Battlefield 4

[Haystack15 10]

It's the cheap,poor programmers way out of trying to develop free roaming, autonomous AI and they should be shunned for that.

Why should they? It's their game. Why are they in the wrong if preferred scripted NPC's then non-scripted? There are pro's and con's to using either or, there should be nothing wrong going with solution B then A.

I agree with you choosing scripted bots over non ruins the fun, however for it being a "poor" programming tactic and that it should be "shunned" on is something I strongly disagree for.

I was watching one of my friends playing SP campaign in one of these games, cant remember which but it was an interactive movie. The problem for me that made me completely uninterested in it was two things:

1 - it was boring gameplay. Very limited options what he could do if any, and nothing but a shooting gallery and if any "puzzle" they made sure to guide him through it.

2 - the "movie" was boring.

So if you like interrupted shooting gallery or a bad interrupted movie, sure why not.

I guess you weren't buying the story, because if you think about it, that what the campaign is mainly good for. To getting people to buy the game to find out what happens to those characters.

Edited April 3, 2013 by Haystack15

[chortles 263]

Why should they? It's their game. Why are they in the wrong if preferred scripted NPC's then non-scripted? There are pro's and con's to using either or, there should be nothing wrong going with solution B then A.

I agree with you choosing scripted bots over non ruins the fun, however for it being a "poor" programming tactic and that it should be "shunned" on is something I strongly disagree for.

Pretty much this... froggyluv's mistake the idea that DICE is even looking for "free roaming, autonomous" AI in the first place.

[froggyluv 2130]

Yes it's their game and they can do as they please and as a lifelong PC gamer and fan it's my right to voice my extreme displeasure of taking the cheap way out. Fighting bots in BF3 SP was a complete droll affair as I always knew where they were going to be and if I didn't place myself in the place they wanted me to be -the movie would go on pause. How is that enjoyable gaming? When I was a kid in the 80's we had a 'revolutionary' game at the arcade called Dragons Lair - a beautiful animated movie in which the player would only choose the direction to act at the exact moment the movie wanted you to -and the movie would progress from there or the game would end. Most arcade players were wow'ed for a day, got bored by the way the game completely restricted you and went back to more free control games like Asteroids or Defender (relatively free roaming for the time).

Function over flashiness. The same few kids whom preferred Dragons Lair were the minority then but seem to be the majority now -so in that sense you are correct in them giving to their intended audience. The reason i say they are taking the poor programmers way out is because they had a semblance of autonomy in their BF2 bots -and i expected them to advance in what these bots could do in the future yet they took the low road. The easier road. Autonomous AI are extremely hard to program as the potential amount of variables infinite so its always easier to just create hollywoodish scripted sequences or forgo AI altogether and purely offer MP -a trend in which many game developers prefer.

Its sad for old gamers like myself who expected that AI would be leaps and bounds better than they once were yet the opposite has occured save BI games -and that is why I support them so strongly.

I've un-installed Bf3 a while ago but Im tempted to reinstall just to show you some raw footage of how fake the bots in BF3 really are - they aren't AI at all but merely an illusion of one. Ill stick with the red pill thanks.

[Smurf 12]

Honestly, who cares about AI or bots in a game like Battlefield? Even more when the SP content is a straight forward corridor shooter with cinematics (you can expect some "open" levels where you command stuff and bots aren't so scripted, because last COD did that). There is no point in discussing over it.

Bot match are cool in RTS and back then with old-school shooters like CS, UT and Quake where you had to train to not get pwnd everytime you went online. Nowadays is so easy to pick a game and go straigh online (because of the game being more easy and because players are... worst?) that this doesn't matter.

[froggyluv 2130]

Because having your own area (since you supposedly own the game) to test out anything you'd like for as long as you like is enjoyable to many. I've had my fun in Battlefield MP but sometimes I don't feel like dealing with the lunacy of kids or hackers and i just want to test out a helo, an explosive device, destruction capabilities and range etc.. and mess around a bit.

Second is that I care about the advancement of AI in gaming and the current trend creates the opposite effect. The leading AAA titles should be forging ahead with the newest, latest and bestest that AI technology has to offer yet they seem to want to cater to the lowest common demoninator...

