The computer is a cheating bastage...

[Carlston]

You know after reading this...
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TheComputerIsACheatingBastard

And the subtopics.

Anyone not just feel something strange about still playing a game when you know...yes indeed the computer did just spawn x and x out of it's ass just to screw with you?

That when you made fun of someone for not having lEET skillz or whatever, it doesn't matter because if the computer wiped someone in seconds in War/starcraft you were just gonna have to take it anyway? and no you could not have done better?

No matter how pimped the ride was in a racing game the rubber banding would insure you lose...

I knew Ninja Gaiden on the NES would move the crow on the cliff level every time just to make that one jump BS...
Yet games like Civ which you play a set of rules and your enemy just is given things to screw ya in the hoop, and when you take over their glamed out city you find out it's the most bankrupted piece of trash, Five times over population limits and six of these monsterous sins of city planning got Ghandi a nuke in 750 bc? And Ghandi nukes your ass and only your ass right after he made a peace treaty?

Sooooo what will it take to have real AI? I mean no one wants down the road fair as make games dull... but jesus, it doesn't have to flat out cheat if your showing promise.

It has lists on lists of examples....

Might as well throw out the ones you notice.

 

[Shurikens and Lightning]

If humans aren't collectively intelligent how can we make a computer intelligent?

 

[Flishiz]

I'm sorry to be THAT GUY, but the thread's been done before, verbatim, basically. If it had a new spin, I'd look the other way, but in this case, search bar, my friend.

 

[Smack-Ferret]

Remember the battle with Lou in Guitar Hero 3? It's one percent playing good, and ninety-nine percent hoping you get the better power-ups.

 

[Nickisimo]

I just got beat in Ice Hockey on NES by the Czech team again...same ol' third period comeback. Sons of bitches...

 

[Sassafrass]

Remember the battle with Lou in Guitar Hero 3? It's one percent playing good, and ninety-nine percent hoping you get the better power-ups.

Ah, Lou...bastard.

OT: Yeah, happens a lot in Pro Evo and Footie Manager.
Pro Evo example: See that rebound? Going to the opponent.
Footie Manager example: See your best players? We'll crock them for eight months and watch your team crash and burn.

Grr...

 

[thevillageidiot13]

in the [original] pokemon gameboy games, i couldn't beat the gym master with the alakazam because it had recover. i was so frustrated, and then i thought of a brilliant strategy. use a defensive pokemon to outlast their alakazam, and wait until it runs out of recover, and then kill it. at one point, i actually COUNTED the number of times the computer used the recover, and it used the recover technique 24 times, when the PP is 20.

 

[geldonyetich]

Computers only cheat if the game designers weren't able to make the game adequately challenging without it. Don't begrudge the cheating - it's supposed to be a challenge to overcome.

 

[DeadlyYellow]

One of my favorite articles on TV Tropes. Man do I love that site.

 

[rockingnic]

In Unreal Tournament 3. I swear the AI snipes you on the other side of the map when there are easier, more visual, and closer targets (other AI) but it chooses to shoot you dead in one try just because you're human. Every time you try to use the hoverboard,you get shot automatically from some AI that happens to pop his head out JUST to shoot you. So you fall over and get killed while recovering from the fall. And this is on the easier difficulties...

 

[Carlston]

Computers only cheat if the game designers weren't able to make the game adequately challenging without it. Don't begrudge the cheating - it's supposed to be a challenge to overcome.

This about Left 4 Dead and the director. I thinks thats why i loved the game, If i was doing TO good it threw thing at me to spice it up. But never made it a impossibility, just cause.

Almost every game out there does the extreame wrong thing, like Civ, woo you got a archer so the computer must have fusion cannons. If a player is doing what they should, make it neck and neck...not a lobotimised boneless fish VS Kimbo Slice.

Like playing DC vs MK it might as well have a number at the top of the screen says "You must lose this many more games before story continues."

 

[thevillageidiot13]

also, in Call of Duty 5 [World at War], the AI aims at you, and only at you. seriously. if you stick your head out of cover half an inch, every enemy AI automatically notices you and starts emptying out the magaazine clip into your face with deadly accuracy. what's the point in having friendly AI's in a game if the enemy is only going to shoot in your direction, no matter what, and totally forget about any other threat on the entire map?

i mean, if we're playing Halo, and you're a spacemarine that wears a tank as body armor and mows down hordes of enemies for breakfast, fine, it makes more sense that the AI would shoot in your direction. but if you're just a common grunt, and there are a dozen more-exposed targets the AI can shoot at, why oh why does it aim for you every single time?

 

[Carlston]

One of my favorite articles on TV Tropes. Man do I love that site.

May be search bar stamped but hey, it brings conversation.

God if they only allowed a topic once we'd have 10 with 80k messages in them. Sometimes you need a new rant... Like Modern warfare 2, try the helicopter missions covering your buddy on the ground, he can be scratched twice and die, And the enemy can shoot him from across down, drunk,stoned, banging a hooker inside a sealed bank safe. Felt good to finish that thing but it's like the farcry 10 mile away sniper with a 9mm.

 

[MelasZepheos_v1legacy]

Check out your statistics on solitaire on your computer. They should stand at about 80% win over 10% loss and 10% unplayable (roughly.)

Mine stand at 11% win to 80% loss and 9% unplayable. I call cheating scum on the computer.

 

[Canadamus Prime]

For many games the computer has to cheat in order for there to be any challenge.

 

[thevillageidiot13]

For many games the computer has to cheat in order for there to be any challenge.

i judge a game by its realism. if it can convince you that you're actually "in" the game, and then offer you a compelling and fun experience, then it's a good game. if the AI cheats, that's just BULLSHIT

 

[Hiphophippo]

Any of you played Puzzle Quest?

Yea. : /

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

i would def. have to agree on the civ. games..dearrr godd, play empire earth on expert god mode, and they develop into the freaking nanobot technology while my guys are still figuring out you can make slingshots with rocks and sticks, its such bullshit, i will EVENTUALLY build up massive walls upon walls and take over 3 of the enemy cities (which you are completely right about the hwole the city is like taking over a 3rd world country, its more of a liability than a asset to have), but that last city is near impossible..its like the walls are made of pure adamantium metal (wolverine's shit).


i completely agree, i would like an AI that was smarter, more defensive, and able to counter what i do, not cheat, you put Gears of War on insane or w/e and the bullets just do insanely more damage, they are not smarter in any possible way.

 

[TheNumber1Zero]

in the [original] pokemon gameboy games, i couldn't beat the gym master with the alakazam because it had recover. i was so frustrated, and then i thought of a brilliant strategy. use a defensive pokemon to outlast their alakazam, and wait until it runs out of recover, and then kill it. at one point, i actually COUNTED the number of times the computer used the recover, and it used the recover technique 24 times, when the PP is 20.

Is that with or without PP-UP's and PP-MAX's? I beat it just fine, use things it has no advantage to and teach that Pokemon moves that hurt psychic types.

 

[Weaver]

OP I recommend you read Alan Turing and John Searle. Both their papers influenced the perception of AI and are monumental.

Turing: http://www.loebner.net/Prizef/TuringArticle.html
Searle: http://www.bbsonline.org/documents/a/00/00/04/84/bbs00000484-00/bbs.searle2.html