Is GT6's AI actually as unrealistic as we think it is?

[NixxxoN]

Is that not the aim of all AI programers? To have their AI indistinguishable from dealing with a human? Isn't that the Turing Test?

I wouldn't say it was impossible to code. Difficult, yes, but not impossible.

We need to separate that CPU controlled cars ability to drive quickly round a corner an AI. A good example of rubbish AI driving well is GT3's Pro Vitz / Yaris race where the CPU cars drive very quickly, on the racing line and that's it. Very dumb, but very difficult to beat.

When it comes to actual AI, as many people have pointed out, GT falls down quite badly. It seems very tightly scripted and it takes a lot to break it from that script. The most noticeable example of this is the slavish adherence to the racing line, whether there is another car on it or not. It just doesn't react enough to what is going on around it.

The rolling start, chase the rabbit format if the races is clearly there to hide the lack if AI. Rather than having the CPU cars interacting with each other and exposing their stupidity, they're nicely spaced out...

Ahahaha... are you a coder or something? You cannot code human intelligence. AI will always be inferior no matter what. Also if we assume its possible, you would need an uber-powerful machine to handle the uber-complex coding and the ps3 is far from that.
In chess it has been possible to make an almost perfect AI but a driving game like GT6 is far more complex than chess.

 

[ScouserInExile]

Ahahaha... are you a coder or something? You cannot code human intelligence. AI will always be inferior no matter what. Also if we assume its possible, you would need an uber-powerful machine to handle the uber-complex coding and the ps3 is far from that.
In chess it has been possible to make an almost perfect AI but a driving game like GT6 is far more complex than chess.

Not a coder, no. But I did work in games development for 11 years, including a few years as a designer, so have a half decent grasp on these things.

No, you can't code human intelligence, but you can code artificial intelligence that is good enough to fool a human into thinking its human - the aforementioned Turing Test being one measure of this. And this is the point of this thread - do the CPU controlled cars act in any way that might make you believe there is some intelligence there. Which they don't.

However, I would maintain that it's not as difficult as you are making out to give the illusion of intelligence to the user. Plenty of games, driving and otherwise, give some illusion of some intelligence, to varying degrees of success. You don't need perfect AI, you only need good AI to make the game enjoyable, you just have to have those smoke and mirrors that gives the impression that the CPU drivers are actually reacting in a vaguely intelligent manner to what is happening around them.

And plenty of people would argue that chess is much more complicated than GT...

 

[TeamCZRRacing]

Not a coder, no. But I did work in games development for 11 years, including a few years as a designer, so have a half decent grasp on these things.

No, you can't code human intelligence, but you can code artificial intelligence that is good enough to fool a human into thinking its human - the aforementioned Turing Test being one measure of this. And this is the point of this thread - do the CPU controlled cars act in any way that might make you believe there is some intelligence there. Which they don't.

However, I would maintain that it's not as difficult as you are making out to give the illusion of intelligence to the user. Plenty of games, driving and otherwise, give some illusion of some intelligence, to varying degrees of success. You don't need perfect AI, you only need good AI to make the game enjoyable, you just have to have those smoke and mirrors that gives the impression that the CPU drivers are actually reacting in a vaguely intelligent manner to what is happening around them.

And plenty of people would argue that chess is much more complicated than GT...

I'm sure it's possible for a large group of people to code AI that could pass the Turing Test, but PD only has two guys working on AI. I think it's actually pretty decent for only having a couple of people working on it.

 

[JaseScott]

Which they don't.

That's where we disagree.
So you can't just breeze by that statement so easily without some reasoning or evidence.
Got any?

 

[MustangManiac]

No, you can't code human intelligence, but you can code artificial intelligence that is good enough to fool a human into thinking its human - the aforementioned Turing Test being one measure of this.

I'm sure it's possible for a large group of people to code AI that could pass the Turing Test, but PD only has two guys working on AI.

That's funny, so far no one has been able to pass the test. Yes, there have been some false claims, one very recent, but none have been able to pass scrutiny.

 

[ScouserInExile]

I'm sure it's possible for a large group of people to code AI that could pass the Turing Test, but PD only has two guys working on AI. I think it's actually pretty decent for only having a couple of people working on it.

Damning with faint praise there! "it's good, considering... "

That's where we disagree.
So you can't just breeze by that statement so easily without some reasoning or evidence.
Got any?

Yeah, play the game and you'll see the CPU cars failing to react to what's going on around them, they mostly just run their own race and that's that. They don't block and yet they don't move out of the way of a much faster car, they make little to no attempt to avoid you if you're on the racing line, they don't take risks, they just seem to be tightly scripted, rather than intelligent.

