Fixing AI should be Easy

[aieeegrunt]

It is very clear by now that Soren is not Firaxis (anymore). Post-Soren products tell a lot. By the same measure, that is, the products, sorry but not sorry to at least challenge the idea of real talent being present post-Soren...

Also, why is it that when arguments lack, the word "hater" always comes to the table?

Because people always default to that when they can’t actually address your points and won’t admit they might have been wrong.

Then comes the attempts to shut you up

 

[Alaindor]

That is so condescending, don't you think? Unless differing opinions are not allowed here.

 

[Kwami]

It will be out in Steam soon enough, that's a given. I think it was a good call after all to focus on a single store for Early Access. TBH, a year ago it was VERY rough.

We'll see. Until then, the game might as well not exist.

Never implied that. The thing about Soren was that his talent is on programming, so having a lead designer that's a programmer and is interested in AI results in a game with a good focus on AI, which is what seems to be lacking in Firaxis at this point (a good AI programmer as a lead designer).

And since when is Soren a "good AI programmer"? The AI in Civ IV was so bad that Firaxis had to incorporate community mods to fix it. And that was for a much simpler game than Civ VI! I'm not trying to hate on Soren here. I'm sure that he's improved since then and I do wish him the best. But let's not pretend that Firaxis ever made great AI in Civ games.

It is very clear by now that Soren is not Firaxis (anymore). Post-Soren products tell a lot. By the same measure, that is, the products, sorry but not sorry to at least challenge the idea of real talent being present post-Soren...

Also, why is it that when arguments lack, the word "hater" always comes to the table?

I used "hate" because of all the attacks against the actual people working at Firaxis. Rather than saying negative things about the game itself, some posters here are saying negative things about the producers, designers, and programmers working on the game. Not cool.

 

[Elhoim]

And since when is Soren a "good AI programmer"? The AI in Civ IV was so bad that Firaxis had to incorporate community mods to fix it. And that was for a much simpler game than Civ VI! I'm not trying to hate on Soren here. I'm sure that he's improved since then and I do wish him the best. But let's not pretend that Firaxis ever made great AI in Civ games.

It makes sense they incorporated the mods to the official game since the interest back then was to make a good AI, even if they couldn't for some reason (lack of talent or whatever). The intent was to make a game the AI could play, and if the community did a better job, they added it. Now they won't even release the source code.

BTW, not hating the current devs nor questioning their competence. I'm pretty sure they hate seeing the bugs, but the company as a whole has a different set of priorities.

 

[Kwami]

Because people always default to that when they can’t actually address your points and won’t admit they might have been wrong.

Then comes the attempts to shut you up

Or maybe we just don't agree. Have you considered that possibility? Have you considered that:

1. Most players here like the game and enjoy playing it, even if it's not perfect, and
2. The AI isn't amazing, but it's sufficient for the vast majority of players, and
3. Some of your facts about other games are just flat our wrong, and
4. Your negativity is unfortunate and annoying?

Because that's how I see it. But please, keep posting the same nonsense in every thread and bringing down the mood everywhere. That'll show 'em.

It makes sense they incorporated the mods to the official game since the interest back then was to make a good AI, even if they couldn't for some reason (lack of talent or whatever).

Oh, sure. I'm glad that they did! I'm just saying that Civ IV isn't really evidence that Soren is a great AI programmer when he had to rely on the community mods to get challenging AI into the game.

 

[Elhoim]

Oh, sure. I'm glad that they did! I'm just saying that Civ IV isn't really evidence that Soren is a great AI programmer when he had to rely on the community mods to get challenging AI into the game.

Sure, but my main point was his interest in AI, not his competence. I know in the parenthesis I said "good AI programmer", but that was more wishful thinking for the future of Firaxis than saying Soren was back then.

