Halo 3 in Swedish Mag!

[destrukt]

^ lol owned.

 

[Jintor]

If they had it in game... ummm... they couldn't... use it... later?

*shrugs*

 

[Stigmata]

Okay. Source has AI routines built into the engine that are, from what I've heard, far beyond basically any other game engine (with the possible exception of, say, UE3), it's just that Valve is trying to capture a wide, wide range of computers with HL2, and thus can't make use of a lot of the advanced routines due to low-end processor constraints. Plus, HL2 is based one hundred percent around NPC-on-player combat encounters (apart from story scenes), so you don't really get a chance to see how the AI operates from an observer's perspective.

 

[Atomic_Piggy]

How can u tell what the graphics look like, the pictures are small and from a camera?

'Cus its Halo.
*screams as suffacated by a barrage of fanboys.









(For those who take life and video games to seriously, I was joking).




Also, those screens are form the trailer.

 

[destrukt]

.. and the graphics in the trailer blow hl2 and almost any other game away.

why doesn't valve let those with medium/high end system take advantage of the [apparent] amazing ai ?

if it's not being used, at all, it might as well not exist.

 

[Asknoone]

:|

"Okay guys listen up. WE HAVE THIS INCREDIBLE AI IN THE GAME, and when I say incredible I mean peoples brains will ****ing explode when they play the game, but I decided were not going to use it LOLOLOLOLOL"

Wow. You are ****ing hilarious. Hats off to you. Idiot.

 

[Zephos]

.. and the graphics in the trailer blow hl2 and almost any other game away.

Why oogle over the graphics when the art direction is a pile of shit?

 

[Asknoone]

Okay. Source has AI routines built into the engine that are, from what I've heard, far beyond basically any other game engine (with the possible exception of, say, UE3), it's just that Valve is trying to capture a wide, wide range of computers with HL2, and thus can't make use of a lot of the advanced routines due to low-end processor constraints. Plus, HL2 is based one hundred percent around NPC-on-player combat encounters (apart from story scenes), so you don't really get a chance to see how the AI operates from an observer's perspective.

Yes, pretty much. And also because of the style of the game.

Why oogle over the graphics when the art direction is a pile of shit?

Bingo.

 

[guchi]

Why oogle over the graphics when the art direction is a pile of shit?

I love the art direction in halo, it all boils down to taste... although yes, hl2s art direction was far more original.

 

[Kyorisu]

Or perhaps some people look for different things from their fps? Wouldn't that be crazy!?

Halo is only repetitive if you play on an easy setting and are not very good at it

Reminds me of the whole hide and shoot debate. Higher difficulties should come with smarter and more interesting AI not beefed unit stats.

 

[Sparta]

Same thing can be said about many other FPS games which is why the combat in Halo1 I believe is still the best you can find in the FPS genre with really only FEAR coming close to stealing its crown. Only problem with fear is the battles are over quickly and are not epic in scope as in Halo due to limited level design, rudimentary weapons, and enemies on screen, etc.

I think i've noticed a pattern. I'd just like to point out that you mention FEAR here, and then go on to say this below.

Don't say its generic either because you couldn't give me a single example of a game that is similar.

You did just mention FEAR, which shares many qualities similar to Halo. Great A.I. Limited weapon choices, repetitive and limited level design, numbers of enemies in each fight (Halo usually pits you against 8 enemies at any time, while FEAR does that with 5 or 6). Both games have kickass last-levels, yet ultimately both games have you fighting the same kind of fight over and over again with limited variety.

For some people, this their cup of tea, for others not so much.

I thought FEAR and Halo were both great games, but nothing more. Halo is probably better than FEAR though.

And Destrukt, you said Halo 3 looks to have better graphics than almost any other game.

Gears of War?

Crysis?

Alan Wake?

ummm F.E.A.R?

Condemned even?

heck i'd say Ninja Gaiden Black has looks that could match Halo 3, based on everything i've seen from Halo 3 and played from Ninja Gaiden Black.

Although, in all honesty graphics dont matter too much at the end of the day really. But still, given that Halo 3 is coming out on X360, i'd expect it would look alot more next-gen then any of those pictures suggest.

 

[destrukt]

Why oogle over the graphics when the art direction is a pile of shit?

.. because thank goodness your opinion isn't the only one and things are subjective.

Oh, and who's ogling ?

And Destrukt, you said Halo 3 looks to have better graphics than almost any other game.

Gears of War?

Crysis?

Alan Wake?

ummm F.E.A.R?

Condemned even?

heck i'd say Ninja Gaiden Black has looks that could match Halo 3, based on everything i've seen from Halo 3 and played from Ninja Gaiden Black.

You just proved my point, it does look better then almost any other game as you were only able to mention what, 3 that I'd agree are (GoW, Crysis & Alan Wake) out of what, how many gazillion games and it's nowhere near being finished and they have said it will look a lot better than the incredibly small amount of things we have seen so far.

