<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Round Table Entry: Artificial Humanity</title>
	<atom:link href="http://flashofsteel.com/index.php/2007/07/23/artificial-humanity/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://flashofsteel.com/index.php/2007/07/23/artificial-humanity/</link>
	<description>The Best Strategy Game Blog in My House</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 21 May 2012 20:36:05 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Michael A.</title>
		<link>http://flashofsteel.com/index.php/2007/07/23/artificial-humanity/comment-page-1/#comment-76900</link>
		<dc:creator>Michael A.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Aug 2007 17:16:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://flashofsteel.com/index.php/2007/07/23/artificial-humanity/#comment-76900</guid>
		<description>For action and FPS shooter games, perhaps. For strategy games (and not all RTS games need apply), I would say the number of games with a credible AI are few and far between.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>For action and FPS shooter games, perhaps. For strategy games (and not all RTS games need apply), I would say the number of games with a credible AI are few and far between.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Marcus Riedner</title>
		<link>http://flashofsteel.com/index.php/2007/07/23/artificial-humanity/comment-page-1/#comment-75708</link>
		<dc:creator>Marcus Riedner</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Aug 2007 20:08:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://flashofsteel.com/index.php/2007/07/23/artificial-humanity/#comment-75708</guid>
		<description>I dunno, I&#039;ve always viewed the problem as making an AI just stupid enough, rather than making it &#039;not stupid&#039;...

:)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I dunno, I&#8217;ve always viewed the problem as making an AI just stupid enough, rather than making it &#8216;not stupid&#8217;&#8230;</p>
<p>:)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alan</title>
		<link>http://flashofsteel.com/index.php/2007/07/23/artificial-humanity/comment-page-1/#comment-75670</link>
		<dc:creator>Alan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Aug 2007 17:50:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://flashofsteel.com/index.php/2007/07/23/artificial-humanity/#comment-75670</guid>
		<description>Ah yes, the old debate about &quot;good&quot; AI vs. &quot;fun&quot; AI...  There are apocryphal stories about this sort of stuff.  As it turns out, &quot;random&quot; is often mistaken for &quot;creative&quot;, and &quot;tough&quot; is often mistaken for &quot;smart.&quot;  The real key, as mentioned, is how to make a &quot;not stupid&quot; AI.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ah yes, the old debate about &#8220;good&#8221; AI vs. &#8220;fun&#8221; AI&#8230;  There are apocryphal stories about this sort of stuff.  As it turns out, &#8220;random&#8221; is often mistaken for &#8220;creative&#8221;, and &#8220;tough&#8221; is often mistaken for &#8220;smart.&#8221;  The real key, as mentioned, is how to make a &#8220;not stupid&#8221; AI.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Michael A.</title>
		<link>http://flashofsteel.com/index.php/2007/07/23/artificial-humanity/comment-page-1/#comment-75265</link>
		<dc:creator>Michael A.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 31 Jul 2007 23:40:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://flashofsteel.com/index.php/2007/07/23/artificial-humanity/#comment-75265</guid>
		<description>Hear hear...

I&#039;ve said the same thing many times before - especially when game fans start being angry about &quot;bad AI&quot; and other defend this by saying that &quot;perfect AI is impossible&quot;.

IMO, players generally don&#039;t want for the AI to be unbeatable - they just want for it to be &quot;not stupid&quot;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hear hear&#8230;</p>
<p>I&#8217;ve said the same thing many times before &#8211; especially when game fans start being angry about &#8220;bad AI&#8221; and other defend this by saying that &#8220;perfect AI is impossible&#8221;.</p>
<p>IMO, players generally don&#8217;t want for the AI to be unbeatable &#8211; they just want for it to be &#8220;not stupid&#8221;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chris</title>
		<link>http://flashofsteel.com/index.php/2007/07/23/artificial-humanity/comment-page-1/#comment-73322</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Jul 2007 16:11:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://flashofsteel.com/index.php/2007/07/23/artificial-humanity/#comment-73322</guid>
		<description>To me, I see two different AI&#039;s here: strong AI is involved in determining the level of challenge; I might call it &quot;AI for Agon&quot; in Caillois&#039; terms. Then there is &quot;AI for Mimicry&quot; in Caillois&#039; terms... that seems to be what is being talked about here. AI with the goal of immersion, to use the usual buzzword. 

I might take this tack for my Round Table post... 

Best wishes!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>To me, I see two different AI&#8217;s here: strong AI is involved in determining the level of challenge; I might call it &#8220;AI for Agon&#8221; in Caillois&#8217; terms. Then there is &#8220;AI for Mimicry&#8221; in Caillois&#8217; terms&#8230; that seems to be what is being talked about here. AI with the goal of immersion, to use the usual buzzword. </p>
<p>I might take this tack for my Round Table post&#8230; </p>
<p>Best wishes!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JonathanStrange</title>
		<link>http://flashofsteel.com/index.php/2007/07/23/artificial-humanity/comment-page-1/#comment-72670</link>
		<dc:creator>JonathanStrange</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Jul 2007 17:07:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://flashofsteel.com/index.php/2007/07/23/artificial-humanity/#comment-72670</guid>
		<description>I like the idea that a good A.I. isn&#039;t necessarily the most challenging but one that brings &quot;you into the world the designer has created.&quot; That, for me, means that I&#039;m not having my willing suspension of disbelief shattered by an A.I. that sends its lightly armored halftracks against my known entrenched anti-tank guns, or allows an alien civilization to assemble a huge invasion starfleet on its borders without taking any defensive action, or simply palace guards who ignore a nearby fallen comrade. People often say &quot;Well, careful what you ask for...&quot; and I&#039;m not asking to be beaten senseless by a silicon know-it-all. A fairly won game though would have its thrills, and we&#039;d no longer have to run up 100-1 scores just to give the computer a chance.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I like the idea that a good A.I. isn&#8217;t necessarily the most challenging but one that brings &#8220;you into the world the designer has created.&#8221; That, for me, means that I&#8217;m not having my willing suspension of disbelief shattered by an A.I. that sends its lightly armored halftracks against my known entrenched anti-tank guns, or allows an alien civilization to assemble a huge invasion starfleet on its borders without taking any defensive action, or simply palace guards who ignore a nearby fallen comrade. People often say &#8220;Well, careful what you ask for&#8230;&#8221; and I&#8217;m not asking to be beaten senseless by a silicon know-it-all. A fairly won game though would have its thrills, and we&#8217;d no longer have to run up 100-1 scores just to give the computer a chance.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

