[MUD-Dev] AI not worth doing in our games?

[amanda at alfar.com]

Jeff Freeman <jfreeman at soe.sony.com> wrote:

> e.g. A "real" AI for pigeons in the park would be big, complex,
> and result in flocks of pigeons wandering around the park.  We can
> make pigeons do that without a big, complex AI, though.  So if
> that's the desired result, we should just do that.

I think this depends a bit.  If the pigeons really are just window
dressing, sure.  And once players determine that they're just
CPU-eating window dressing, they'll turn off "show pigeons in parks"
display option (cf. client-side wildlife in AO, and landscape frills
in AC2).

However...

If the pigeons respond to player actions, and mobs respond to
pigeons, it could make it much more challenging to sneak through the
park.  Example:

  - target a mob, cast lightning bolt.

  - flock of pigeons burts out the trees, scared by the noise.

  - mobs converge on you to see what the fuss is about.

I'll go back to my claim that faked, teflon-coated scenery is less
immersive than reactive scenery.  Remember what was so fun about
Duke Nukem?  You could actually blow holes in stuff!  Sure, it was
only a few preconstructed holes in a few pre-designated places, but
it was there.  Same with decals in Q3 for scorch marks, etc.

> The areas in which faking it just won't do are areas of
> competition with players.  But even in those areas, the players
> don't want the AI to be competitive anyway.

True.  But they may well prefer it to be at least reactive.


Amanda Walker

_______________________________________________
MUD-Dev mailing list
MUD-Dev at kanga.nu
https://www.kanga.nu/lists/listinfo/mud-dev