What makes good AI?

[MustangManiac]

Grid Autosport has some of the best ai around, the best for a console racer. if they could do that for the GT series I would be hooked for good! As it is I am going back to pc instead of PS4, I can still get all of codies games for that.

 

[Earth]

GT6 has something similar to this, although not with the same degree of precision.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=725281&page=156

See the eighth post down. Apparently the game selects 16 AI from a list of 32.

Why dont they make that available to adjust?

The Madden series is very 'casual' yet look how much you can adjust the AI. The idea GT's simulation mode allows zero adjustment of the AI is bizarre to say the least

 

[FerrariF1GT]

I am worried that GT7's new AI could be rubberband AI. GT6 (kind-of) does that.

 

[Zuku]

I am worried that GT7's new AI could be rubberband AI. GT6 (kind-of) does that.

It would be a step up from GT at least. Everyone worried about the rubberband A.I, but after playing NFS(ultimate rubberband A.I game) At least it provides some excitement when I'm racing something GT hasn't done for awhile now.

 

[LeMansAid]

Until we get access to something that is properly artificially intelligent, we may have to settle for intelligently artificial, and I'm not so sure that rubber banding is the devil. It represents something not all together removed from reality. When you're behind, you push harder.

Even a basic expansion could greatly improve it though. I think that with a grid of say 12 cars, rubber banding could be applied strongly to sub-sets of 2,3 or 4 equally matched cars, and subtly across the whole grid. Coupled with drivers not just driving their lines faster or slower, but rather using more or less offensive/defensive lines and braking points/re-application of power, the battles that make up the war would more readily come to bear. Though it clearly wouldn't get to blow by blow details within those battles.

Moving up the grid a player might encounter an npd (non player driver) driving defensively, trying to maintain their hold on 10th position as they are at the front of their sub-set, followed by an npd driving much more aggressively as they are in 9th position, but last in their sub-set. It's effectively just several races running concurrently within the one, but would introduce a greater dynamism for the player, and better mimic what real races are like.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Until we get access to something that is properly artificially intelligent, we may have to settle for intelligently artificial, and I'm not so sure that rubber banding is the devil. It represents something not all together removed from reality. When you're behind, you push harder.

Even a basic expansion could greatly improve it though. I think that with a grid of say 12 cars, rubber banding could be applied strongly to sub-sets of 2,3 or 4 equally matched cars, and subtly across the whole grid. Coupled with drivers not just driving their lines faster or slower, but rather using more or less offensive/defensive lines and braking points/re-application of power, the battles that make up the war would more readily come to bear. Though it clearly wouldn't get to blow by blow details within those battles.

Moving up the grid a player might encounter an npd (non player driver) driving defensively, trying to maintain their hold on 10th position as they are at the front of their sub-set, followed by an npd driving much more aggressively as they are in 9th position, but last in their sub-set. It's effectively just several races running concurrently within the one, but would introduce a greater dynamism for the player, and better mimic what real races are like.

Assuming the whole "PS3 is underpowered and can't handle a standing start" issue is gone on the super powerful PS4, why would you need rubber banding at all? Rubber banding is a byproduct of starting 30 seconds behind because the PS3 can't reproduce all the cars on a standing start without a massive frame rate drop. Once the standing starts are possible, there is no need for rubber banding at all.

 

[LeMansAid]

Assuming the whole "PS3 is underpowered and can't handle a standing start" issue is gone on the super powerful PS4, why would you need rubber banding at all? Rubber banding is a byproduct of starting 30 seconds behind because the PS3 can't reproduce all the cars on a standing start without a massive frame rate drop. Once the standing starts are possible, there is no need for rubber banding at all.

I really don't know what truly smart AI requires from a system, but in any event the horsepower tends to be taken up by flashier aspects that convince the masses of a game's virtues. Unfortunately making something dumb appear smart might be the best we can hope to get for now.