[bangtail 0]

Yes it's their game and they can do as they please and as a lifelong PC gamer and fan it's my right to voice my extreme displeasure of taking the cheap way out. Fighting bots in BF3 SP was a complete droll affair as I always knew where they were going to be and if I didn't place myself in the place they wanted me to be -the movie would go on pause. How is that enjoyable gaming? When I was a kid in the 80's we had a 'revolutionary' game at the arcade called Dragons Lair - a beautiful animated movie in which the player would only choose the direction to act at the exact moment the movie wanted you to -and the movie would progress from there or the game would end. Most arcade players were wow'ed for a day, got bored by the way the game completely restricted you and went back to more free control games like Asteroids or Defender (relatively free roaming for the time).

Function over flashiness. The same few kids whom preferred Dragons Lair were the minority then but seem to be the majority now -so in that sense you are correct in them giving to their intended audience. The reason i say they are taking the poor programmers way out is because they had a semblance of autonomy in their BF2 bots -and i expected them to advance in what these bots could do in the future yet they took the low road. The easier road. Autonomous AI are extremely hard to program as the potential amount of variables infinite so its always easier to just create hollywoodish scripted sequences or forgo AI altogether and purely offer MP -a trend in which many game developers prefer.

Its sad for old gamers like myself who expected that AI would be leaps and bounds better than they once were yet the opposite has occured save BI games -and that is why I support them so strongly.

I've un-installed Bf3 a while ago but Im tempted to reinstall just to show you some raw footage of how fake the bots in BF3 really are - they aren't AI at all but merely an illusion of one. Ill stick with the red pill thanks.

Indeed :(

The further forward we go in time, the further backwards we seem to go in design philosophy.

Wasteland was leaps and bounds ahead of what is out there now in terms of complexity.

Sure, it didn't have DX11 etc - but it had playability, ingenuity and appeal in droves.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wasteland_(video_game)

Published in 1988 ROFL.

And in terms of AI, just look at the original Far Cry - almost 10 years old and the AI was ahead of pretty much anything out there now.

Edited April 4, 2013 by BangTail

[froggyluv 2130]

Wasteland :cool:

Fallout's father and when EA released just awesome PC games...that time is gone.

[bangtail 0]

Wasteland :cool:

Fallout's father and when EA released just awesome PC games...that time is gone.

Sadly, so true :cry:

[slatts 1978]

I said the same things about the bots in the first "Faultline" trailer for BF3. And while they weren't amazing in the final release, they were more lethal. I'd assume then and now, they are dumbed down for easiness of getting a trailer together.

Even still, I'd hold judgement till more comes out about MP. That is what BF games are about.

[Haystack15 10]

The reason i say they are taking the poor programmers way out is because they had a semblance of autonomy in their BF2 bots

Have you ever worked for EA?

Have you ever been part of the Battlefield project?

If no, Then you really can't say they're choice on dropping it should be shunned for. How do you know if it was a benefit or draw back on what they wanted to do with the series?

and i expected them to advance in what these bots could do in the future yet they took the low road. The easier road. Autonomous AI are extremely hard to program as the potential amount of variables infinite so its always easier to just create hollywoodish scripted sequences or forgo AI altogether and purely offer MP -a trend in which many game developers prefer.

There must be a very good reason for that trend, one of which you can't really know for sure because you never been part of those teams to work on the projects.

Its sad for old gamers like myself who expected that AI would be leaps and bounds better than they once were yet the opposite has occured save BI games -and that is why I support them so strongly.

Good to know you do, but you're forgetting the kind of game BIS is making is completely different from the game EA is making. There is a very fine difference between a Simulator and the Casual Arcade.

I've un-installed Bf3 a while ago but Im tempted to reinstall just to show you some raw footage of how fake the bots in BF3 really are - they aren't AI at all but merely an illusion of one. Ill stick with the red pill thanks.

I have battlefield 3 sitting in the top drawer to the left of me...

[froggyluv 2130]

Have you ever worked for EA?

Have you ever been part of the Battlefield project?

If no, Then you really can't say they're choice on dropping it should be shunned for. How do you know if it was a benefit or draw back on what they wanted to do with the series?

LOL, you don't have to be part of a company to criticise their practice. If that were the case, you could never criticise your favorite sports team as you were never in management. You could not belittle the practices of your favorite burger joints as you were never on their Board of Directors. Smack talking your politicians? Forbidden as you have never drafted legislature with them. That makes little sense really. What if BI decided they didn't want to bother with AI anymore as they can make plenty of cash off of limited AI games like DayZ -would the community have no legitimate right to voice their displeasure? Of course we as the consumer have every right to do so when we suspect developers are cutting corners. Your free to disagree but I have no question in my mind that AAA title developers are forgoing AI technology as it is just too unpredictable and costly and as long as they can get enough kids to buy their 'movies' -why the hell not?

