Talk:Game artificial intelligence
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Out-of-context information
An anon user just added this information. The quotes are his:
- "20Q.net is an experiment in artificial intelligence. The program is very simple but its behavior is complex. Everything that it knows and all questions that it asks were entered by people playing this game. 20Q.net is a learning system; the more it is played, the smarter it gets." It can be played in English, Spanish, French, and German. The URL is http://www.20q.net/.
It is out of context and has little to nothing to do with the article. It mentions that it uses AI, but mentions nothing about why that AI is notable or how it works. It also uses in-article external links, which are a no-no (except as cites). As it is, it is just an ad. If someone wants to take a crack at fixing it (i.e. giving it context, mentioning why it is notable, how it works), please feel free.
UPDATE: Actually, I just looked at it. It is a simple game of 20 questions. Variations on this game have been around for more than 20 years. It isn't artificial intelligence. It just creates binary trees to track user's questions and answers and spits out an answer when it gets to a leaf node. If the leaf node is wrong, it creates a new branch. Not AI, it is just an ad. — Frecklefoot | Talk 14:31, May 17, 2005 (UTC)
Ah, 20q... I once had a long, long debate with another guy over whether 20q is to be seen as binary tree based or not. Implementation-wise, it clearly isn't, and it is rather comparable to a Kohonen network (but not quite), if I remember right. Whether it is functionally equivalent to a binary tree-based algorithm is another question. I think it is an interesting application, but I agree that the above ad is just an ad and has no place in the article.--Julian Togelius 03:06, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
While I'm at it, would it be appropriate to add a paragraph or two about the resarch being done about computational intelligence and games [1], even though it is rather academical at the moment (but trying to get closer to commercial game ai)?--Julian Togelius 03:06, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
- Well, I have no idea what those are. Perhaps put them in the main artificial intelligence article for now since that is more on the academic side. You could also look at the A.I. portal to find the best fit. — Frecklefoot | Talk 16:30, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Print Sources
For the little I have skimmed, very relevant and usable references: [2] IvanDíaz 14:03, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Bots Placement
Bots belongs under the "See also" section. It does not need its own section simply to link to the bots article. That's exactly what see also is for. -Dave 21:05, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Games which use "Game AI"
As this article is talking specifically about computer games and the use of AI in games, wouldn't it be appropriate to have a section which lists those games which either 1) Has incredibly good game AI, or 2) Is supported by a language which allows people to write their own. Enigmatical 00:36, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
Those of note which I can think about include:
- Good Game AI
- Galactic Civilizations 2 (Recently released and touting one of the best non-cheating AI's around)
- Quake/DOOM/Half-Life (I read somewhere that one of these has the AI improving to respond to you)
- Command and Conquer
- Programmable AI
[edit] Images
How about a few images for this article, such as screenshots and game covers? (^'-')^ Covington 07:36, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
- Would love to add those, but since most of those were submitted under fair use, they can't be used here. — Frecklefoot | Talk 19:36, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] "Traditional turn-based games" section
The "Traditional turn-based games" section seems out of place and meaningless. --Mrwojo 18:22, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Move article?
I think that naming conventions would put this article at AI (game), or some such with the modifier subordinate and following AI, since in video game parlance the AI is referred to generally only as "the AI". Thoughts? ENeville 20:36, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
- "AI" is an acronym and naming conventions state we should avoid naming an article as an acronym. I'd support moving it to Artificial intelligence (game), though. — Frecklefoot | Talk 19:36, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Confusing paragraphs
I removed the following paragraphs:
- Differential Games were investigated by Rufus Isaacs and Published early in his famous Book,[Differential Games, 1965]. A new Game, Laser Game, was firstly presented in SIAM Fall Meeting,[Moustafa El-Arabaty, 1981]. A chase in the 3-D involving a pursuer with large turning radius and carrying a laser system for increasing his capability, and a more maneuverable evading vehicle was constructed,[M. El-Arabaty, CDC, IEEE, 1982].
