Revolutionary gaming? What is that?

[Dubcee]

Takes a long time? Yes. Tedious? Extremely

Now, I want you to get together with maybe 5 or 6 other people. From there, I want to you list every single situation that the computer would have to react to in oh, let's say a game such as Transformers. I bet I can add much more to your finalized list, as could the rest of the world. Something will ALWAYS BE LEFT OUT.

Now, list how those actions could be transferred into code and mathematical instances. Oh sure, computers can handle it much faster. Such as:

If x = 50, and you want to do x += 5 , then the compy would be able to make x = 55 in no time at all. BUT those equations have to come from HUMAN BRAINS. Humans to to create and use these functions. In the end, the computer all comes down to what HUMANS tell it to do. Therefore, the computer is ONLY as good as the HUMANS who programmed it.

I also reiterate my previous statement, that if your opponent is not allowed to use the same equipment, there is no fair competition.

I have played splitscreen PSO and you can use characters from other memory cards. A game boy IS applicable because it acts just like the memory card, except for the fact that the game is inside it

As for the PDA comments, where do they hold it when they aren't sitting? The air? Seriosuly, it's either in your palm or held by the side. Just like a one handed GBA. You mention there are also buttons -- notice the DS has backwards compatability? I'd like to see someone play a GBA game without any A/B buttons. On the side of developers, I doubt someone would make a game that requires the stylus, dpad, and buttons all at the same time o.O

As for controlled random factor, it is not random if it is controlled 3 word oxymoron there. Are you referring to change of movements? The computer takes your location in the X.Y.X plane, and reacts to that o.O I would also like to know what program you made that 100% accurately replicates the human brain. So would every other scientist out there. Seriously.

[Razer]

[Dubcee]

"I'm not saying you should have 99.9% realistic human reaction in every situation"

But earlier you just complained that they didn't act human o.O

"You know how most fighting game AI is done nowadays? It reads your joystick. It doesn't see what you do onscreen like a human would do, it reads what you do as you do it. This is not AI, this is "cheat" programming aka laziness."

A cpu has to know where you are going in order to react. A human does not randomly teleport. It IS just like we see it on the screen - CPU is so far away, closer, closer, closer, until we react. It reads what you do as you do it, just like we do when we watch a person - they're running, their leg is coming up, I better do something!


"In a maze game (shooter or what have you) the enemy knows where you are because the computer is reading the entire map like radar."

It has to, otherwise it wouldn't be able to detect you're in the vicinity and react. Congrats on destroying the whole concept of reacting o.O The CPU doesn't come at you like a hawk either, if you actually play games with bots most programmers are actually decent enough to program them to take other paths or chase other bots.

"Even in games that where the enemy doesn't "see" you until you alert them (aka Transformers) the computer knows you're there (how could it not?) but it doesn't have them react until you alert them. THIS is good AI."

Just like every other game O.o So what I understand from that argument is, that if in a shooter, a game where you are the hunter AND the hunted, it is cheap for the cpu to hunt you - like a human - yet if you sneak into an enemy area undetected, a WHOLE DIFFERENT CONCEPT since the CPU is no longer hunting, but guarding, and the CPU doesn't "notice" you until you alert them - like a human - it is good? In the end, you have 2 human acts - if you were placed in a maze and ordered to kill the other guy, would you just sit their picking your nose? NO. You MOVE.

"I can respect that bad programmers make bad games (mostly) but what I'm against is laziness. Games take time to make. 6 months, a year, five years, whatever. It's not neccesarilly a time table that dictates results."

Actually, I timetable can dictate results. More time allows a programmer to include more things, and therefore result in a better game. 6 months is way too short for a game, and even a year is really pusshing it, especially if you are trying to make a complicated game. If time did not matter, we'd see a new Final Fantasy every half year.

"Sports games are faster to make because you're dealing with known variables (names, stats) from past iterations. It's pretty much just REcoding and moving them where they belong. 50% of the stats in sports games are bogus anyway. Shaq may be texture mapped and analyzed but who inputs 82 games of stats for that guy in Seattle who sat on the bench all season. Hell, even EA had a White player and made him Black in one of the old NBA Lives. Somebody didn't even bother to look up his face in the team guide. How lazy is that?"

So you hate laziness, but in the case of 82 games of stats, you condone it? I smell contradiction here. When it comes to the looks of characters, this is the result of the art department, not the programming department. Just a heads up there.

