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

Street Fighter II's AI Engine

sf2platinum.wordpress.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 88 posts

Re: Street Fighter II's AI Engine

#71

Post by mikekchar »

lmitchell wrote: post #65
pmarreck wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Most people do not find "fun" in losing. Allow me to introduce you to a developer named https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FromSoftware ...

And if that's not good enough, there's the one whose game basically opens with 'Losing is fun!': http://dwarffortresswiki.org/index.php/DF2014:Losing

Kind of off topic, but the thing I like about the "Losing is fun!" mantra of DF is that "losing" is not the end of the game. It's just another point in history. So "losing" really just advances the story plot -- which is why it's fun. Conversely, "winning" means that you don't have anything left to do and it's "boring". I don't know any other game with this point of view.

Re: Street Fighter II's AI Engine

#72

Post by c0achmcguirk »

I'm going to find Vega's script and replace it with NOOPs. I hated playing Vega. He would climb that wall like a spider and then jump with a shrill yell and then body-slam me.

I think that's the most rage I've ever experienced in my life....just repeatedly getting beat by Vega.

The only thing that comes close is getting hit by the blue shell in Mario Kart.

Re: Street Fighter II's AI Engine

#73

Post by setr »

mikekchar wrote: post #71
lmitchell wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And if that's not good enough, there's the one whose game basically opens with 'Losing is fun!': http://dwarffortresswiki.org/index.php/DF2014:Losing

Kind of off topic, but the thing I like about the "Losing is fun!" mantra of DF is that "losing" is not the end of the game. It's just another point in history. So "losing" really just advances the story plot -- which is why it's fun. Conversely, "winning" means that you don't have anything left to do and it's "boring". I don't know any other game with this point of view.

Thia is just the general rule for simulation games, in free play mode.

Reach a point where all core problems are solved, and then create your own problems (and try to solve them).

Its just DF community that claimed it as their mantra, and their primary marketing of the game. But all sim games (d)evolve to this.

Kinda like Lucky Strike's "it's toasted!" slogan

Re: Street Fighter II's AI Engine

#74

Post by setr »

YeGoblynQueenne wrote: post #66
lmitchell wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And if that's not good enough, there's the one whose game basically opens with 'Losing is fun!': http://dwarffortresswiki.org/index.php/DF2014:Losing

Both of which were influenced in their attitude towards losing by a little game known as Nethack [1]. Although I understand Souls doesn't have permadeath, therefore it's probably only half the fun of Nethack. __________ [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NetHack

Which in turn took from rogue. Which in turn came from DnD first edition / advanced edition, when DnD was more about navigating dungeon traps than fighting monsters (and not at all similar to modern DnD, which resembles Besthesda RPGs much more than roguelikes)

But Original DnD is where my inspiration-knowledge stops

Re: Street Fighter II's AI Engine

#75

Post by freeflight »

ralfd wrote: post #58
indspenceable wrote: post #38

> These days, when most people talk about AI they’re talking about machine learning. There’s not any of that in SF2. Actually, AI for games is pretty much never equivalent to AI for non-games. The end goal is different - games want to provide a non-optimal set of instructions, so that it's challenging but not impossible to win. The goals are entirely different. If you're making a game, this is probably at least a use…

Now i want though a machine learned fighting game AI. Maybe it would even be a challenge for the enthusiasts? https://youtube.com/watch?v=xSGW7CwD5GM

Machine learning would be interesting to apply to something like saltybet[0], there's already a paper on the idea[1], dunno if somebody actually did manage to do it.

[0]http://www.saltybet.com/

[1]http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:VXw25h2...

Re: Street Fighter II's AI Engine

#76

Post by samstave »

echan00 wrote: post #52
indspenceable wrote: post #38

> These days, when most people talk about AI they’re talking about machine learning. There’s not any of that in SF2. Actually, AI for games is pretty much never equivalent to AI for non-games. The end goal is different - games want to provide a non-optimal set of instructions, so that it's challenging but not impossible to win. The goals are entirely different. If you're making a game, this is probably at least a use…

Completely agree. Games are typically only "fun" when you feel challenged. Most people do not find "fun" in losing.

That actually would be an interesting game mechanic; make sure you lose, but you get more points for how spectacularly you lose...

Re: Street Fighter II's AI Engine

#77

Post by thaumasiotes »

setr wrote: post #74
YeGoblynQueenne wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Both of which were influenced in their attitude towards losing by a little game known as Nethack [1]. Although I understand Souls doesn't have permadeath, therefore it's probably only half the fun of Nethack. __________ [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NetHack

Which in turn took from rogue. Which in turn came from DnD first edition / advanced edition, when DnD was more about navigating dungeon traps than fighting monsters (and not at all similar to modern DnD, which resembles Besthesda RPGs much more than roguelikes) But Original DnD is where my inspiration-knowledge stops

D&D is descended from wargaming.

Re: Street Fighter II's AI Engine

#78

Post by 0x0 »

snickmy wrote: post #36
Kiro wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's still AI though.

I always thought that the I in AI stood for Intelligence

AI always seems to be that elusive magical self-conscious computer algorithm, which when revealed to run on actual binary logic is claimed to be "not AI after all"

Re: Street Fighter II's AI Engine

#79

Post by pmarreck »

YeGoblynQueenne wrote: post #66
lmitchell wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And if that's not good enough, there's the one whose game basically opens with 'Losing is fun!': http://dwarffortresswiki.org/index.php/DF2014:Losing

Both of which were influenced in their attitude towards losing by a little game known as Nethack [1]. Although I understand Souls doesn't have permadeath, therefore it's probably only half the fun of Nethack. __________ [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NetHack

https://alt.org/nethack/ is probably the best way to play it (or watch others do so, which is a pretty cool feature)

Re: Street Fighter II's AI Engine

#80

Post by madshiva »

c0achmcguirk wrote: post #72

I'm going to find Vega's script and replace it with NOOPs. I hated playing Vega. He would climb that wall like a spider and then jump with a shrill yell and then body-slam me. I think that's the most rage I've ever experienced in my life....just repeatedly getting beat by Vega. The only thing that comes close is getting hit by the blue shell in Mario Kart.

lol, vega is easy to beat come on! There's a lot of trick in SF2, with almost every character.

Thanks for the info, I'm currently building my SF2 game and was wondering how they made their AI, then much thanks for the sharing.

Post reply on HN