It doesn't matter what rubber banding is a by-product of, it matters what it does. It's also certainly not a PS3, GT, or standing start specific thing. It's been around for a very long time now.

Some sims have much better AI than GT, but that doesn't mean they actually have good AI. Until we eventually experience a genuinely high standard, I think we'll be merely wallowing in "lesser evils" and thinking them saint-like.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Some sims have much better AI than GT, but that doesn't mean they actually have good AI. Until we eventually experience a genuinely high standard, I think we'll be merely wallowing in "lesser evils" and thinking them saint-like.

As far as I can tell from my admittedly limited experience, all sims have light years better AI than GT. Even Assetto Corsa whose AI is routinely panned, delivers a much more realistic experience than GT. I tried Grid Autosport in the spring on the PS3 and it was also light years ahead of GT.

The real question is though, who are they building the game for? IMO the majority of the fanbase are the Johnny Weekend Warriors of the world, the millions of people out there who just want to sit on their couch, slap some RS tires on some cars and run around tracks, trouncing the AI. They don't know about rubber banding and could care less, they just run into whomever they want and push them off the track. Would you risk alienating that player by making AI that are competitive, challenging and fun to a hard core fan? I wouldn't.

Whatever they do with the AI in GT7, there better be an "easy as pie, the AI really want you to win" button or they'll lose a huge portion of the fanbase.

 

[lbpomg95]

What makes good AI? Knowing where I am and making an effort to leave some room on the track would be wonderful.

*hint hint PD seasonal events*

 

[Zuku]

As far as I can tell from my admittedly limited experience, all sims have light years better AI than GT. Even Assetto Corsa whose AI is routinely panned, delivers a much more realistic experience than GT. I tried Grid Autosport in the spring on the PS3 and it was also light years ahead of GT.

The real question is though, who are they building the game for? IMO the majority of the fanbase are the Johnny Weekend Warriors of the world, the millions of people out there who just want to sit on their couch, slap some RS tires on some cars and run around tracks, trouncing the AI. They don't know about rubber banding and could care less, they just run into whomever they want and push them off the track. Would you risk alienating that player by making AI that are competitive, challenging and fun to a hard core fan? I wouldn't.

Whatever they do with the AI in GT7, there better be an "easy as pie, the AI really want you to win" button or they'll lose a huge portion of the fanbase.

I say let them lose that porition and gain new fans that will actually appreciate the series FOR WHAT IT SHOULD BE! Not yelling at you just saying that because I'm just like you my experience is limited.

Should have got GAS((GridAutosport)) when I had the chance over Christmas, but still there is no more excuses over why this A.I can't be at least Codemasters decent at this point.

 

[FS7]

The real question is though, who are they building the game for? IMO the majority of the fanbase are the Johnny Weekend Warriors of the world, the millions of people out there who just want to sit on their couch, slap some RS tires on some cars and run around tracks, trouncing the AI. They don't know about rubber banding and could care less, they just run into whomever they want and push them off the track. Would you risk alienating that player by making AI that are competitive, challenging and fun to a hard core fan? I wouldn't.

That's easy to solve: work on the AI and give players the option to adjust AI difficulty.
Set the default offline race settings to very easy, no damage, no penalties, all aids on, and give players the option to adjust the settings to their own liking. In that way casual players can simply stick to the default settings and have easy wins while more advanced players can make races more challenging by increasing AI difficulty, enabling damage & penalties, and turning aids off.
Pretty much every other racing game has been doing that for years, it makes no sense why PD doesn't work on something similar for GT.

 

[Mike_grpA]

I have grid autosport, and I can't see why everyone praises the ai in it. Yes, it's better than gt6 ai, but so is the ai on almost every game, so no big deal. Grid's ai has completely different physics to the player, just like the f1 games, so they can basically use the accelerator and brake like on off switches, and suffer no penalty. Their damage is also much more forgiving than the player's so when they pit you (which they tend to do almost every time you enter a corner ahead of them), they just drive right through you like they have a tank, and your car spins out easily, and gets badly damaged.

