31–40 of 63 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
white moves first, in any perfect game black can only play to a draw
> in any perfect game black can only play to a draw You’re making this up. Chess is not solved. It’s also largely irrelevant to my point.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> in any perfect game black can only play to a draw You’re making this up. Chess is not solved. It’s also largely irrelevant to my point.
Nope, all the research with Stockfish et al is pointing to chess being a draw with perfect play.
I think it is highly likely that perfect play results in a tie for both sides.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Kind of like trying to automate writing a novel… So you are saying procedural level design could be solved with generative AI?
In theory. It'll be more convincing once generative AI proves itself useful for writing novels.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In theory. It'll be more convincing once generative AI proves itself useful for writing novels.
AI can already write short stories, just not very good ones. It'll be doing novels once the context windows are big enough.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This can be accounted for by training bots using player inputs from historical games, no? If you then partition the training set by player ranking, you'd presumably get a set of bots that approximate a player from each ranking. With that, you could simulate the effect of a balance change on players of various skill levels.
Not really. It would take immense effort to train bots to play “like humans” and not “as performantly” as humans which is very different. And if you’re going to be optimizing game parameters that means you’re assuming that either the AI doesn’t change its behaviors even though the game is different or you’re assuming that humans will adapts in the same way the bots do. Like if all the humans use the AK because it’s s…
There is precedent in Maia Chess, which does a good job of mimicking human chess players at various ELO ratings. Of course, it's a lot more difficult to extrapolate to games with significantly more state/movesets, but I imagine that this space will be further explored in the near future.
> And if you’re going to be optimizing game parameters that means you’re assuming that either the AI doesn’t change its behaviors even though the game is different or you’re assuming that humans will adapts in the same way the bots do.
This could be addressed by including the game parameters of interest (what map, what character, the weapon stats at time of gameplay, etc.) in the input to the training data.
> It also takes away a lot of the design thinking behind balance. You probably don’t want to nerf the AK. You probably want to buff counterplay options (guns are not a great example but still)
Tool-assisted QA is nothing new. Using AI is a newer iteration of the concept. You still have to interpret the results it gives and make decisions based on that. The design thinking isn't replaced, it's augmented with additional insights. Are those insights potentially inaccurate? Sure, but you can account for that with sanity checks/manual intervention/play testing.
NEAT is really well suited to modeling behaviors in a less structured way and gets used to play videogames.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nope, all the research with Stockfish et al is pointing to chess being a draw with perfect play.
That’s not what “prove” means and notably is not specific to black which was the more significant claim. I think it is highly likely that perfect play results in a tie for both sides.
Many games were ruined post-release because developers tried to make the gameplay "more balanced". This usually leads to everything feeling the same.
Helldivers 2 was a good recent example, which is suprising since it's not a PvP game at all but a co-op PvE only.
Seems unlikely to work imo. Games need to account for the fact that 90% of the player base will be deeply unskilled and the remaining 10% will be tightly invested in a meta of dominant strategies. You’d need the bots to be able to consider this and also not just equalize every character.
Programmers always want to automate content creation. I get it as I’m a coder and it’s a fun problem space. Plus creating content is super time and skill intensive. It’s really hard to get right in my experience. Kind of like trying to automate writing a novel… OK I read the article. I'm very skeptical of this approach. I doubt we can actually uncover fitness functions that reliably maps to "fun", and I believe it wo…
You don't have to. Get empirical data and form a proxy evaluator. Usable enough for most evolutionary algorithms. I've done this sort of stuff for very subjective metrics and actually sold something with it.