. And the human mind is highly skilled in adapting to circumstances while even a learning VI could not hope to adjust quickly enough to new tactics and situations, even with an auto-evolution system in place.

[Innocent Bystander]

no. the point of higher difficulty is that we have smarter, tougher, more intelligent and agile opponents, ore in short a better AI. or at least that would be the point. but in most games there are just simply more enemies to kill with more hitpoints and they do absurd damage.

Okay. The point of higher difficulty is to pose greater challenge for players, in other words, to handicap players vs. AI enemies. Whether it's done by 'smarter' AI, more enemies, less available resources or any other means in completely irrelevant.

[kajtarp]

The point of higher difficulty is to pose greater challenge for players.... Whether it's done by 'smarter' AI, more enemies, less available resources or any other means in completely irrelevant.

 

it's absolutely not irrelevant. maybe according to you. thank god not everyone shares this opinion. 

 

This thread has quite nice ideas about difficulty levels:

 

http://forum.bioware...r-difficulties/

[kajtarp]

 

No, enemies should be the same intelligence on all difficulty levels... People shouldn't get half or less of the combat experience because they play on lower difficulties. 

 

Well, unless you wanna pay extra for higher difficulties, that should be the same. Or go play vs. other people, there's plenty of multiplayer games. 

 

 

Sure, maybe it would be better to have smarter enemies rather than dumb enemies. But then rewriting the enemy AI is a massive issue and is probably never practical to the degree you want. And then it begs the question, why doesn't the lower difficulty levels also get a better AI? I can't think of any game where difficulty levels successfully scale directly based on the AI apart from brute force evaluations in a game like Chess.

 

You two actually couldn't be further from the truth. Just play a multiplayer SOLO game once on bronze then silver and gold. why multi and not single? because theres no hunter mode/geth scanner there and im too lazy to mod my game.

 

equip a geth scanner or play with hunter mode specced for max distance. that reveals quite a lot about how the AI actually works. Firebase Giant is a good map for that. its quite small and you can see trough walls so you always see whats going on outside of the room you are standing.

 

its quite easy to realize the differences. its not only about enemies having more hitpoints and dealing more damage at higher difficulties. and its not just about having more bosses and elite level enemies. their attacks are more frequent. just go into a corner and you can see everything whats going on. there were points when i stood in the middle of 3 Cerberus troopers on bronze. literally within one feet distance. they did not shoot me for 3 seconds. 2 out of 3 enemies started to reload his gun after 3 seconds, the third one attacked my shields. then they shot at me once, and stood there again doing nothing for another seconds.

 

geth scanner / hunter mode also revealed some other quite interesting facts. on lower difficulties 1 or max 2 enemies are charging you at once. the rest just idles and stays in cover. yes they are closing to you, but do not attack. every time i kill something, one of the idling enemy is starting to charge/advance towards me and attacks. the number of enemies attacking you at once increases by difficulty, how agressively they charge towards you also changes. so the truth is, combat experience is not nearly the same on all difficulty.

[kajtarp]

 

People claim they want better AI.  But those claims are sorta like bragging, "look how good I am, I think the AI sucks."  If developers made the AI as effective as they could, very, very few people would be able to finish the game.

 

what a bullshit. who is bragging? i can't remember one single comment in this thread which was about bragging. but like or not, for an average gold or platinum level player single player insanity is not challenging at all.

[WillieStyle]

what a bullshit. who is bragging? i can't remember one single comment in this thread which was about bragging. but like or not, for an average gold or platinum level player single player insanity is not challenging at all.

 

Sigh!  This is precisely the mentality I'm talking about.  Insanity is too easy for the average gold or platinum level player.  So Bioware should just make the AI "smarter" right?

 

Except that the AI using clever tactics against the player can easily lead to frustration:

-trigger their staggers sequentially to keep you perma-stunlocked so that other enemies can destroy you;

-fire through cover using penetrating weapons;

-Enemy snipers focus their burst with millisecond timing to instagib you the moment you step out of cover;

-use soft cover like the player to make your life a living hell. etc etc.