In grid, the big theme I have noticed, is I will try to overtake before straights, so I can get away a bit before the next corner. It seems if the ai is within a certain distance of you going into a braking zone, they will ALWAYS dive down the side trying to outbrake you, even if you are already braking really deep to avoid them doing that, they just ram into you and screw your race up, as each ai that passes drives straight into you like you don't exist if you've been spun on track.

f1 is the same. One thing that annoys me, while I'm trying desperately to look after my tyres and avoid wheelspin on corner exit, I'm always hearing any ai cars around me just mash the throttle to the floor and wheelspin through every corner. Even though they get just as much drive out of corners as if they had controlled the wheelspin, and their tyres seem to never wear, as they set almost identical lap times lap after lap until they pit.

So, after this little essay, I guess my conclusion is yes, the ai in GT6 would be better if it was like codies games, but it would still be bad enough to be totally unrealistic, and everyone would still be able to find countless things to complain about, as most people seem to hold PD to much higher standards than codies lol.

 

[Imari]

Grid's ai has completely different physics to the player, just like the f1 games, so they can basically use the accelerator and brake like on off switches, and suffer no penalty.

It wouldn't surprise me at all to learn that the AI in GT uses a reduced physics system as well. It seems like an easy way to save CPU cycles: you only need enough physics to generate a car that looks believable, which is a lot easier than generating a car that feels believable to drive.

In fact, if Polyphony didn't do that then they're idiots. There would be no excuse for wasting power like that when they're obviously so tight as it is.

 

[Mike_grpA]

I never said pd didn't do the same thing, because I thought it was pretty obvious they did. My point wasn't that GT6 ai had something over grid or f1, it was that the ai isn't really much better in those games, so people would still complain if Gt ai was like those games. Essentially, cm games have a mega aggressive version of gt ai. Gt ai seems to just brake way too early and way too much. My point is a lot of people praise cm games ai, simply because it's marginally less **** than gt, not because it's actually any good. I would prefer pd try to make the ai as realistic as possible, than try a different way to make it artificially difficult to race against.

The one thing that annoys me about gts ai is that they slow down if you go anywhere near them, which means if you get right onto the back of them exiting a corner, they either brake, or get off the throttle on corner exit, forcing you to either swerve violently, or run into the back end of them. It's very frustrating when you're forced to play chase the rabbit, and every ai except the leader seems to be trying to be a roadblock to slow you down. It's a very artificial way of making a race difficult.

 

[Griffith500]

GT's AI uses the same physics, but they follow a geometric racing line which basically tells them what to do. What's taxing is the intelligence aspect, i.e. figuring out where to brake lap after lap, not just being told according to the racing line data and the tyre grip values etc.

An AI that can do that, and extend it to "obstacles", would be a great improvement - it will immediately seem more dynamic. Then you can expand its repertoire with racecraft, and strategy etc, because the low level stuff doesn't change, once it knows how to navigate a course on its own.

 

[Mike_grpA]

I dont think the ai on gt uses the same physics as the player. They seem to have way more grip, they never get wheelspin, they do stoppies sometimes under braking, and if you run into them, they hardly budge from their line, unlike when they hit you, and you go for six lol

 

[LeMansAid]

That's easy to solve: work on the AI and give players the option to adjust AI difficulty.
Set the default offline race settings to very easy, no damage, no penalties, all aids on, and give players the option to adjust the settings to their own liking. In that way casual players can simply stick to the default settings and have easy wins while more advanced players can make races more challenging by increasing AI difficulty, enabling damage & penalties, and turning aids off.
Pretty much every other racing game has been doing that for years, it makes no sense why PD doesn't work on something similar for GT.