I actually lol'd at your reply, what where you trying to achieve, trying to prove my comment was wrong ? I said almost any for a specific reason, to catch morons.

 

[Asknoone]

if it's not being used, at all, it might as well not exist.

How does that make any sense?

 

[destrukt]

What is the point of something if it doesn't get used ?

I hope you're pretending that that doesn't make sense to you..

 

[Asknoone]

And you know it isn't being used, yes? Even then, it's something to be used down the line. Just because it presently isn't being used in HL2/EP1 does not mean it shouldn't be there. Idiot logic really, don't you think?

 

[Sparta]

.. because thank goodness your opinion isn't the only one and things are subjective.

Oh, and who's ogling ?

You just proved my point, it does look better then almost any other game as you were only able to mention what, 3 that I'd agree are (GoW, Crysis & Alan Wake) out of what, how many gazillion games and it's nowhere near being finished and they have said it will look a lot better than the incredibly small amount of things we have seen so far.

I actually lol'd at your reply, what where you trying to achieve, trying to prove my comment was wrong ? I said almost any for a specific reason, to catch morons.

I actually stopped listing games because i couldn't be bothered arguing anymore. Not because i couldn't think of anymore.

 

[Jintor]

What is the point of something if it doesn't get used ?

I hope you're pretending that that doesn't make sense to you..

Well, there's all kinds of stuff coded into HL2 that isn't used... like the Gunship Belly Cannon. What is the point, indeed.

The Aftermath vortex grenade is good though. ^^

 

[Bad^Hat]

Reminds me of the whole hide and shoot debate. Higher difficulties should come with smarter and more interesting AI not beefed unit stats.

Heh, I was trying to say just that in a past thread, except I got to like 4 paragraphs and gave up. You pretty much nailed it with just that

A difficulty setting does not make a game. The legendary argument is so tired... but seriously, ramping up enemy health and decreasing the players' does not constitute good or thoughtful game design. I don't think it even deserves to be called challenging. A better word would be unfair.

Ninja Gaiden (I use this example alot ) is challenging, and fun, and it encourages you to improve to advance - and it's satisfying when you do. With Halo, I struggled to put my advancing down to skill at all. It was like, just keep doing the same thing over and over until you pull it off, then repeat at the next checkpoint/level/play-through. And all I felt with completing it was... relief.




*cough* ANYWAY.

So um... go Halo 3 discussion. Woo.

 

[Warbie]

Higher difficulties should come with smarter and more interesting AI not beefed unit stats.

I disagree. As long as the result is more rewarding it doesn't matter how the developer gets there. Simply increasing enemy stats and making shots do more damage often results in an unsatisfying experience, screwing up any balance that may have made the game 'work', but not always.

There's a fine balance between unfair and challenging, between relying on hindsight and getting by with practise and skill, and Halo on Legendary finds it perfectly. Whether this balance was a fluke or not, I don't know (it wasn't there in Halo 2).

Like with Golden Eye, Halo is far more enjoyable on the hardest setting. It's rare (infact only 3 games in fps history spring to mind) that a single player shooter offers a decent challenge and rewards the time you've put into the game to this extent. It isn't unfair or cheap, when you die it's because you hadn't put the practise in and/or weren't good enough, simple, not because of 'cheating' ai.

 

[poo?]

I think i've noticed a pattern. I'd just like to point out that you mention FEAR here, and then go on to say this below.



You did just mention FEAR, which shares many qualities similar to Halo. Great A.I. Limited weapon choices, repetitive and limited level design, numbers of enemies in each fight (Halo usually pits you against 8 enemies at any time, while FEAR does that with 5 or 6). Both games have kickass last-levels, yet ultimately both games have you fighting the same kind of fight over and over again with limited variety.

For some people, this their cup of tea, for others not so much.

I thought FEAR and Halo were both great games, but nothing more. Halo is probably better than FEAR though.

What exactly are you trying to convince me of here? That F.E.A.R and Halo are similar games? Because those abstract similarities aren't exactly persuading me. You could compare any two games together using that logic.

 

[Adrik_Senturu]

Wow. You are ****ing hilarious. Hats off to you. Idiot.

Well thats what you said :|

Seriously. They have this great AI there, and for what? To not use it? Whats the point of even mentioning it if no one has seen it? Infact the AI could suck, but we would never know because according to Valve its super awesome. Your defending something that you haven't even seen :| Thats just dumb....but than again it should be expected on HL2.net in a halo topic So as far as im concerned Halo AI > The magical invisible HL2 AI.


"HL2 Has incredible AI. Incredible"

"...Really?..but..where is it?..I mean..I want to experience this incredible AI"

"omg lol its hiding dummy "

"......but..if you haven't seen it than how do we know its good or not?"

