Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

DeepMind and Blizzard to release StarCraft II as an AI research environment

deepmind.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 344 posts

Re: DeepMind and Blizzard to release StarCraft II as an AI research environment

#111

Post by cosarara97 »

stale2002 wrote: post #57
doikor wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it harder to make an AI that is mediocre at playing the game vs one that is good? That is the main issue with making good AIs for games now. We want AIs (if you can call them that) that play kinda like humans but worse then the player as the player wants to win. Making an AI for game isn't about making a good AI. It is about making an AI that loses in a convincing manner. This is especially try for games like Star…

Well, starcraft AIs aren't particularly good. Any player who has completed the single player campaign could beat all the AIs that came with the game that didn't cheat. And a player in the top 20 percent could beat any AI that has ever been created. AIs are really in an abysmal state for RTSes.

What about APM? Doesn't the speed at which the AI can input commands give it a big advantage?

Re: DeepMind and Blizzard to release StarCraft II as an AI research environment

#112

Post by bduerst »

thedangler wrote: post #84
formula1 wrote: post #15

I suspect this will eventually lead to AI as a service for games. Rather than build a terrible AI that delays a game by months, approaching a company that can build a decent AI initially which gets better overtime would probably be ideal and create better experiences. Im curious if a startup can be built from this.

I thought a neat way to make NPCs less dumb in games would be to let other players (internet connection required) to be the NPCs. They would have limited coverage area maybe set tasks and restrictions and let them fight a real person to move onto the next part of the game. Basically set up a queue of player and what NPC character to play and when a user gets to that part of the game where NPC needs to load, you jump…

I'm picturing a Westworld-esque job task on mechanical turk.

Re: DeepMind and Blizzard to release StarCraft II as an AI research environment

#113

Post by tdaltonc »

bradleyjg wrote: post #100
tdaltonc wrote: post #90

I'd love to see a e-sport league where the teams are AI human hybrids (Centaur teams). We know that AI human hybrid teams are great at chess [1], and I'd love to see rts games played by 'Centaur' teams. In the same way the innovations made in F1 often trickle down to consumer cars, can you imagine the advances that could be made in human-machine interactions in the crucible of a real-time Centaur gaming league? [1] h…

If they allowed you to script micro unit behavior in some way that'd be first step in a hybrid game.

Either that or a custom alerts system.

Re: DeepMind and Blizzard to release StarCraft II as an AI research environment

#114

Post by cableshaft »

formula1 wrote: post #15

I suspect this will eventually lead to AI as a service for games. Rather than build a terrible AI that delays a game by months, approaching a company that can build a decent AI initially which gets better overtime would probably be ideal and create better experiences. Im curious if a startup can be built from this.

I've been to the Game Developer's Conference (once) before. Believe me, there have been startups that have provided A.I. services for years (it was kind of like the equivalent of the Havok engine for physics, you had to implement it into your game). I don't know how well used they are, but I remember them being mentioned at one of the lectures about A.I. that I attended. They had tables and swag, too. I don't remember their names.

Re: DeepMind and Blizzard to release StarCraft II as an AI research environment

#115

Post by fweespeech »

doikor wrote: post #42
formula1 wrote: post #15

I suspect this will eventually lead to AI as a service for games. Rather than build a terrible AI that delays a game by months, approaching a company that can build a decent AI initially which gets better overtime would probably be ideal and create better experiences. Im curious if a startup can be built from this.

Is it harder to make an AI that is mediocre at playing the game vs one that is good? That is the main issue with making good AIs for games now. We want AIs (if you can call them that) that play kinda like humans but worse then the player as the player wants to win. Making an AI for game isn't about making a good AI. It is about making an AI that loses in a convincing manner. This is especially try for games like Star…

> Making an AI for game isn't about making a good AI. It is about making an AI that loses in a convincing manner. This is especially try for games like Starcraft (RTS and strategy games in general. For FPS games it really isn't so important as you can just increase or decrease the accuracy and hp of the enemies)

It is actually about making a good AI. Civ 6 or SC2, in both cases they simply "cheat" by providing multipliers to the AI in order to solve its limitations. The basic function is largely the same. Providing the AI with cheat codes is not "good" AI.

A good AI design would remove the need for such arbitrary advantages that are out of context for human players and leads to weird issues.

Re: DeepMind and Blizzard to release StarCraft II as an AI research environment

#116

Post by uw_rob »

thaumasiotes wrote: post #49
nharada wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Back when I played SC2, you really didn't need a high APM to succeed, unlike SC1. SC2 offered some helpful mechanics that SC1 did not, such as the ability to select infinite units at once, or give commands to multiple structures at one. I think Sheth, a high level Zerg player, was famous for having under 100 APM.

I'll consider APM "not high" when it gets down to 12. Two actions per second is comfortably "high".

That may be an ok definition for you, but it most certainly isn't for SC2. I wasn't anywhere near the pro level and I would peak at 300 apm and would spend most of the game around 200. 12 APM is borderline not playing.

Re: DeepMind and Blizzard to release StarCraft II as an AI research environment

#117

Post by Joof »

thedangler wrote: post #84
formula1 wrote: post #15

I suspect this will eventually lead to AI as a service for games. Rather than build a terrible AI that delays a game by months, approaching a company that can build a decent AI initially which gets better overtime would probably be ideal and create better experiences. Im curious if a startup can be built from this.

I thought a neat way to make NPCs less dumb in games would be to let other players (internet connection required) to be the NPCs. They would have limited coverage area maybe set tasks and restrictions and let them fight a real person to move onto the next part of the game. Basically set up a queue of player and what NPC character to play and when a user gets to that part of the game where NPC needs to load, you jump…

It's difficult to make fun because the AI are typically intended to lose, but it's cool when it happens.

Re: DeepMind and Blizzard to release StarCraft II as an AI research environment

#119

Post by sillysaurus3 »

cosarara97 wrote: post #111
stale2002 wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, starcraft AIs aren't particularly good. Any player who has completed the single player campaign could beat all the AIs that came with the game that didn't cheat. And a player in the top 20 percent could beat any AI that has ever been created. AIs are really in an abysmal state for RTSes.

What about APM? Doesn't the speed at which the AI can input commands give it a big advantage?

It's like saying that a Go AI would have a huge advantage because it can move instantly, giving the opponent no time to think. Perhaps it contributes, but strategy is far more important.

See "The Marginal Advantage," an essay from the famous Starcraft player Day9: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/brood-war/64514-competitive-...

Re: DeepMind and Blizzard to release StarCraft II as an AI research environment

#120

Post by pizza »

kurthr wrote: post #73
doikor wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it harder to make an AI that is mediocre at playing the game vs one that is good? That is the main issue with making good AIs for games now. We want AIs (if you can call them that) that play kinda like humans but worse then the player as the player wants to win. Making an AI for game isn't about making a good AI. It is about making an AI that loses in a convincing manner. This is especially try for games like Star…

I think it's really important to realize is that a game AI isn't really there to try to win, or maybe even to "convincingly" beat you the same way a human is. Perhaps you could train an AI to make the game more "fun", but that's pretty hard to measure and people are so different. It's a really hard optimization process. One commonality, it seems, is that players want to get better at the game. Perhaps, an AI that TEA…

You could use some kind of library of example "mistakes" made by very-high-level players to identify when lower-rank players are making similar errors; then point out to the user how everyone else who made that mistake 'updated' their behavior.
Post reply on HN