There must be a very good reason for that trend, one of which you can't really know for sure because you never been part of those teams to work on the projects.

See above -one only need read between the lines. If you think about it, as wonky as BI AI may seem they are really on the cutting edge of the technology. They can drive, fly, scuba, run and fight vast distances or even crawl under a small hole in a fence with very little 'coding' needed by the mission designer and this done in the hundreds or even thousands. What other game Dev's are pushing AI to these limits? When's the last time a bot crawled under a hole or did anything remotely interesting in a game like Skyrim? They don't -they're very basic chase the player until's he's dead -type drones. Of course autonomous AI can also utterly ruin a scene or kill immersion with their unpredictability and if you look at current AAA titles -one thing they really don't like is unpredictablity in their scenes.

So on this level, it's pretty easy to see what AAA titles are going for -high visual impact in a very constrained environment with bot-like actors to give the player a sense of companionship, propel the story and create a shooting gallery for. The autonomous bot that can be controlled enough for their purposes is outside of the scope and abilities of their programmers and probably budget/interests. BI leads the pack here and I doubt many if any of the other developers have the skill to match them.

Edit: ..or use metalcraze's erhm *cough*, more illustrious example below ;)

Edited April 4, 2013 by froggyluv

[metalcraze 290]

Have you ever worked for EA?

Have you ever been part of the Battlefield project?

If no, Then you really can't say they're choice on dropping it should be shunned for. How do you know if it was a benefit or draw back on what they wanted to do with the series?

You went to a restaurant. You ordered something. When your order was delivered you found out that the cook took a dump in it. So you call a manager and tell him "WTF is this?"

And the manager is like "have you ever worked as a cook? No? You have no right to criticize so better get down to eating".

[bangtail 0]

I wouldn't take a guy who has chosen to defend a company that holds the dubious title of 'Worst company in America' for 2012 and is again in the running for 2013, too seriously :D

[Dwarden 1124]

Funny video about where the Battlefield theme has gone.

this is imo quite true, also the same sample (various volume and distortion level) is used in so many trailers (games, movies hell seen it even in unrelated ads)

[Tonci87 163]

Well basically said: "Mainstream" FPS coridor shooter game AI hasn´t evolved much since the first CoD. FEAR and Crysis 1 beeing notable exeptions. I wouldn´t even call those beeings in BF or CoD AI. There is nothing intelligent in their behaviour. They are simply scripted Bots.

[Smurf 12]

That line graphic in the second pic sums up to me:

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-GJTyfW4DL4g/UV2Ka2CA77I/AAAAAAAACb8/cFV-Io5C2ak/s1600/bf4-vysledky_1+%25281%2529.jpg

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-gamxcAHSZ8I/UV2KpS4sopI/AAAAAAAACcU/N6w36PsJPtQ/s1600/bf4-vysledky_2.jpg

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-OAz2qsMlpAE/UV2KjynbYJI/AAAAAAAACcM/_mT_I3nJ83o/s1600/bf4-vysledky_3.jpg

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/--E50tzdmyzA/UV2KhWjH3JI/AAAAAAAACcE/ukZtsDF2cC4/s1600/bf4-vysledky_4.jpg

[Tonci87 163]

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-gamxcAHSZ8I/UV2KpS4sopI/AAAAAAAACcU/N6w36PsJPtQ/s1600/bf4-vysledky_2.jpg

Well I see a clear trend in that last graph.

There is only one little problem. EA doesn´t care. They only statistics they care about are sales. And they are going upwards with each new title....

[Haystack15 10]

LOL, you don't have to be part of a company to criticise their practice.

Still doesn't give you the right to say developers who choose what they've chosen should be shunned.

If that were the case, you could never criticise your favorite sports team as you were never in management.

Bad example to use... I don't watch any sports...

You could not belittle the practices of your favorite burger joints as you were never on their Board of Directors.

Whats there to belittle? You get in, grab a burger and eat. If you didn't like the way the food tasted, find something else.

Even if I've found something to belittle about, I don't go to other people and say their cook should be put in jail for choosing to cook with a wooden or plastic spatula than a metal one.

Smack talking your politicians? Forbidden as you have never drafted legislature with them.

Don't care for politics too much as well...

That makes little sense really.

Same for "choosing non-scripting bots is something that should be shunned for"

What if BI decided they didn't want to bother with AI anymore as they can make plenty of cash off of limited AI games like DayZ -would the community have no legitimate right to voice their displeasure?