"Anyone that's played a Firepro Wrestling game knows about the logic section. With it you can program your wrestler to do damn near exactly what a real person would do. I have taken weeks on one character just changing one number 32 times just to get it right. I don't consider myself done until the wrestler acts like he would if I were watching it on TV. I did a test one day with a friend and called out his actions while we watched."

Since I have never even heard of a Firepro Wrestling game, which I assume has its built in editor because not many retail-happy companies will let the average joe at their source code, do clarify exactly what number is being changed. Especially since a real compiler doesn't have its own "AI intelligence editor"

O.o and since you're playing a game, and only changing one minor variable, it smells like you're upping the consistency of how much your wrestler punches, throws, etc. rather than editing the source code. Again, specifics please.

"The way it is now is the old "That takes too much time, do they want to wait 2 years?"

Actually for most games we do wait 2 years..


"Well whatever takes 2 years to FIX would have taken 1 year to get right from scratch."

Considering in many cases programmers can't copy and paste from other games, because that is bad, they have to program from the ground up. And it still takes several years in many cases. Null point.

"I'm not attacking Nintendo specifically, I'm attacking the state of the industry. There are lots of smaller start-up houses and garage teams that can do really good work but it's the fat cats already established thatget the lion's share of the props, and undeservedly so."

Ugh how many times have I said this before in my life. If they don't try to market their product, then their product won't be sold. If they want money, perhaps they should pull a loan, start a company, get off their asses and sell their game. Or their operating system. Or their media playing software.


"If you're gonna sit at the head of the table you should step up and earn that right."

They did. They had the balls to sell their product.

"Those that know me know I don't have any toleralnce for unprofessionalism. You can be Joe Schmo off the street or John Romero. "

People have been doing their best, the problem is that people are quick to point out minor flaws. Either that, or they suck at games and point blame elsewhere.

[Cobalt Katze]

My bottom line is I think people spend too much time complaining about games, and in the end they just become picky and upset with every game they play. I'm not as easily disappointed, so I end up enjoying a broader range of games than people I know that are nitpicky. There's only so much an agitated fan can do. Want change? Get into the industry and contribute ideas and guidance. Can't do that? Then I guess learn to tolerate things for how they are and know that people are regardless working hard to make games we enjoy. In the end it's your money paying for things. Poor sales give a good clue to developers. But if it's undeserved, that's a different story.

[Therin]

I point you all here:
http://www.gameinformer.com/News/Story/200406/N04.0618.1846.53631.htm

There's also an article in the magazine, which I subscribe to, but which is aggrivatingly unaccessable online, and which I am too lazy to type up, but which basically says that the DS has good potential but that the overuse of the stylus in Metroid Prime: Hunters is slightly dissappointing. However, you do not move on one screen and shoot on the other. You move and shoot all in one screen, and the other screen simply provides a map. The same is true for Mario Kart DS and Super Mario 64X4. There is also a 3D sidescroller coming out entitled Super Mario Bros. DS, which seems to hail back to the original mario bros. games, and which uses one screen to display what you're doing, and the other...






To display the name of the game.
Warioware, Inc. DS looks to make the best use of the touch screen and stylus as of yet, utilizing it in many ways within the various minigames.

By the way, this thing has slightly better graphics than the N64.

The main draw for the DS seems to be its wireless networking capability, which can assemble up to 16 players together, as long as they're within a distance of anywhere from 30 to 100 feet. I forward the possibility for more-than-four-player SSB games, 16-player races at Mario Kart, and things of that nature.

They're also going to release a version of Animal Crossing, for all you addicts out there.

Oh, and Razer, I really liked the N64 controller as well.

[Razer]

Ok, this was not meant to be a line by line nitpick topic. Dub, you seem to want to just argue every word I write. When I said "Shaq may be texture mapped and analyzed but who inputs 82 games of stats for that guy in Seattle who sat on the bench all season." it was not a statement of graphics (note the "AND ANALYZED"). what I meant was that while programmers may pay attention to the stars of a game they often don't do a complete job and accurately portray the lesser players. That was my point. I feel that if you're going to do a game that relies on numbers and percentages (which sports games do) then you should see where scrubbie #12 on the bench makes his shots from just as much as where Jordan made his shots from. It's like me making a PO game and taking 3 weeks to code Shino but only taking 1 hour to code Doot (just for example). All aspects should be given equal weight in an equal situation. Same with graphics. If we're going to spend a week getting Iverson's tattoos just right then should the same amount of time be spent getting some 4th round rookie's tattoos?