"omg lol stfu idiot"

 

[Cole]

Your defending something that you haven't even seen Thats just dumb....but than again it should be expected on HL2.net in a halo topic So as far as im concerned Halo AI > The magical invisible HL2 AI.

Actually you can see the AI at work, thats how we know it's there. You can set up battles in Garrys Mod and see how they fold out and the AI really shows in large scape battles.

Valve made the AI dumber, the intentionally made it worse to make the game funner. But how...how can that work? What would it be like if you could never hit a guy with an object with the gravity gun? What fun would it be? By the 200th object thrown and the 50th death..you'd be outraged. So Valve coded it in so guys stay still more. This caused you to be able to hit them easier, when there running, with the GV, etc... This was figured out by(I think Valve said it in an email and when as people looked at the code).

Also in my opinion Valve simply never took the time to recode the AI for small scale battles, as Samon is talking about they are coded for large scale battles.

So yes Samon and many other have seen the AI doing wonders in large scale battles.

 

[Adrik_Senturu]

Actually you can see the AI at work, thats how we know it's there. You can set up battles in Garrys Mod and see how they fold out and the AI really shows in large scape battles.

Valve made the AI dumber, the intentionally made it worse to make the game funner. But how...how can that work? What would it be like if you could never hit a guy with an object with the gravity gun? What fun would it be? By the 200th object thrown and the 50th death..you'd be outraged. So Valve coded it in so guys stay still more. This caused you to be able to hit them easier, when there running, with the GV, etc... This was figured out by(I think Valve said it in an email and when as people looked at the code).

Also in my opinion Valve simply never took the time to recode the AI for small scale battles, as Samon is talking about they are coded for large scale battles.

So yes Samon and many other have seen the AI doing wonders in large scale battles.

Ok, but thats in GMOD Im talking about HL2 here, not gmod. If they have this great AI that really does wonders in Large Scale battles, than why not allow for areas where these battles could take place? I mean seeing from Episode 2 trailers the areas are a bit bigger so does that mean there going to show up there? Hopefully :| Than I'll be wrong, and we'll all get some pizza.

Also the whole 200th object thrown thing Seriously, even if they did move and you still couldn't hit them, that wouldn't be a matter of AI it would just be a matter of the player sucking really bad

 

[Asknoone]

Well thats what you said :|

Seriously. They have this great AI there, and for what? To not use it? Whats the point of even mentioning it if no one has seen it? Infact the AI could suck, but we would never know because according to Valve its super awesome. Your defending something that you haven't even seen :| Thats just dumb....but than again it should be expected on HL2.net in a halo topic So as far as im concerned Halo AI > The magical invisible HL2 AI.

Gogogogo moronic assumptions! Valve have never said it was super awesome. I said it was super awesome, because quite frankly, it is. I've seen it, I've set about using it, and I can quite frankly say it is fantastic.

Adrik_Senturu: Read

Okay. Source has AI routines built into the engine that are, from what I've heard, far beyond basically any other game engine (with the possible exception of, say, UE3), it's just that Valve is trying to capture a wide, wide range of computers with HL2, and thus can't make use of a lot of the advanced routines due to low-end processor constraints. Plus, HL2 is based one hundred percent around NPC-on-player combat encounters (apart from story scenes), so you don't really get a chance to see how the AI operates from an observer's perspective.

 

[Adrik_Senturu]

Well like I said above, thats in gmod. I've played gmod and spawned a bunch of guys in a larger area and I've noticed that the AI is better, but where are these large areas in HL2? If large areas are where the AI truely shines, than whats the sense in not putting them in the game. So I guess its going to appear in Episode 2 than seeing as the areas are larger...but seriously. All that wait for something they're not gonna use? GO GO GADGET DELAY

 

[Cole]

Ok, but thats in GMOD Im talking about HL2 here, not gmod. If they have this great AI that really does wonders in Large Scale battles, than why not allow for areas where these battles could take place? I mean seeing from Episode 2 trailers the areas are a bit bigger so does that mean there going to show up there? Hopefully Than I'll be wrong, and we'll all get some pizza.

You said Samon never seen this AI at work, just shouting out that it's there. I am telling you how he knows it's there and he's seen it. It is in HL2, not the actual game that you play. It is in the code however, the data that you get when you buy HL2. Don't quote this and be like "OMG what good is it then" because then your completely ignoring\missing the whole point. The point is that if I say "It is in HL2", then I am not saying it's in the actual game you play but the data that buy.

Also the whole 200th object thrown thing Seriously, even if they did move and you still couldn't hit them, that wouldn't be a matter of AI it would just be a matter of the player sucking really bad

Exaclty. Now what if the average player\most players bought the game couldn't hit guys that well? I don't think that would be great design decision. It might be a good idea to make the guys easier to hit.