- Artificial Intelligence techniques were used for Pursuit-Evasion Games with the Algorithms Design of different Aerospace Dynamic Games and their extended applications, [M. El-Arabaty, Towards The Design of an Intelligent Aerospace System, AIAA-1987-2844].
- Expert Systems different techniques were considered in the design of aerospace computer games with attention given to production rules, networks,frames ,Bayes laws ,Fuzzy rules, languages used in expert systems, and man-machine interfaces,[M. El-Arabaty, AIAA-1989-3007].
I removed them earlier, but an anon user added them back in. They are confusing and don't use wiki-markup correctly (but that's easily remedied). The biggest problem, though, is they give no context, don't really express their ideas clearly and give us no reason why we should consider any of it important. It presents ideas without explaining what they are, why they are important, or why anyone should care or how they advanced the field of artificial intelligence in games. What's a differential game? I have no idea, and it isn't explained.
So, before adding them in again, try fixing them. Otherwise, they'll just be removed again. — Frecklefoot | Talk 21:40, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] COMMENT
Have you read something about Dynamic Games? I advice you to study the Book Differential Games of Isaacs, it is a nice and very famous book,and was translated to different languages, I advice you to study higher higher mathematics to be able to read such book! . I belief that this will make additional knowledge to you in GAMES . You will not be confused, and at that time you will never cancel such games . Advice ; if you do not know about this field and you are personally interest to know the fundamentls of dynamic games, Do not cancel such papers , but bring them and try to study them instead of writing about scientific branches you never heard about them. If you do not know and you are not willing to know let others who are more interesting than you to see and read, these research were published internationally !!!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.114.92.188 (talk • contribs)
- Thank you, Rufus Isaacs, for your above comment. — Frecklefoot | Talk 23:42, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Facade
refference for Facade:http://games.softpedia.com/get/Freeware-Games/Facade.shtml —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.210.245.91 (talk) 21:06, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
- Great, just what we need: another reference to an obscure game that is one reader's favorite. I reverted it. Thanks for slapping your comment in the middle of the page with no context whatsoever (I moved it here, where it belongs). Please only make additions that improve the article, not promote obscure products. — Frecklefσσt | Talk 12:26, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
facade is obscure game, i agree, but it is an important game in artificial intelligence not in game artificial intelligence. It`s an expirimental game maybe more inportant in field than "far cry". Far cry was game with advances in 3d more that AI. Games mentioned here are mostly mainstream games. Artificial intelligence in mainstream games is more obsuce theme than 3D. So maybe we should stick to "obscure" games. This game was mentioned in magazine "joker" (game magazine Slovenia) in artificial intelligence article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.210.245.252 (talk) 02:11, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
In Facade are human interactions very precise similar to those in black and white, but here they depend on talk rather than actions (communication bots) There are two people in relation(love) and you interract with them in your visit in their appartment. Due to your interaction theri romance fails, get stronger, they throw you out,ets (different endings) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.210.245.252 (talk) 02:16, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry, it's obscure and unimportant unless you can cite an impartial source that says it's groundbreaking, important, etc. Until then, it has no place in the article. These aren't my standards, they are Wikipedia's. — Frecklefσσt | Talk 15:28, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
Dont know if thats what you are looking for but anyway:http://www.gamespot.com/pc/adventure/facade/ here are some news,awards (indie award for most innovative game,etc..) about the game Facade made by professor related to AI and this cite:Facade, an artificial intelligence-based art/research experiment in electronic narrative. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.250.202.181 (talk) 04:37, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Article Revamp
This article is badly organized and really needs a revamp. The "Views" section is nothing more than an opinion of misconceptions. The "Usage" section discusses almost no usage notes at all. The "Cheating AI" section is worthless as it contributes nothing to the actual discussion of Game AI. (Wjmurdick (talk) 18:51, 15 May 2008 (UTC)).
- I agree. Be bold!. — Frecklefσσt | Talk 18:59, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

