STROKE, is there such a thing as "real AI" in video games?
Perhaps not "real", but "good AI". I think what we see in most games is static AI: a simple
IF command checks if
Soldier \'X\' == is being attacked,
then fire back or call for help..
Now, I think there is a way to achieve good AI in a game. AI that interacts with the user. Just to make an example: I programmed once the algorithmics of a simple knots and crosses game, that included pretty dynamic AI code. The AI was build in order to only make each mistake once. So, every time the computer lost due to a silly mistake, it would register that - not to make the same mistake again. In conclusion: the more you played the game, the smarter it got. After a few 100 games (I think using any possible way to win) the AI was unbeatable. That is my understanding under good AI. It might not be real, but it\'s sure good.
In MGS2, I could think of good AI as in: if Soldier gets killed at that place, security and alert increases in those areas. What happens now is,
guard sees Snake, guard goes on alert, shoots or runs and calls for help. If you manage to escape, guards search for a while and then go back to NULL (completely forgeting that Snake ever existed).I think MGS2 should somehow interact with the player - registering what he does, what kind of tactics he uses. In conclusion, you would have a game that isn\'t easy and the player would have to change is tactics each time he gets caught (and the AI learned something new). That what I would call good AI.
MGS2 doesn\'t quite deliever that yet. It is impressing, hell I ain\'t denying that, but I don\'t call it good or smart AI. It seems to static (as explained above). I\'ve only played the demo, so it is yet to see if the final build is any better. Still by far the best I have seen to date though (just to have that said).