3 ms·
The ability to reason about obstacles that you can’t see could be an interesting feature to add for a human-equivalent creature, although I guess it will be a r
by bee_rider 2y ago
The ability to reason about obstacles that you can’t see could be an interesting feature to add for a human-equivalent creature, although I guess it will be a real mess to simulate something as smart as a person, haha. But for example, if you know what a house looks like, you can probably speculate about where obstacles might be, depending on parts of the roofline that you can see. And might be wrong. And your odds of being wrong might be influenced by your familiarity with some region’s architectural conventions.
- jvanderbot 2y agoYeah, that's an interesting problem. I've worked in planning for a bit, mostly for robotics. I can honestly say that the _planning_ side of making interesting behaviors is really simple. It's the world representation that is hard. In the real world it's hard to build up a good enough representation to do smart things. Most robots can't reasonably see longer than 50 yards/100 yards. In games is hard to build up a bad enough representation to match the partial information in the real world - running just about any planner on the map will just work and probably look too good.