My goodness, I've never stated you don't have the right to say if it is a bad thing or a good thing. However acting as if you're the programming police and saying people or developers whom choose scripted bots over AI is something that should be shunned for, is something you shouldn't do.

There is no authority in the world of programming, so quit trying to get those whom choose scripted bot punished socially.

See above -one only need read between the lines. If you think about it, as wonky as BI AI may seem they are really on the cutting edge of the technology. They can drive, fly, scuba, run and fight vast distances or even crawl under a small hole in a fence with very little 'coding' needed by the mission designer and this done in the hundreds or even thousands. What other game Dev's are pushing AI to these limits? When's the last time a bot crawled under a hole or did anything remotely interesting in a game like Skyrim? They don't -they're very basic chase the player until's he's dead -type drones. Of course autonomous AI can also utterly ruin a scene or kill immersion with their unpredictability and if you look at current AAA titles -one thing they really don't like is unpredictablity in their scenes.

Again, Skyrim is a different game from Arma. Causal Arcade vs Simulator.

So on this level, it's pretty easy to see what AAA titles are going for -high visual impact in a very constrained environment with bot-like actors to give the player a sense of companionship, propel the story and create a shooting gallery for. The autonomous bot that can be controlled enough for their purposes is outside of the scope and abilities of their programmers and probably budget/interests. BI leads the pack here and I doubt many if any of the other developers have the skill to match them.

So in terms Causal Arcade devoplers will rather choose scripted bots because they might see no need to use them in a causal game while when it comes to simulators, developers will rather choose to create AI.

A very understanding trend there.

Edit: ..or use metalcraze's erhm *cough*, more illustrious example below ;)

I have... it was a childish and revolting example.

-----------------

You went to a restaurant. You ordered something. When your order was delivered you found out that the cook took a dump in it. So you call a manager and tell him "WTF is this?"

And the manager is like "have you ever worked as a cook? No? You have no right to criticize so better get down to eating".

Guess what I've ate today. Homemade Shrimp scampi with some broccoli and had water as my drink.

Even though I've never worked as a cook, I have and still do continue to cook for myself. There is a fine line between cooking and using the restroom.

If you ever come to a problem like that in the U.S, you report it to both your local Law Enforcement, and to your Local Health Department. They will take of it.

Quit with the childish examples

------------------

I wouldn't take a guy who has chosen to defend a company that holds the dubious title of 'Worst company in America' for 2012 and is again in the running for 2013, too seriously :D

Re-read the two pages again... You obviously don't now what I'm targeting, and therefor should stay out of it.

[bangtail 0]

Re-read the two pages again... You obviously don't now what I'm targeting, and therefor should stay out of it.

You seem to have an obsession with telling people what they can and can't do.

Not a good attitude for this forum ;)

And because you 'don't care for something', doesn't make it an irrelevant argument.

That's pretty pompous tbh.

If you are going to post on public forums, you should learn to deal with criticism :D

Still doesn't give you the right to say developers who choose what they've chosen should be shunned.

Of course it does - he is the customer and he can say what he wants.

It's up to the individual (or the collective) to decide if what he is saying has merit.

Who are you to tell people what they can say?

Seriously :rolleyes:

Edited April 4, 2013 by BangTail

[jblackrupert 14]

[Haystack15 10]

You seem to have an obsession with telling people what they can and can't do.

Not a good attitude for this forum ;)

And because you 'don't care for something', doesn't make it an irrelevant argument.

That's pretty pompous tbh.

If you are going to post on public forums, you should learn to deal with criticism :D

Of course it does - he is the customer and he can say what he wants. It's up to the individual to decide if what he is saying has merit.

Who are you to tell people what they can say?

Seriously :rolleyes:

Telling people not to take others so seriously isn't criticism. It's an attempt to belittle another.

And for you, yourself to say "not to take me seriously" you sure did jump in...

[Smurf 12]

So... what's your whole point again?

[Haystack15 10]

That developers choosing to use scripted bots over AI isn't something they shouldn't be punished for.

[jblackrupert 14]

So... what's your whole point again?

We are the only ones complaining about the direction of Battlefield and because this is an Arma forum we have don't play anything else.

[bangtail 0]

Telling people not to take others so seriously isn't criticism. It's an attempt to belittle another.

And for you, yourself to say "not to take me seriously" you sure did jump in...

All Most of that doesn't make sense :confused:

At any rate, FL was not trying to belittle anyone, he (and others here) were simply pointing out that we don't like the direction the franchise is taking.

If people want to voice that opinion here, that is their right, and it is in no way an attempt to 'belittle' anyone.