 

The level of the AI is where it is because Bioware has to strike a balance between challenge and fun for as many of its players as possible.  If the AI was just as smart as the average gold player (and let's be honest, it wouldn't be hard to script that level of skill) the average gold player would have absolutely no chance of beating it.  That's because the AI has essentially instantaneous reaction time, a direct interface to the engine (no mouse or keyboard required), perfect knowledge of game mechanics, and a perfect hive mind that would allow all Geth infiltrators on the map to simultaneously fire their Javelins with perfect accuracy at your head the millisecond you left cover. 

 

While I think that the Single Player campaign was a bit too easy on Insanity in ME3, it's much safer to increase difficulty by buffing enemy defenses and nerfing combos.  If it turns out that enemies are too easy at 100 health, give them 200 health.  If they turn out to be too hard at 200 health, you can always lower it to 150 with a patch.  But if the AI turns out to be too effective, it isn't clear how to tweak it to be just right.  Improving AI forces you to dance on a knife edge between easy and unbeatable.

[kajtarp]

Sigh!  This is precisely the mentality I'm talking about.  Insanity is too easy for the average gold or platinum level player.  So Bioware should just make the AI "smarter" right?

 

i don't see whats wrong with providing a difficulty level that's also fun for the gold/plat level players, do you? as long as there are enough difficulty levels so there's a suitable difficulty for everyone. do you have a problem with that? 

 

in mass effect 2 we had a fight with Vasir. enemies using flashbang grenades in the Kasumi DLC. In mass effect 3 citadel dlc we had the fight with our clone, or the armax arena mirror match. All great ideas and i'd like to see more.

 

But this is totally OFF topic here.

[Innocent Bystander]

it's absolutely not irrelevant. maybe according to you. thank god not everyone shares this opinion. 

It is irrelevant. Developers using easy way out by making OHW bullet sponges isn't matter of relevance but laziness/deadlines/engine used/..... insert any number of other rasons. But you're right that making smarter enemies is more attractive than simple moar dps&hp.

[WillieStyle]

It is irrelevant. Developers using easy way out by making OHW bullet sponges isn't matter of relevance but laziness/deadlines/engine used/..... insert any number of other rasons. But you're right that making smarter enemies is more attractive than simple moar dps&hp.

This nonsensical post is basically the opposite of the truth. We live in a world where chess engines can brute force 100 million moves per second... On your iPhone. It would be trivial to make the AI in Mass Effect completely unbeatable. In fact, the developers have to work to make the AI less effective (by giving it imperfect aim for instance). Developers use health totals to tweak difficulty because they care about the enjoyment of their players. Not because they are "lazy".

[WillieStyle]

i don't see whats wrong with providing a difficulty level that's also fun for the gold/plat level players, do you? as long as there are enough difficulty levels so there's a suitable difficulty for everyone. do you have a problem with that?

in mass effect 2 we had a fight with Vasir. enemies using flashbang grenades in the Kasumi DLC. In mass effect 3 citadel dlc we had the fight with our clone, or the armax arena mirror match. All great ideas and i'd like to see more.

But this is totally OFF topic here.

Well sure. I loved all those boss fights and there should be more of them. But those boss fights were and should be at all difficulty levels. Complex boss fights are fun for everyone. Complexity shouldn't be what separates normal from insanity. Tweaking enemy dps and health is still the best, most reliable way to boost difficulty levels.

[kajtarp]

Tweaking enemy dps and health is still the best, most reliable way to boost difficulty levels.

 

so if i need to shoot the same dumb "standing still" opponent four time instead of three or two times is a good way to increase difficulty? 

 

http://forum.bioware...r-difficulties/

 

Well sure. I loved all those boss fights and there should be more of them. But those boss fights were and should be at all difficulty levels. Complex boss fights are fun for everyone. Complexity shouldn't be what separates normal from insanity.

 

i was referring those fights, because on any difficulty these fights were harder than the rest of the game. I never said i want them to be exclusive for higher difficulties.