What you are talking about is not "AI difficulty" but simply.... difficulty. Easy/difficult has nothing to do with whether or not non-player drivers are behaving intelligently. Note that intelligent in this case is not driving well, but driving realistically - be it realistically poorly, realistically well, or realistically average.

I cannot fathom why PD have left people still waiting for decent difficulty options, but just because you don't have them, don't mistake them for AI.

 

[Griffith500]

I dont think the ai on gt uses the same physics as the player. They seem to have way more grip, they never get wheelspin, they do stoppies sometimes under braking, and if you run into them, they hardly budge from their line, unlike when they hit you, and you go for six lol

They use a lot of cheats, yes. One of them is knowing how much grip they have on all wheels, another is access to the rubber band effect (grip multipliers, power; possibly to augment the B spec "pace" function, i.e. on top of a scalable "accuracy" to the racing line and attitude to obstacles), yet another is zero need for reaction, they know exactly what's happening the instant it happens, they use all the aids, perhaps extra hidden ones. Etc.

I can't remember all of the AI related strings I've seen for GT6, and not all of the "features" mentioned are in the game, but it was mostly behavioural modifications (aggression etc.) rather than physics. Also, I spied "new corner AI".

 

[Mike_grpA]

I just wish I could actually have a close race with an ai in a racing game. cm games give the most excitement from the ai, but only by giving them completely different physics and absolutely no tyre wear. GT is so bad it is actually funny. I cant even run close to another car, because if I'm within a couple of feet of their rear bumper, they just back off or brake. When overtaking ai on GT6, just go close to rubbing against their door on the way past. Don't actually make contact, just about a foot or so away. They will back off the throttle even mid straight, and you will have no chance of losing the place back or having them run into you in the following braking zone lol. They will even lose a place to any ais running behind them. cracks me up.

 

[Johnnypenso]

I have grid autosport, and I can't see why everyone praises the ai in it. Yes, it's better than gt6 ai, but so is the ai on almost every game, so no big deal. Grid's ai has completely different physics to the player, just like the f1 games, so they can basically use the accelerator and brake like on off switches, and suffer no penalty. Their damage is also much more forgiving than the player's so when they pit you (which they tend to do almost every time you enter a corner ahead of them), they just drive right through you like they have a tank, and your car spins out easily, and gets badly damaged.

In grid, the big theme I have noticed, is I will try to overtake before straights, so I can get away a bit before the next corner. It seems if the ai is within a certain distance of you going into a braking zone, they will ALWAYS dive down the side trying to outbrake you, even if you are already braking really deep to avoid them doing that, they just ram into you and screw your race up, as each ai that passes drives straight into you like you don't exist if you've been spun on track.

Our experiences with the GRID AI are polar opposites. I thought it was the best console AI I'd ever seen. Yes they could be a little aggressive but it wasn't hard to figure out how to combat it, and I never found their pace to be unrealistic or their cars overly grippy. In fact their pace was set by some of the staff at Codies. Once out of the first few corners and the inevitably higher chances of contact, I found their behaviour very consistent and I had no trouble running tight with them at all, you just have to know what their tendencies are and be in the right position, which is no different than you would do with a human driver.

 

[LeMansAid]

Our experiences with the GRID AI are polar opposites. I thought it was the best console AI I'd ever seen. Yes they could be a little aggressive but it wasn't hard to figure out how to combat it, and I never found their pace to be unrealistic or their cars overly grippy.

That also would not be anything to do with AI anyway. Difficulty level? Maybe. Physics? Maybe. AI? No. Unrealistic pace is a bit of a stretch as well.

Amusing to think of how really good AI would actually revel in physics flaws and exploit them - "Ahahaha!! Those idiots gave me unrealistically grippy tyres and low inertia. I'm gonna go all Ridge Racer on their arses."

 

[Johnnypenso]

That also would not be anything to do with AI anyway. Difficulty level? Maybe. Physics? Maybe. AI? No. Unrealistic pace is a bit of a stretch as well.

