AI going to be player centric?

[[frl]myke 14]

According to the Interview/report on www.pcgames.de, the AI is going to be changed to player centric behaviour. Let me quote (and translate) the corresponding part:

Auch die KI soll das betreffen. Man ging zwar nicht ins Detail, will die KI aber nicht mehr global und dynamisch halten. Vielmehr geht sie auf Standby und aktiviert sich erst, wenn der Spieler in die Nähe kommt. Das soll verhindern, dass die KI abseits vom eigentlichen Geschehen Sachen vollführt, die die Spielmechanik aushebeln könnten.

Translation (parts in round brackets are additions from myself):

This also affects the AI (referring to previously mentoined fidelity of weapons, real or fictional). Without naming any details, the AI will be less global and dynamic. Instead it (the AI) is going on standby and only gets "reactivated" when a player comes near. This should prevent that the AI is doing things far off players view that could possibly mess up game mechanics (possible storyline/mission goals are meant here).

I strongly hope that there is a option to re-enable the actual AI behaviour (AI does not care if player is near) as the aspect of a real war going on, even when the player is on the opposite side of the area, is for me one of the most important aspects of the OFP(original)/ArmA series.

I dislike the idea that far away enemy troops are just standing there, staring at each other, just waiting for a player to come near to start off the battle.

Although i do understand that it is indeed a challenge to design missions in a way that the player still have some work to do when coming to battle area and not the AI already fulfilled the task by themself, making ArmA 3 too player-centric would mean (IMHO) a huge step backwards.

Gentlemen, your thoughts please.

[CameronMcDonald 146]

Perhaps a module for disabling distant AI, or an init-line variable to be used where distant AI is necessary to be disabled. Optional is the word I'm thrusting for... in the direction of the problem.

Like that team-switch thing. Generally unliked, despised by some, but available if you really want to use it.

[maddogx 13]

I can't be sure, of course, but I believe this will only relate to the campaigns, probably through the use of modules or just simple scripting. Missions like Evolution already do something like this.

If there was absolutely no way for the AI to do things outside of the players sphere of knowledge, there will be a shitstorm of biblical proportions.

[metalcraze 290]

Myke;1951782']

Gentlemen' date=' your thoughts please.[/quote']

If what is written in your post is true then we will get a yet another terribly sucking hiking simulator like oh so many out there.

[dmarkwick 261]

ArmA's non player-centric paradigm is the thing I like most about ArmA. However, there looks to be some amount of blurring of this here. From reading that translation I might make the following observations:

1. Units that are far away might recieve less attention. I wouldn't like to see this happen, as I believe it's a strength not a weakness or problem. However I acknowledge DAC's excellent solution, to reduce distant groups to one single representative unit, and build the groups up again when opposing units get close.

2. The units who are not distance-disabled sound to me like they'll still act non player centrically, in that you will be no more, or less, important to the game engine than any other unit.

[rye1 21]

It's good for fps with lot's of AI. We have it in the MSO and a sleep mode also; it does not affect gameplay. :)

[Hurby 0]

Oh I don't think it means that players will be more likely targets or anything, that was maybe a bad choice of words...

It's a little strange. It really depends on how far they're going to go with it. If they just stand and do nothing, that's bad.

[instagoat 133]

Good Idea to make story based missions work, so people are where you want them to be without complex and easily broken spawn-in spawn-out scriptings.

In general, I hope this is an option, though. It only makes sense for heavily story and event based missions, but not for all of the gameplay Arma offers. If it´s permanently active, it´s gonna save some system resources, but could be crippling in other regards.

[Jezuro 452]

Just to calm you down, I guess I can tell you that this is just a feature we're playing with in the campaign missions to boost the framerate. In the end it might become a standalone module, but we've never discussed implementing it into the core engine.

[pettka 694]

Myke;1951782']Gentlemen' date=' your thoughts please.[/quote']

You don't have to be afraid as far as I can tell :icon_twisted:

[[frl]myke 14]

@Metalcraze

The article names Ivan Buchta as source of this information (other german-speaking Forum members can verify this).

To make it clear, if either actively disabling or enabling this "feature", i see no problem. It sure makes things easier for mission designer and there are surely tons of missions where this behaviour is exactly what is needed.

But there are also tons of missions where thie feature would just make the mission hilarious.

So i do really hope there is any sort of option to enable/disable it.

On the other hand, don't we already have such a tool at hand with the scriptingcommand "enableSimulation"?

:EDITH:

@Jezuro & pettka

thank you for your comment, makes me relax again. ;)

Basically that's exactly what i wanted, a word from a deveolper to clarify things. Much appreciated.