 

[Kwami]

@Elhoim: Fair enough! Point taken. I, too, hope that Firaxis shows more interest in the AI moving forward. I suspect that they will, too. While they never quite got there with VI, they did make a lot of progress since the early days. I think the quick release cycle during NFP was too much to keep the AI working right, though.

 

[Aristos]

And since when is Soren a "good AI programmer"? The AI in Civ IV was so bad that Firaxis had to incorporate community mods to fix it. And that was for a much simpler game than Civ VI! I'm not trying to hate on Soren here. I'm sure that he's improved since then and I do wish him the best. But let's not pretend that Firaxis ever made great AI in Civ games.

False. I was there, and also before and after. Civ 4 AI was already good enough in vanilla, at least it could use all game systems... Soren was open enough to see the value in Blake's work, so he decided to incorporate it into the base game with Blake's permission. That is very different from "relying on the community". Compare that to now.

And comparatively speaking at the least, yes, Soren is a great AI programmer, and in fact, it's his area of expertise from his Stanford years. So yes, compared to what we have now, Soren is indeed a much better coder.

 

[Kwami]

False. I was there, and also before and after. Civ 4 AI was already good enough in vanilla, at least it could use all game systems... Soren was open enough to see the value in Blake's work, so he decided to incorporate it into the base game with Blake's permission. That is very different from "relying on the community". Compare that to now.

Oh, please. The AI in Civ IV was pretty bad. The only reason it was even a threat was because of the simple nature of combat (stacks), the simple leader bonuses (just +stats), and the enormous bonuses that it got. The AI didn't have to do much of anything complicated because the game itself wasn't very complicated. And despite that, it was still pretty bad. That's why Blake's mods were so good and valuable!

Now? Sure, we don't have the DLL and we can't improve the AI. That sucks. But the default AI is handling a much more complex game and doing a pretty decent job of it. It's bad at a small number of the new "game modes", but it does just fine with anything from vanilla (except for air craft, kind of), the two major expansions, and all of the other game modes. Focusing on a small number of deficiencies isn't honest.

And comparatively speaking at the least, yes, Soren is a great AI programmer, and in fact, it's his area of expertise from his Stanford years. So yes, compared to what we have now, Soren is indeed a much better coder.

I suspect that, like me, you know absolutely nothing about the current AI programmers. So, that's just baseless speculation.

 

[Aristos]

Oh, please. The AI in Civ IV was pretty bad. The only reason it was even a threat was because of the simple nature of combat (stacks), the simple leader bonuses (just +stats), and the enormous bonuses that it got. The AI didn't have to do much of anything complicated because the game itself wasn't very complicated. And despite that, it was still pretty bad. That's why Blake's mods were so good and valuable!

Now? Sure, we don't have the DLL and we can't improve the AI. That sucks. But the default AI is handling a much more complex game and doing a pretty decent job of it. It's bad at a small number of the new "game modes", but it does just fine with anything from vanilla (except for air craft, kind of), the two major expansions, and all of the other game modes. Focusing on a small number of deficiencies isn't honest.



I suspect that, like me, you know absolutely nothing about the current AI programmers. So, that's just baseless speculation.

I know enough to judge their work: I know their product, and beat it much easier than any previous one.

So, you find the Civ 6 AI good enough but claim that the Civ 4 AI was bad? Something does not compute there. Anyone that really knows both can attest to your inconsistency. Sorry.

 

[Kwami]

I know enough to judge their work: I know their product, and beat it much easier than any previous one.

So, you find the Civ 6 AI good enough but claim that the Civ 4 AI was bad? Something does not compute there. Anyone that really knows both can attest to your inconsistency. Sorry.

No, I think that they're both pretty mediocre. Like the AI in pretty much every 4X game ever because programming AI for such complex games is really difficult to do and it's even more difficult when you have to care about the turn timers on mid-range PCs. But I also think that both games have adequate AI for the vast majority of players. There's no inconsistency here.