Do you really think that 4th he CPU controlled cars ever do anything that you could describe as "intelligent"?

 

[JaseScott]

Yeah, play the game and you'll see the CPU cars failing to react to what's going on around them, they mostly just run their own race and that's that. They don't block and yet they don't move out of the way of a much faster car, they make little to no attempt to avoid you if you're on the racing line, they don't take risks, they just seem to be tightly scripted, rather than intelligent.

Nope.
Didn't work.
Just put disc in, went drove some seasonals, AI still reacting to my vehicle all over the place.

Do you really think that 4th he CPU controlled cars ever do anything that you could describe as "intelligent"?

Should I understand what this means?

Need to see evidence of how intelligent your driving is, not someone else's.

 

[NixxxoN]

And plenty of people would argue that chess is much more complicated than GT...

Chess is 1 vs 1, and the variables are the chess pieces positions, nothing more.
GT6 is up to 16 cars, those 16 cars can be 1000+ different cars with different handling, in all the different tracks, with different tires, different conditions, different power, different torque, and all doing solid laptimes, reacting to other cars, reacting to the human player, taking different likes... there are just so many variables, its very very hard to code a good AI for every circumstance. I'd say its far far more complicated than chess.

 

[Lewis_Hamilton_]

I'm still not quite grasping why GT6 is a special exception to AI performance compared to any other game. Why does the car count matter?

In Assetto Corsa for example, the AI mostly deals with custom made cars and custom made tracks better than GT's AI does anywhere in it's own game. There is obviously a set code that the AI goes by, and it seems to handle most cars well (only the Shelby is a bit wacky). As for the custom tracks, all the modders need to do is point out the track boundries and say where the fastest line is - the AI does the rest on it's own, which includes difficulty levels and dealing with the player and other AI vehicles. This is a simulation made by a grand total of 10 people.

 

[GT6OuTLaW]

The general rule is the driver who brakes latest get the right of way and the other driver has to let them pass. So if you brake later to make a pass on entry the AI following good driving technique should slow down. I'm not saying this is why they do it, but it could be a reason.

There is a video with Niki Lauda talking about this.

 

[HKS racer]

I'm sure it's possible for a large group of people to code AI that could pass the Turing Test, but PD only has two guys working on AI. I think it's actually pretty decent for only having a couple of people working on it.

Excuses.
Excuses everywhere.

 

[GT6OuTLaW]

Excuses.
Excuses everywhere.

Give us the magic AI code to make this epic AI with, maybe PD will use it

But I'd like your response to the post above yours.

Its a game so you are offset to be in a position to win. Usually done through PP, the cars the AI drive are closer to the low end. As the "500pp" races allow us to run up to 600pp, the AI all get 500pp even if your driving 600pp.

Its really as easy as lowering your pp to a level closer to the same as the AI and removing the assist that make it too easy to be consistent. Presto more competitive and more entertaining.

Now when your car is more evenly matched and all the "easy to be consistent" assist are off, the AI won't let you by so easy.

I'm not saying the AI is great, but seriously its not that bad if you actually want to be real about it.

 

[HKS racer]

The general rule is the driver who brakes latest get the right of way and the other driver has to let them pass. So if you brake later to make a pass on entry the AI following good driving technique should slow down. I'm not saying this is why they do it, but it could be a reason.

There is a video with Niki Lauda talking about this.

No, they slow down because they have very slow corner entry. Real life has drivers that don't give up position so easily, expecially in series with the same car.

Give us the magic AI code to make this epic AI with, maybe PD will use it

But I'd like your response to the post above yours.

ISI, Kunos, SMS, Reiza this people know how to code good AI.
And Codemasters, expecially with Grid 1, if they tone agressivity down a bit keeping the same code they would have in impressive AI. Grid 1 was released in 2008.

 

[Thimble]

I gained 21 seconds in 3 laps in the recent Brands Hatch seasonal. I was in a M3 CSL on CM tyres, the "rabbit" was in a M3 CSL on SH tyres. That's faaaaaar too much of a bridge in pace to be anywhere near "realistic" in my opinion.

 

[TeamCZRRacing]

No, they slow down because they have very slow corner entry. Real life has drivers that don't give up position so easily, expecially in series with the same car.

ISI, Kunos, SMS, Reiza this people know how to code good AI.

Because they have ore people working on AI. Why does PD only have two people coding AI? Who knows, but it's decent for what it is.

 

[HKS racer]

Because they have ore people working on AI. Why does PD only have two people coding AI? Who knows, but it's decent for what it is.