 

[Asknoone]

Well like I said above, thats in gmod. I've played gmod and spawned a bunch of guys in a larger area and I've noticed that the AI is better, but where are these large areas in HL2? If large areas are where the AI truely shines, than whats the sense in not putting them in the game. So I guess its going to appear in Episode 2 than seeing as the areas are larger...but seriously. All that wait for something they're not gonna use? GO GO GADGET DELAY

No, that isn't in Gmod. It is not limited to Gmod in any way, shape or form.

Adrik_Senturu: Read

View Post
Okay. Source has AI routines built into the engine that are, from what I've heard, far beyond basically any other game engine (with the possible exception of, say, UE3), it's just that Valve is trying to capture a wide, wide range of computers with HL2, and thus can't make use of a lot of the advanced routines due to low-end processor constraints. Plus, HL2 is based one hundred percent around NPC-on-player combat encounters (apart from story scenes), so you don't really get a chance to see how the AI operates from an observer's perspective.

 

[Adrik_Senturu]

You said Samon never seen this AI at work, just shouting out that it's there. I am telling you how he knows it's there and he's seen it.

I know, I meant in HL2 so I should've rephrased that :|

And samon jesus christ on a stick :| Im talking about the BATTLES IN HL2. Not in gmod, not in something else, not in the lollipop village. HL2. Im talking about this AI appearing in HL2. It hasn't yet. Thats what I've been talking about for the past 10 minutes :|

 

[Cole]

know, I meant in HL2 so I should've rephrased that Im talking about HL2 here. Not huge battles you've made in GMOD. Where is this AI in HL2. If it doesn't show up in EP2 with its larger areas than what the point of it being there It better show up.

That AI code is in HL2, in fact it is being used. However that AI simply sucks at small battles. So yes you see that AI in HL2 every single time you play. Those particle AI Routines are simply better with more space and large battles that HL2 does not offer.

 

[Adrik_Senturu]

Why didnt they write a code in to determine the level of complexity for the type of processors? I mean, if they can write the programming to make excellent AI, that shouldve been simple enough. That way as the computers become better, so does the game

 

[Asknoone]

I know, I meant in HL2 so I should've rephrased that :|

And samon jesus christ on a stick :| Im talking about the BATTLES IN HL2. Not in gmod, not in something else, not in the lollipop village. HL2. Im talking about this AI appearing in HL2. It hasn't yet. Thats what I've been talking about for the past 10 minutes :|

Am I banging my head against a rock?

Okay. Source has AI routines built into the engine that are, from what I've heard, far beyond basically any other game engine (with the possible exception of, say, UE3), it's just that Valve is trying to capture a wide, wide range of computers with HL2, and thus can't make use of a lot of the advanced routines due to low-end processor constraints. Plus, HL2 is based one hundred percent around NPC-on-player combat encounters (apart from story scenes), so you don't really get a chance to see how the AI operates from an observer's perspective.

Alot of it simply boils down to gameplay and design process.
I'd also like to know if you are a coder.

 

[Adrik_Senturu]

Why didnt they write a code in to determine the level of complexity for the type of processors? I mean, if they can write the programming to make excellent AI, that shouldve been simple enough. That way as the computers become better, so does the game

:O

 

[Cole]

Why didnt they write a code in to determine the level of complexity for the type of processors? I mean, if they can write the programming to make excellent AI, that shouldve been simple enough that way as the computers become better, so does the game

A better question, and more relevant, would be......
Why didn't they improve the AI in small scale battles?

Time? HL2 was redone 2/3 times.

To be honest I don't know infact I could probably care less. Don't ask me. E-mail Gabe about it.

 

[Asknoone]

:O

Alot of it simply boils down to gameplay and design process. I'd also like to know if you are a coder.

:O

 

[Pi Mu Rho]

Why didnt they write a code in to determine the level of complexity for the type of processors? I mean, if they can write the programming to make excellent AI, that shouldve been simple enough. That way as the computers become better, so does the game

Because then the gameplay experience varies from person to person, according to their specs. That makes it a total bitch to implement, design around, plan for and test.

 

[Adrik_Senturu]

Are you a coder? (You better not be :|)

 

[Pi Mu Rho]

No, I'm a game designer.

 

[Adrik_Senturu]

Actually I was asking Samon :x but because of time travel and the flux capacitator you posted before I did D:

 

[Asknoone]

No, I'm a game designer. And on-off mapper.

 

[Adrik_Senturu]

Even than the question is irrelevant . Now im gonna go :| but this is no retreat. Its merely a pizza run.


AHEM

So your a game designer.

Well,thats part of the job designing for PC rather than console. On PC, you have to account for different systems, and thusly, must include different code for different comps. Hell, the designing process isnt that complicated, its just people using big words for excuses. So wait, whats the problem with including a code to dumb down the AI if a computer cant handle it? or even changing the AI to suit it for small squad based fighting.