 

[Gedemon]

Never implied that. The thing about Soren was that his talent is on programming, so having a lead designer that's a programmer and is interested in AI results in a game with a good focus on AI, which is what seems to be lacking in Firaxis at this point (a good AI programmer as a lead designer).

And since when is Soren a "good AI programmer"? The AI in Civ IV was so bad that Firaxis had to incorporate community mods to fix it. And that was for a much simpler game than Civ VI! I'm not trying to hate on Soren here. I'm sure that he's improved since then and I do wish him the best. But let's not pretend that Firaxis ever made great AI in Civ games.

It's perfectly possible that Civ6 AI is technically better than Civ4 and Civ5, and IIRC from comparing code, Civ5 AI was capable of handling things more complex than Civ4 AI, but in the end having a game designer competent enough in AI coding is what makes the real difference here.

What made civ4 a lot more interesting for me than civ5 and civ6 is that because of the above, the AI was able to be good enough at playing the game, independently of the supposed level of the AI programmer.

I mean for what I've seen exposed to modding, civ6 AI is not bad, it's the way it plays the game that is.

I don't know why Firaxis can't/don't release the gameplay DLL source for civ6, but I do hope that they'll make sure to expose all of its AI code to modding for civ7, not just weighting parameters and strategic behavior without documentations. (edit: because from my POV civ6 is really a wasted potential on that subject)

 

[Aristos]

No, I think that they're both pretty mediocre. Like the AI in pretty much every 4X game ever because programming AI for such complex games is really difficult to do and it's even more difficult when you have to care about the turn timers on mid-range PCs. But I also think that both games have adequate AI for the vast majority of players. There's no inconsistency here.

Well, we agree to disagree then. Yes, all AIs in 4X are "bad" in absolute terms, obviously. But comparatively speaking, Civ 6 AI is by far the worst in every possible measure, and I don't know how can you possibly deny that when the reports about that abound in this very forum. But OK, stick to your "beliefs", at least they help you enjoy the game as is. I envy you that, for sure.

 

[Kwami]

Well, we agree to disagree then. Yes, all AIs in 4X are "bad" in absolute terms, obviously. But comparatively speaking, Civ 6 AI is by far the worst in every possible measure, and I don't know how can you possibly deny that when the reports about that abound in this very forum. But OK, stick to your "beliefs", at least they help you enjoy the game as is. I envy you that, for sure.

Oh, come on. Really? The worst AI by every possible measure? That's insane. Have you seen how bad the AI is in Endless Legend, for instance? Almost 7 years after release, it still can't do quests!

 

[Aristos]

Oh, come on. Really? The worst AI by every possible measure? That's insane. Have you seen how bad the AI is in Endless Legend, for instance? Almost 7 years after release, it still can't do quests!

I was obviously talking about this franchise.

 

[Kwami]

I was obviously talking about this franchise.

That actually wasn't obvious since the previous sentence was about the 4X genre. But, OK.

 

[Kupe Navigator]

I was obviously talking about this franchise.

I don't think Ai is worse than non-modded civ 5 to be honest.

 

[Aristos]

I don't think Ai is worse than non-modded civ 5 to be honest.

It is. I just tried a Civ 5 Immortal game and I had to concede because Shaka became unstoppable. Granted, long time since I don't play it, but I know the game upside down.

I never beat civ 4 deity either. The civ 6 AI is considerably weaker than both civ 4 and civ 5. It's just fact.

 

[Kupe Navigator]

It is. I just tried a Civ 5 Immortal game and I had to concede because Shaka became unstoppable. Granted, long time since I don't play it, but I know the game upside down.

So? A lot of people have problems winning civ 6 game on higher difficulty. Dosen't mean civ 6 Ai is good.

 

[bengalryan9]

I don't think Ai is worse than non-modded civ 5 to be honest.

The first time I played a game of unmodded and vanilla Civ 5 I was *shocked* at how bad the AI was. Some people have some ridiculously rose-colored glasses on in an attempt to make a point.