Amusing to think of how really good AI would actually revel in physics flaws and exploit them - "Ahahaha!! Those idiots gave me unrealistically grippy tyres and low inertia. I'm gonna go all Ridge Racer on their arses."

The Grid AI liked to go inside if you leave them a gap. I never found them divebombing from 75 feet back or anything like that, but if they were right on your tail and you tried to take a normal racing line, you'd turn in and find them there. So you had to drive defensively until you pulled out a 3 or 4 car length lead and then you could go back to your racing line. The Ravenwest team was very aggressive and they remembered anything you did to them as well. You could bump them out of the way, but if they caught you back up they'd do the same to you. You simply could not leave them a gap of any kind when racing and you had to be aware of who was around you at all times. Because of this I found the racing very intense and quick paced, unlike in GT which always seem rather leisurely even in faster cars. You were quite often driving in a pack and it wasn't unusual for the entire field to be covered by 10 seconds or less at the flag. I had to drive at 10/10ths from flag to flag and I think it was 23 races before I won my first event..against the AI!

 

[mr_serious]

I have grid autosport, and I can't see why everyone praises the ai in it. Yes, it's better than gt6 ai, but so is the ai on almost every game, so no big deal. Grid's ai has completely different physics to the player, just like the f1 games, so they can basically use the accelerator and brake like on off switches, and suffer no penalty. Their damage is also much more forgiving than the player's so when they pit you (which they tend to do almost every time you enter a corner ahead of them), they just drive right through you like they have a tank, and your car spins out easily, and gets badly damaged.

In grid, the big theme I have noticed, is I will try to overtake before straights, so I can get away a bit before the next corner. It seems if the ai is within a certain distance of you going into a braking zone, they will ALWAYS dive down the side trying to outbrake you, even if you are already braking really deep to avoid them doing that, they just ram into you and screw your race up, as each ai that passes drives straight into you like you don't exist if you've been spun on track.

f1 is the same. One thing that annoys me, while I'm trying desperately to look after my tyres and avoid wheelspin on corner exit, I'm always hearing any ai cars around me just mash the throttle to the floor and wheelspin through every corner. Even though they get just as much drive out of corners as if they had controlled the wheelspin, and their tyres seem to never wear, as they set almost identical lap times lap after lap until they pit.

So, after this little essay, I guess my conclusion is yes, the ai in GT6 would be better if it was like codies games, but it would still be bad enough to be totally unrealistic, and everyone would still be able to find countless things to complain about, as most people seem to hold PD to much higher standards than codies lol.

This is not my experience at all.

In GT overtaking is a very simple affair, you only need to catch them up & then you can pass them pretty much anywhere on any circuit and it doesn't really matter if you hit them either.

In real racing, there are many places where it is simply not possible to overtake another car without causing an accident.

Treat the Grid:AS (and shift, shift2) races like this and you get a much more realistic race, with little to no damage.

GT's AI doesn't give anyone a racing experience, but with other games, you just have to remember to drive realistically yourself.

 

[Mike_grpA]

Just to clarify, I finished Grid as in a week easily. Don't assume because I found the ai unrealistic, or only marginally better than gts, is because I found them hard to beat. Quite the opposite. I never said anything about dive bombing from 75 feet back either. I said they would ALWAYS try to dive down the inside, even if you had closed the door they would simply ram into the back of you.

Treating any ai on any racing game as real racers would result in problems. I have yet to find ai in a racing game that goes anywhere near what a real driver would do.

 

[mr_serious]

Just to clarify, I finished Grid as in a week easily. Don't assume because I found the ai unrealistic, or only marginally better than gts, is because I found them hard to beat. Quite the opposite. I never said anything about dive bombing from 75 feet back either. I said they would ALWAYS try to dive down the inside, even if you had closed the door they would simply ram into the back of you.

Treating any ai on any racing game as real racers would result in problems. I have yet to find ai in a racing game that goes anywhere near what a real driver would do.