It's hard to argue sports games vs other types but sequels DO take way less time to produce than original games. Are you telling me it would take the same amount of time to produce a homegrown shooter as it would to produce a game that uses a pre-existing engine? The rest of the time could be spent touching up graphics or calling retailers or having lunch with the wife and kids but it would not take the same time to produce the final product.

Since you're unfamiliar with Firepro I'll fill you in. The logic section basically consists of sections that cover practically every variable that will take place in a wrestling match. For example it starts with the section of "wrestler standing". You have choices like "use A button, use B button, back away, grapple, etc" Now you change the sliders next to each choice until the total of a section equals 100%. How hard is that to code? When someone who really dives into it gets ahold of it they can spend hours making sure things are exactly as they want it. I know, I've spent those hours...and days. You are limited to changing variables and not editing the source code. As a programmer tho, you have the entire source code available. Why not rip it wide open?

Now as Cobbie brought up, some people just play and enjoy the game. I used to do that but then I learned to hack and code. Then I started seeing how sloppy the work was. To you it may seem like this is all magical but when it takes 13 lines to code something that could be done in 5, that's laziness more often than not. It's the difference in saying I own a car and it is colored blue" and "I own a blue car". Straight and to the point instead of wasting space. Space in a program is very valuable. regardless of how large discs get, there is always the "We couldn't fit this feature on". I look at something like the GT series and say "If they could fit 8002 highly detailed cars in their dvd then why does X game look like crap with just 20 cars?"

The statement about "if your opponent is not allowed to use the same equipment, there is no fair competition." is pretty silly. What competition is totally fair? That is what competition is. One side is always stronger or faster or just different in some way. The challenge is to take advantage of your strengths while exploiting your opponent's weakness towards victory. What's the point of me taking my save to your house if we're all going to use the same thing anyway? If we both use Porsches that go 200 mph or Mini Coopers that go 80, aren't we still locked in the same level of competition? Whether someone uses a "better" or more powerful piece of equiptment shouldn't be the responsibility of the game company. That's the integrity of the user.


"People have been doing their best, the problem is that people are quick to point out minor flaws. Either that, or they suck at games and point blame elsewhere."

So are you saying that every programmer out there is giving his 110% every minute of every day? Wow, is that speculation or what? Do you have a Matrix-like jack-in to every mind in the world? Those that deserve credit should get credit, those who deserve blame should get blame. I guess we should all go out and thank the makers of Superman 64 (or whatever it was called) for their efforts. I'd like to see you buy an undercooked steak and say "It's ok, I know he was trying". Somehow, I doubt that would happen tho.

This is getting too out of hand for me. I'm still scratching my head at some of your quotes, Dub. My mistake for being too technical, I guess. I'm done with this one.

[Dubcee]

"Ok, this was not meant to be a line by line nitpick topic. Dub, you seem to want to just argue every word I write."

What's wrong with a good debate? I'm allowed to argue against poitns I find untrue right? =/


"When I said "Shaq may be texture mapped and analyzed but who inputs 82 games of stats for that guy in Seattle who sat on the bench all season." it was not a statement of graphics (note the "AND ANALYZED"). what I meant was that while programmers may pay attention to the stars of a game they often don't do a complete job and accurately portray the lesser players. That was my point."

After rereading the post, I'll agree on the stats thing. The graphics thing was more in reference to the following quote:

"Hell, even EA had a White player and made him Black in one of the old NBA Lives. Somebody didn't even bother to look up his face in the team guide. " - Which is not relevant to the programmers, who appear to be on trial here.

"I feel that if you're going to do a game that relies on numbers and percentages (which sports games do) then you should see where scrubbie #12 on the bench makes his shots from just as much as where Jordan made his shots from. It's like me making a PO game and taking 3 weeks to code Shino but only taking 1 hour to code Doot (just for example). All aspects should be given equal weight in an equal situation."

Agreed.


"Same with graphics. If we're going to spend a week getting Iverson's tattoos just right then should the same amount of time be spent getting some 4th round rookie's tattoos?"

Not revelevant to the topic at hand - I thought we were disputing AI?

"Are you telling me it would take the same amount of time to produce a homegrown shooter as it would to produce a game that uses a pre-existing engine? The rest of the time could be spent touching up graphics or calling retailers or having lunch with the wife and kids but it would not take the same time to produce the final product."