That's ridiculous. You can't excuse a Sony developer because they have 2 incompetents developing one of the most important things in a racing game.
They were looking for a sound engineer 2 weeks ago, they should also look for an AI designer ASAP.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Give us the magic AI code to make this epic AI with, maybe PD will use it

But I'd like your response to the post above yours.

Grid Autosport on PS3 proves its not a hardware limitation, although PD may have so much going on with the physics and graphics not much horsepower is left for the AI. GAS AI isn't perfect butit is on pace and generally behaves much like a real driver if you do the same. If they took out some programmed aggression on the part of your "rivals" and made a couple of situational awareness tweaks it would easily work for the GT series.

 

[GT6OuTLaW]

No, they slow down because they have very slow corner entry. Real life has drivers that don't give up position so easily, expecially in series with the same car.

I think your not familiar with the rules of racing based on this comment. The RULE is if the other guy brakes later than you, you slow to let him by otherwise the 2 of you may crash. This is not about wanting to give up the position, you have to, its about racing line safety.

When your car has over or close to 100pp more than the AI, they have little choice but to yield the faster car. Same as if you are the slower car dropping pp too low for an event, you should yield the faster AI, but instead the common move is to block them then bitch about the AI not stopping before hitting you.

 

[Lewis_Hamilton_]

Its really as easy as lowering your pp to a level closer to the same as the AI and removing the assist that make it too easy to be consistent. Presto more competitive and more entertaining.

Now when your car is more evenly matched and all the "easy to be consistent" assist are off, the AI won't let you by so easy.

 

[HKS racer]

I think your not familiar with the rules of racing based on this comment. The RULE is if the other guy brakes later than you, you slow to let him by otherwise the 2 of you may crash. This is not about wanting to give up the position, you have to, its about racing line safety.

Try to explain this to people like Hamilton Alonso and Ricciardo. Every turn every situation is different, it's where driver skills comes into play. They may also let you pass on purpose and then pass you again with better corner exit speed. It happens in real life. Skilled drivers on decent cars and tyres are notoriously more difficoult to pass.

 

[GT6OuTLaW]

This misses my point. Its not hard to beat AI when they dontt have the maximum pp for the event and you do, even in reverse or parked at the finish line waiting for them. Let's see that done with faster more evenly matched cars......

Try to explain this to people like Hamilton Alonso and Ricciardo. Every turn every situation is different, it's where driver skills comes into play. They may also let you pass on purpose and then pass you again with better corner exit speed. It happens in real life. Skilled drivers on decent cars and tyres are notoriously more difficoult to pass.

Your argument makes no sense. I don't need to tell them because they are licensed to be on a race track and so they are qualified, what they do on the track they are responsible for and while we may not see how all the rules are applied as spectators that's not to say if we don't see something as a spectator it doesn't happen. Drivers are allowed to make it difficult to be passed HOWEVER they are not allowed to ignore the rules set in place for safety governing passing, YOU may not see or understand everything thats going on as you watch the drivers racing. (like how and when each and every rule is applied) but that changes nothing as your understanding or seeing exatly how is not important. The Drivers on the track are aware of the rules, certain my I don't hav to tell them anything.

Would you like me to dig up the Nikki Lauda video where he explains this. Maybe me some dude on the net is not the best source, but Nikki is nobody to argue with.

 

[1241Penguin]

Ahahaha... are you a coder or something? You cannot code human intelligence. AI will always be inferior no matter what. Also if we assume its possible, you would need an uber-powerful machine to handle the uber-complex coding and the ps3 is far from that.
In chess it has been possible to make an almost perfect AI but a driving game like GT6 is far more complex than chess.

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/black-or-white

 

[HKS racer]

Your argument makes no sense.

No, it's just you can't understand the difference from AI robots and real drivers. If you expect everyone to act the same when they are being passed that would be completely unrealistic.

 

[Lewis_Hamilton_]

This misses my point. Its not hard to beat AI when they dontt have the maximum pp for the event and you do, even in reverse or parked at the finish line waiting for them. Let's see that done with faster more evenly matched cars.....

You failed to read the video description. Same PP as the AI, lesser tires than the AI, only ABS at 1, and done with a controller. This all meets the criteria you say we must do to have a good race, I met that criteria and still won handily entirely in reverse gear. Do you even realise how difficult that was to control the car? Yet I still breezed right on past them, around the outside of corners and getting on the throttle earlier, my top speed was actually lower than theirs.

Stop defending bad programming.

 

[GT6OuTLaW]

No, it's just you can't understand the difference from AI robots and real drivers. If you expect everyone to act the same when they are being passed that would be completely unrealistic.

