HorseshoeHermit
20% accurate as usual, Morty
just some examples of complex features from 15 years ago...the diplomacy allowed proper threats and even degrees of threat. Yes the graphics are awful, but this was a great 'civ' game.
http://assets1.ignimgs.com/2000/05/13/calltopower2012-159479_640w.jpg
http://images.eurogamer.net/converted/pics/reviews/ctp2/03b.jpg
http://images.eurogamer.net/converted/pics/reviews/ctp2/02b.jpg
http://images.eurogamer.net/converted/pics/reviews/ctp2/05b.jpg
and smacx diplomacy
http://www.kekkai.org/google/devilsadvocate/alpha-centauri-pic4.png
ok the only one of these that's interesting and on-topic is the second link, but it is pretty interesting. The first link shows a diversity of talking to the A.I., but that's just talking about the pieces of the game, which is really the starting point and the rudiment, not an accomplishment, and it doesn't mean the A.I. *reasons* about what you tell it at all.
But stating the intended consequences of refusal, that's really neat. For that to even be there the AI has to have rudimentary appreciation of casus belli and/or limited war, which... I mean, the multiplayer environment of Civ with Humans sometimes doesn't have that. Imagine what's cooler if the A.I. can think about your promise and watch you actually do it and decide what that means - and apparently the community patch involves actual routines of the AI looking at and responding to your behaviour on a strategic level, so this is doable right now. Jon Shafer's At the Gates is selling his AIs on this.
It's fun to think of how the AI can act smartly on that level even when making it economically moronic , for brief periods, is an improvement