If you read my post, I said that the more time a game is in development, the better it usually turns out :p With games using pre-exising engines, there is also the possibility they may try to improve it a bit :p You know, to fix those errors everyone complains about

"Since you're unfamiliar with Firepro I'll fill you in. The logic section basically consists of sections that cover practically every variable that will take place in a wrestling match. For example it starts with the section of "wrestler standing". You have choices like "use A button, use B button, back away, grapple, etc" Now you change the sliders next to each choice until the total of a section equals 100%."

So basically you have an in game editor to change the frequency of which buttons the cpu uses which are then put in to pre-existing equations in the game. Now note those numbers would never be the same for two people, ever. What works for you may not work for other people. Programmers are left to make a broad generaliztion

"How hard is that to code? When someone who really dives into it gets ahold of it they can spend hours making sure things are exactly as they want it."

What if I wanted my wrestler to kick more than punch? What if I think the cpu would grab instead of punch? Actions are open to interpretation.

"I know, I've spent those hours...and days. You are limited to changing variables and not editing the source code. As a programmer tho, you have the entire source code available. Why not rip it wide open?"

Since this program only changed the FREQUENCY in which certain actions are used, it is not the holy grail to AI programming, it's a frequency generator based on what appears to be random numbers o.O Kinda like virtual slot machines.

"Now as Cobbie brought up, some people just play and enjoy the game. I used to do that but then I learned to hack and code. Then I started seeing how sloppy the work was. To you it may seem like this is all magical but when it takes 13 lines to code something that could be done in 5, that's laziness more often than not. "

Actually if something can be done in 5 lines but the programmer does it in 13 to get it right, and more work is done, isn't that the OPPOSITE of lazy? Besides, two different people will usually have two different ways to program things. What works for some appears sloppy to others


"It's the difference in saying I own a car and it is colored blue" and "I own a blue car". Straight and to the point instead of wasting space."

Not relevant, that is spoken language, not entering code o.O see my above comment.

"Space in a program is very valuable. regardless of how large discs get, there is always the "We couldn't fit this feature on". I look at something like the GT series and say "If they could fit 8002 highly detailed cars in their dvd then why does X game look like crap with just 20 cars?""

Gran Turismo games usually get more time to be worked on then other games. Not to mention that the company that makes GT ONLY MAKES GT. There are NO OTHER GAMES being worked on by that company. So it gets 100% of the time and budget the company has, whereas other games do not.

"The statement about "if your opponent is not allowed to use the same equipment, there is no fair competition." is pretty silly. What competition is totally fair? That is what competition is. One side is always stronger or faster or just different in some way. The challenge is to take advantage of your strengths while exploiting your opponent's weakness towards victory. What's the point of me taking my save to your house if we're all going to use the same thing anyway? "

What I'm saying is, is that by denying the opponent the same equipment, you take away an element that is very much loved in multiplayer gaming - FAIR PLAY. If we're playing an FPS, and I have all weapons right off the bat, and you start with a pea shooter, you'd call it unfair. In fair competition, a win should not be 100% dependant on equipment I say if you're afraid to let you're opponent use the same thing, you've already lost o.O

"If we both use Porsches that go 200 mph or Mini Coopers that go 80, aren't we still locked in the same level of competition?"

No, because the Porsche will usually hit 80 faster than the Cooper (depending on the model).

"So are you saying that every programmer out there is giving his 110% every minute of every day?"

No, but every personwho wants to get paid usually tries to do a good job o.O

"Those that deserve credit should get credit, those who deserve blame should get blame."

Those who deserve credit are those who get their products known. If a garage group is too lazy to get their software on the market, boo bloody hoo. That's laziness, which I thought was condoned.

"I guess we should all go out and thank the makers of Superman 64 (or whatever it was called) for their efforts. I'd like to see you buy an undercooked steak and say "It's ok, I know he was trying". Somehow, I doubt that would happen tho."

Some people liked superman 64 o.O Others like their steak rare.

"This is getting too out of hand for me. I'm still scratching my head at some of your quotes, Dub. My mistake for being too technical, I guess. I'm done with this one."


Whoops. If I'm debating I usually hit quote, then read and reply as I go :p but oh well, might as well not let time go wasted. *hits submit*

[Ultrawolf]

[Sperrit]