h a l f b a k e r yYou want a piece of this?
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Essentially if you are not online, your game will function like normal.
Which means normal AI and etc...
However if you are in single player mode, and is online... you can enable a function that makes your mission becomes a multiplayer game.
So while other players are waiting for their friends
to play deathmatches, they can click quick play.
This would warp the other players into another player's singleplayer game. They are given a choice to take control of a friendly AI, or an enemy AI.
The AI they are allowed to hijack in this game are only AIs that are not important characters, and is near the player's path.
They are then told what to do... e.g. patrol the area. Defend the bomb from not exploding.
As soon as they die, they auto jump into the nearest AI.
This would result in increase realism of the enemy or friendly's action, as they are controlled by real bored humans.
[link]
|
| |
Not only are they more smarter, they're more better. |
|
| |
except for when you find enemies suddenly discovering the skill of dry humping your corpse lol. |
|
| |
Nice one. It's a rather good idea. Have a bun. |
|
| |
I always find 'defending the bomb from not exploding' to be quite tricky... |
|
| |
I've often wondered if some Xbox Live games don't occasionally have bored developers take over the AIs. Certainly feasible and a good way to prevent the AI becoming old and stale. |
|
| |
I'm going to take over an AI and make it give you a bun. |
|
| |
Could one adapt this for Space Invaders? I would like to control one of those svelte ones on the top row. |
|
| |
The only problem is there are a lot of twats
out there. Twats who have very little
intention to fit in to your digitally rendered
role playing fantasy world. Indeed, twats
who will actively spoil your virtual reality,
just for kicks. |
|
| |
I probably would. Leroy Jenkins did. Look
how cool and hip we are. [ ] |
|
| |
/who will actively spoil your virtual reality/
doesnt this make it all the more real? |
|
| |
It occurs to me that the natural evolution of this concept is to have these mission-type games occur in the context of those social networking format sites. I suspect Warcraft has some elements of both - people running missions run up against AIs and other players who are doing other things. |
|
| |
The newly released 'Left 4 Dead' has taken this into consideration. You can play as a zombie if you wish and the game could, if wanted, be single player. |
|
| |
//there are a lot of twats out there. Twats who have very little intention to fit in to your digitally rendered role playing fantasy world// |
|
| |
Twats who will either stop the player progressing, in which case they are doing what they are supposed to do, or not stop the player, in which case they are not a big problem. |
|
| |
I think the real problem will be the vast difference in difficulty between a computer controlled mook and a twat controlled mook. Given that the average computer controlled mook is a lot weaker than the average player, the average twat controlled mook will be weaker still and not very entertaining to control. |
|
| |
Seems like, if the mook, instead of defending the bomb,
moons the player while cracking out-of-character jokes,
that might impair the gaming experience for the player.
However, although it seems a real problem, it also seems
fix-able. |
|
| |
As the idea is written, in order to take over an AI, a human
must play through to the end of another game. That
should screen out the casual twats. Add to that a system
of incentives, whereby a player earns points for skillful
playing of bit-parts, and some twats will still get through.
But they'll be a select group of highly dedicated, rather
creative twats. |
|
| |
That could add a new dimension to the game, particularly
since, as the idea is written, they're restricted to limited
niches within the game, where players could learn to
expect them. |
|
| |
Actually I think the casual twat should be more than welcome. I thought the general idea was that players would no longer be able to abuse AI weaknesses so much because monsters could suddenly wise up and catch them off guard. It doesn't really matter if some twats are inexperiened and make silly mistakes, they won't be much worse than the average AI, and they will wise up. |
|
| |
//moons the player while cracking out-of-character jokes// |
|
| |
I think the sort of player who would let random twats attempt to thwart his progress would be ready for it. It's a bit like permadeath, only a toughened minority play it. |
|
| |
[+] but what's wrong with doing the same thing in multiplayer mode ? ie: assuming a fps zombiefest or something, you've got control of zombie #297 in the third wave. Given that npc's really are usually pretty nerfed in for movement, weaponry and strength anyways it wouldn't make it *that* much harder for the Character player and relieve the grinding. |
|
| |
//it wouldn't make it *that* much harder// |
|
| |
If the twats have no real hope of killing or seriously hindering a player they will not bother. They must have a decent chance of causing trouble, therefore the game must get harder when they join. |
|
| |
Nothing wrong with having this in coop mode though. |
|
| |
In the N64 game Perfect Dark, this was a multiplayer option. You inhabit whichever enemy is closest to the hero, jumping to the next when they die. They are weaker, of course, but in aggregate it is more or less fair. |
|
| |
"Ai" (as opposed to "AI"): Japanese for "sensuality". |
|
| |