Now back to work, Gentlemen. :D

Edited June 10, 2011 by [FRL]Myke

[PuFu 4591]

Just to calm you down, I guess I can tell you that this is just a feature we're playing with in the campaign missions to boost the framerate. In the end it might become a standalone module, but we've never discussed implementing it into the core engine.

You don't have to be afraid as far as I can tell :icon_twisted:

campaign related...no drama here

[instagoat 133]

Just to calm you down, I guess I can tell you that this is just a feature we're playing with in the campaign missions to boost the framerate. In the end it might become a standalone module, but we've never discussed implementing it into the core engine.

Cool beans. I think with some creative applications it couldn´t just be used to save system resources, but be actually helpful in making missions pan out as desired.

Given my lack of knowledge in that regard, I´m probably wrong though :V

[[frl]myke 14]

I'm calmed down, what has been needed to be said has been said. So from my side, this topic could be closed.

[CameronMcDonald 146]

Just to calm you down, I guess I can tell you that this is just a feature we're playing with in the campaign missions to boost the framerate. In the end it might become a standalone module, but we've never discussed implementing it into the core engine.

Good man. :pet7: Figured as much.

[Hurby 0]

Just to calm you down, I guess I can tell you that this is just a feature we're playing with in the campaign missions to boost the framerate. In the end it might become a standalone module, but we've never discussed implementing it into the core engine.

It could also find its use in large-scale MP coop missions where you don't want to randomly spawn enemies... So that module thing might be useful.

[NeMeSiS 11]

Just to calm you down, I guess I can tell you that this is just a feature we're playing with in the campaign missions to boost the framerate. In the end it might become a standalone module, but we've never discussed implementing it into the core engine.

See, you have to be careful with us. We are a very fragile community and just one badly worded sentence can give us a nervous breakdown. :p

[PeterBitt 10]

this will save a lot of bandwith in warfare and insurgency missions i hope!

[NoRailgunner 0]

What happen to the AI - will they continue their way/path or will they just become something like invisible frozzen NPC's glued at the same place the player have seen them? So the player can turn away and knows that those AI's won't flank or attack or stalk him until he decides to actvate those AI's again... :confused:

[mrcash2009 0]

I do remember the Arma2 campaign being FPS heavy in situations where it shouldn't have been or seemed to have been.

I have seen all sorts of recent scripts to help in this area of CPU being ties up with things that are not needed off and away. This still doesn't stop actions happening elsewhere have no significance if needed.

Optimising of campaigns and missions is a great thing to have I think, and as been noted campaign specific so its not hardcoded, seems good.

So the player can turn away and knows that those AI's won't flank or attack or stalk him until he decides to activate those AI's again... :confused:

Obviously not as that would be shite. I think that it will clearly have some realistic perimeters in terms of how far off this would be so that kind of thing wouldn't happen. I would assume things like patrols in far off towns in multi mission scenarios, so towns wont fully populate and that kind of thing, what's being done with recent scripts. Thats a like a different end of the scale ... open everything and then closed in nothing ;)

The notion that this would make Arma3 some kind of GTAIV style play is funny though :)

Edited June 10, 2011 by mrcash2009

[NeMeSiS 11]

What happen to the AI - will they continue their way/path or will they just become something like invisible frozzen NPC's glued at the same place the player have seen them? So the player can turn away and knows that those AI's won't flank or attack or stalk him until he decides to actvate those AI's again... :confused:

I assume that they will be activated at such a large distance that you cannot be sure if they are activated or deactived, or that they exist at al.

[maturin 12]

AFAIK, distant AI already have simplified routines and capabilities. This feature as a module would be most welcome.

[elmas 10]

I think its nice as an option, because it can screw up missions when a helicopter goes on a weird flight path and ends up shooting guys that i had Kilometers away, wating to reinforce or something, and i have to go and tweak the mission.

[MoS 0]

Just to calm you down, I guess I can tell you that this is just a feature we're playing with in the campaign missions to boost the framerate. In the end it might become a standalone module, but we've never discussed implementing it into the core engine.

Thats what I expected from BIS!

Seriously I´m not afraid of anything new implemented to the ArmA series as I know that great care is taken to persevere the core elements of this title. ;)

It's good for fps with lot's of AI. We have it in the MSO and a sleep mode also; it does not affect gameplay. :)

Do you mind telling me what MSO is and how you disabled AI (disableAI command or another way)?

[Tobie 10]

Myke;1951782']I dislike the idea that far away enemy troops are just standing there' date=' staring at each other, just waiting for a player to come near to start off the battle.[/quote']

i fully agree with you. but isnt something like that already built in warfare? i've seen that in a warfare mission, the AI was only activated when you came near of the town. of course that was good for the performance.. but still somehow stupid^^