Only marginally better? Really? To me most other games feel substantially more like racing than GT ever has.

Treating any ai on any racing game as real racers would result in problems. I have yet to find ai in a racing game that goes anywhere near what a real driver would do.

What problems?

Drivers come in many skill levels and compete in different disciplines where acceptable limits are different. Contact in F1 is a big no no (but it still happens because even the best drivers in the world make mistakes when pushing hard in competition)

Whereas in touring cars (DTM, BTCC etc...) contact is almost guaranteed.

For me Grid:AS and Shift2 do a pretty good job of making it feel like I am racing against competitive contemporaries.

 

[Griffith500]

This is becoming reminiscent of the sound argument. It's safe to say no game is good enough, and (just as with sound) I'd personally covet a sea change in approach before I'd covet X or Y game's slightly different take on the same old hacks, which I've endured for years already.

 

[mr_serious]

This is becoming reminiscent of the sound argument. It's safe to say no game is good enough, and (just as with sound) I'd personally covet a sea change in approach before I'd covet X or Y game's slightly different take on the same old hacks, which I've endured for years already.

But GT is the game that has been using the same old hacks for years & years. It is plain to see they are utilising the same algorithm from the original game with a bunch of tweaks added on the way. The foundation was always weak, but as everybody else has moved on & improved by innovating, as far as I can see, PD just tweak the same codebase Kaz knocked up in his bedroom.

 

[Griffith500]

But GT is the game that has been using the same old hacks for years & years. It is plain to see they are utilising the same algorithm from the original game with a bunch of tweaks added on the way. The foundation was always weak, but as everybody else has moved on & improved by innovating, as far as I can see, PD just tweak the same codebase Kaz knocked up in his bedroom.

It's really no different from any other game: they follow a "groove", have specific instances where they can deviate from that groove, and there is provision for special scripting. What differs is how it's all tuned.

I'm just saying AI in games, in general, needs more than just a re-tune, it needs a rethink and a re-engineering on a more sophisticated, low-level and therefore emergent basis.

 

[mr_serious]

It's really no different from any other game: they follow a "groove", have specific instances where they can deviate from that groove, and there is provision for special scripting. What differs is how it's all tuned.

I disagree. That might be one (exceedingly high level) description of a method of implementing a driving AI. It certainly does sound like GTs rather naive implementation but the devil is in the details.

I've not played Forza, but I hear the latest version uses a very innovative method?

The differences are quite noticeable between games. For example watch a GT replay and cars rarely deviate from the driving line. In many other games you will see AI cars coming off-line in order to pass other AI cars not just the player.

I'm just saying AI in games, in general, needs more than just a re-tune, it needs a rethink and a re-engineering on a more sophisticated, low-level and therefore emergent basis.

You can't possibly generalise all AI in all games as requiring re-engineering from the ground up. Each game has different requirements for automated opponents and they already use a wide range of methods to achieve them. There is no 1 algorithm for game AI, not even in a single genre.

 

[Griffith500]

I disagree. That might be one (exceedingly high level) description of a method of implementing a driving AI. It certainly does sound like GTs rather naive implementation but the devil is in the details.

I've not played Forza, but I hear the latest version uses a very innovative method?

The differences are quite noticeable between games. For example watch a GT replay and cars rarely deviate from the driving line. In many other games you will see AI cars coming off-line in order to pass other AI cars not just the player.



You can't possibly generalise all AI in all games as requiring re-engineering from the ground up. Each game has different requirements for automated opponents and they already use a wide range of methods to achieve them. There is no 1 algorithm for game AI, not even in a single genre.

False. Almost all (semi-)sim AI is groove based. Any "behaviours" you see are programmed deviations from that line. Please describe this "wide range of methods".

I can't quite understand how overtaking is used as a point of contrast to GT's AI, when it clearly demonstrates the same.