Nobody says they act the same, I'm saying they follow the same rules, and as such they will and should react similar in similar situations, especially concerning passing where there are quite a few rules governing how drivers are allowed to pass, its NOT a free for all, many many rules around passing.

In hockey if you don't know the rules it might look like the player clearing an offside is crazy, but its what he's got to do according to the rules.

You failed to read the video description. Same PP as the AI, lesser tires than the AI, only ABS at 1, and done with a controller. This all meets the criteria you say we must do to have a good race, I met that criteria and still won handily entirely in reverse gear. Do you even realise how difficult that was to control the car? Yet I still breezed right on past them, around the outside of corners and getting on the throttle earlier, my top speed was actually lower than theirs.

Stop defending bad programming.

I'm expressing my opinion, why are you telling me what to do?

I see it as your playing games a bit, no? I did say do that with faster cars, did I not? Its the slow ass cars unable to go much faster than the top speed in Reverse? I did say do that with "FASTER" cars did I not.

I have my opinion and my point was more to take rules governing passing into consideration when analyzing behavior, rules are often a prime factor in the "why".

 

[TokoTurismo]

Dat defance over GT6 having slow AI. I really wish PD never added the PP filter, than this would have became even more amusing. Right now this is gold.

There is no reason for a 2013 racing game, to have such slow AI. Lowering the PP isn't going to cut it either.

 

[HKS racer]

Nobody says they act the same, I'm saying they follow the same rules, and as such they will and should react similar in similar situations, especially concerning passing where there are quite a few rules governing how drivers are allowed to pass, its NOT a free for all, many many rules around passing.

Seems like these "RULES" are not so strict, expecially when Charlie Whiting just give a couple of "warnings" for the drivers not observing said rules. This is what happen in F1 nowdays.

In series like Touring it may happen someone is attempting a pass, the driver being passed close the door, they crash, they complain each other for about 30 seconds, race stewards tells them "it's a race crash", no warnings, no penalizations, and drivers will agree it was just a race crash, no one cry, life moves on.

 

[GT6OuTLaW]

You failed to read the video description. Same PP as the AI, lesser tires than the AI, only ABS at 1, and done with a controller. This all meets the criteria you say we must do to have a good race, I met that criteria and still won handily entirely in reverse gear. Do you even realise how difficult that was to control the car? Yet I still breezed right on past them, around the outside of corners and getting on the throttle earlier, my top speed was actually lower than theirs.

Stop defending bad programming.

I'm expressing my opinion, why are you telling me what to do?
I see it as your playing games a bit, no? Its the slow ass cars unable to go much faster than the top speed in Reverse? I did say do that with "FASTER" cars did I not.

I have my opinion and my point was more to take rules governing passing into consideration when analyzing behavior, rules are often a prime factor in the "why".

Seems like these "RULES" are not so strict, expecially when Charlie Whiting just give a couple of "warnings" for the drivers not observing said rules. This is what happen in F1 nowdays.

In series like Touring it may happen someone is attempting a pass, the driver being passed close the door, they crash, they complain each other for about 30 seconds, race stewards tells them "it's a race crash", no warnings, no penalizations, and drivers will agree it was just a race crash, no one cry, life moves on.

No, it seems you are in no position to make that observation.

 

[HKS racer]

No, it seems you are in no position to make that observation.

What?

 

[Lewis_Hamilton_]

I see it as your playing games a bit, no? I did say do that with faster cars, did I not? Its the slow ass cars unable to go much faster than the top speed in Reverse? I did say do that with "FASTER" cars did I not.

I have my opinion and my point was more to take rules governing passing into consideration when analyzing behavior, rules are often a prime factor in the "why".

What difference would faster cars make? My car would still accelerate at a similar pace, and I already told you that I had a lower top speed in that video, the only reason why I almost matched them on the straight is because I was able to get on the accelerator that much earlier. The same thing would happen.

The problem with the AI in that video and in the scenario you want me to run to somehow prove the AI is actually good, is that the AI is far too early on the brakes, their cornering speed is far too slow and they wait far too long to get on the throttle. That video should not have been possible, but it was. Faster cars would not make a difference, I would still obliterate them into, through and out of corners.

Feel free to go ahead and keep defending away desperately, if you feel that supporting unsatisfactory coding/performance/products is a positive thing to do. If you're happy to keep recieving sub-par results and keep promoting them, you will continue to recieve sub-par results.

If you would like, I could also post up the videos of me winning races with a car that is 150pp lower than the AI on a circuit that is mostly about power, and with three grades of tire lower with no aids or ABS. (A stock Renault Avantime on CS against high powered supercars on SS tires for example).