2 ms·
Wait, weren't both Starcraft and Dota getting very good AI results a few years ago by deepmind's alphastar and openAI respectively, IIRC they had some competiti
by PeterisP 5y ago
Wait, weren't both Starcraft and Dota getting very good AI results a few years ago by deepmind's alphastar and openAI respectively, IIRC they had some competitions with world champions? And I believe for the purpose of generalization and research they intentionally made the problem harder by using the visual render/representation instead of obvious technical simplifications of just taking the game state as any normal game bot would do.
I mean, playing well is obviously not a goal for making the AI for a single-player mode or a bot for a multi-player game; the goal there is to play in an entertaining way, and the optimal system probably is one that is simple, easy to test, and is beatable in a manner that's fun for the players. Probably the only niche (very narrow!) where you would actually want near-optimal AI is for making a "sparring partner" for training e-sports players.
- adgjlsfhk1 5y agothey got good results, but only in highly controlled, short duration testing. they're near the deep blue point, but still far from the era where humans are convincingly and resoundingly beaten.
- PeterisP 5y agoA big aspect is that for everyone working on those competition systems, making an actually good game AI was not even a goal - the only purpose of these experiments is as a proof of concept (perhaps as PR) and a testbed for techniques which would then apply to other practical tasks simulating human decisions; and the research attention seems to have moved from popular strategy games to more specific simulated environments, which are better at being experimental testbeds i.e. faster/cheaper to simulate. People working on AI systems that are going to be actually used in games shipped to gamers is a separate community with (IMHO) almost no overlap.