[AllianceGrunt]

Shitty guns = Another reason to go Adept

[Natureguy85]

Sending our hero into a new galaxy with the shittiest weapons available pretty much doesn't make any sense at all. I want to be able to choose from a big selection of weapons from the start.

 

If the characters are on some ARK fleeing from the Reapers, it would make more sense than in any game ever. They'd be grabbing whatever they could and running out the door. Anything better would have been confiscated for the war effort.

 

 

 

So you could start with a Harrier X ... and find it's even more worthless than a Predator 1 in Andromeda ... and you've only access to a very limited supply of thermal clip

 

Ooh, good point. Tying into my point above, might we get ME1 style guns again? I hope so.

[shodiswe]

I like upgrading, customising, and finding new toys as I play so I get to play with a variety of different toys.

If you got everything from the beginning then you will jsut figure out which one is the best and then you will play your whole game with that same weapon and that same ability.

Having a special pick personal item at the start of the game could be nice though. Upgradable(still) with the possibility to find other similar items and perhaps that really special thing.

[Wulfram]

If the characters are on some ARK fleeing from the Reapers, it would make more sense than in any game ever. They'd be grabbing whatever they could and running out the door. Anything better would have been confiscated for the war effort.

Or alternatively Milky Way weapons could just be inferior compared to Andromedan technology.

That could be a kinda awesome troll, actually. Start the player off with like a Paladin, a Black Widow, a Hurricane, a Reegar and Harrier, then have them be the worst weapons in the game that barely scratch enemy shields and armour.

[kajtarp]

If you got everything from the beginning then you will jsut figure out which one is the best 

 

so in other words playing the way i enjoy most?

 

but still, everyone comes with this argument. i never said i want everything from start. but if we look at mass effect 3, we get the saber on horizon. not much left from the game from that point ... 

[capn233]

The AI discussion is interesting, but I will point out a couple things specifically with respect to ME3.  There are small differences in AI between levels, but on the whole I agree the idea was to increase their HP and damage by level, and in MP use more higher tier units at higher levels.  The other thing was that the player is nerfed (eg gate time) as difficulty goes up.

 

If they would have moved some of the global AI variables to the difficulty handler, it should have been possible to have more differences in AI per level.  With a fix to the "fps bug," you could have consistent accuracy irrespective of framerate and instead modify their lock time based on difficulty.  The other global variable that should be modified by level is the "max aggressive" number.  Increasing the number by level would have helped, and doesn't really break the game with respect to balance or make it appear like the AI is cheating.

[Ahglock]

so in other words playing the way i enjoy most?

but still, everyone comes with this argument. i never said i want everything from start. but if we look at mass effect 3, we get the saber on horizon. not much left from the game from that point ...

And yet no one is arguing ME3 did it perfectly. Yes getting the last of the mods and gear at the end of the game is dumb. But starting off with crap isn't.

You should have access to all guns by mid game. Not the highest level of guns but the base version of all of them. You should have guns that fit all the styled by 1:4 of the game. As an example the tempest is 1/4 game point the hurricane which is a supped up version in effect 1/2 way mark. It might be almost a even trade at that point as you have tempest 5.

But starting off with base guns is a good thing. Just don't dole them out stupidly slowly.

[WillieStyle]

so if i need to shoot the same dumb "standing still" opponent four time instead of three or two times is a good way to increase difficulty? 

 

No, but making it take more shots to kill the actual enemies in the game who move and shoot back is a great way to increase difficulty.  Even in the classic "narrow hallway" map in ME3, giving the enemies more hp and dps does make it harder because it becomes more likely that the player will be overwhelmed if she doesn't take them out quickly enough.

 

I mean look at the vaunted multiplayer.  What's the difference between Bronze and Gold? AI? No.  It's the number of enemies of each type that spawn and their relative hitpoints/shields/armor and dps.

[kajtarp]

 

I mean look at the vaunted multiplayer.  What's the difference between Bronze and Gold? AI? No.  It's the number of enemies of each type that spawn and their relative hitpoints/shields/armor and dps.

 

Did you not read what i wrote earlier? theres much more difference than that.