Guild Wars 2

http://intrinsicalgorithm.com/IANews/2014/04/now-consulting-at-arenanet-on-guild-wars-2/

have it slipped under the radar?

What of it? This sort of thing is murkier than the usual sort of speculation. There is nothing to say about it unless/until ANet actually announces some changes that might possibly be related to it.

Very interesting.

“I’m also excited to be working alongside my friend and colleague, Mike Lewis, who has been the AI developer for ArenaNet for a number of years.”

“Intrinsic Algorithm is available to help you with your game design and AI programming on an outsourced contract basis. We provide a fresh, detailed approach to any genre of game. We use a variety of different AI techniques to accomplish whatever task is at hand in the best combination of computing speed and realism we believe we can achieve given the style of the game.”

It seems obvious as to what one thing could be that they are being consulted for, which could turn out real good for us if they are finally going to fix enemy AI (which also would mean ranger pet AI getting fixed). This could also be supported by his stating that ANet has “…some excellent ideas about how to improve their product in many different areas…”, and better enemy/pet AI would, indeed, improve many different areas of the game.

Screw ranger pet AI, if this is what I think it is we might see an end to stacking and zerker meta. \o/

Freeelancer.2860:

Screw ranger pet AI, if this is what I think it is we might see an end to stacking and zerker meta. \o/

Ranger pets use the same AI/pathing as enemies. I think “boss” AI is pretty much the same as standard enemy AI, only bosses tend to have different skills/‘mechanics’ that the underlying AI has available for use. Fixing enemy AI fixes ranger pets and bosses alike, so you should want ranger pets to get fixed.

You are quite right, I stand corrected.

o.o

O.O

frothing at the mouth

Eh, probably nothing good will come of it.

Freeelancer.2860:

You are quite right, I stand corrected.

\o/

:)

To have some content to this post, if this consulting job is not related to improving/fixing the aforementioned pet/enemy/boss AI, that is something that is sorely needed and I hope ANet is already working on it or will be working on it soon.

I hope, that this will lead also to the point, that all enemies in the future will get more Skills and become through this far more interesting to fight.

Its sad to see, that all enemies in the game mostly have only like 1-3 skills…
All enemies should have at least so much skills, like we players.
10

Increase of the skill number of enemies requires also naturally better AI.

Orpheal.8263:

I hope, that this will lead also to the point, that all enemies in the future will get more Skills and become through this far more interesting to fight.

Its sad to see, that all enemies in the game mostly have only like 1-3 skills…
All enemies should have at least so much skills, like we players.
10

Increase of the skill number of enemies requires also naturally better AI.

And give enemies very strong healing abilities, so poison can have a place in the game other than a really bad DoT.

Hate to be a party pooper but shouldn’t this work have been done 2 years ago?

I can see it now: Thanks to our collaboration with IA we have successfully implemented a new AI. From now on when you successfully beat an enemy it will now produce a chat bubble advertising how you can convert gems into gold!

StinVec.3621:

Freeelancer.2860:

Screw ranger pet AI, if this is what I think it is we might see an end to stacking and zerker meta. \o/

Ranger pets use the same AI/pathing as enemies. I think “boss” AI is pretty much the same as standard enemy AI, only bosses tend to have different skills/‘mechanics’ that the underlying AI has available for use. Fixing enemy AI fixes ranger pets and bosses alike, so you should want ranger pets to get fixed.

I would hope that it’s both. The turrets are still stupid and the ranger pets too, they definitely need help. I hope while he’s at it he’ll help them understand the things we’ve been telling them about balance issues as well.

Xae Isareth.1364:

And give enemies very strong healing abilities, so poison can have a place in the game other than a really bad DoT.

“an enemy that heals constantly is fun to fight”…

…said no one ever.

Nerelith.7360:

Hate to be a party pooper but shouldn’t this work have been done 2 years ago?

IF it is simply fixing the existing AI then yes.
But it could also be that they are creating something completely NEW which couldn’t really have been done 2 years ago, since it wasn’t being developed at the time.

Freeelancer.2860:

Screw ranger pet AI, if this is what I think it is we might see an end to stacking and zerker meta. \o/

No one force you to not ranging everything in PVT gear now (safe spot exploits included).

I don’t really think AN should invest in such a serious process like AI programming in the first place. Life-like behavior can be made mutch cheaper and ~same good~ with proper animations, skill designs and emotes.

Hyper Cutter.9376:

Xae Isareth.1364:

And give enemies very strong healing abilities, so poison can have a place in the game other than a really bad DoT.

“an enemy that heals constantly is fun to fight”…

…said no one ever.

Players heal. That’s why burst mechanics exist and why poison is a thing.

Would PvP be fun if it was just a race of attrition to see who could get the other person down to zero faster?

Lalangamena.3694:

http://intrinsicalgorithm.com/IANews/2014/04/now-consulting-at-arenanet-on-guild-wars-2/

have it slipped under the radar?

Maybe they’ve bought them in to finally fix Mesmer wardens and phantasms

Hyper Cutter.9376:

Xae Isareth.1364:

And give enemies very strong healing abilities, so poison can have a place in the game other than a really bad DoT.

“an enemy that heals constantly is fun to fight”…

…said no one ever.

If adding interruptable heals was the solution then they wouldn’t need an Ai consultant. What needs fixing is enemies just path to an aggressor by the shortest means possible to the range they are set to fight at and spam 1 or two attacks in place until they die. There currently is almost no AI in GW2 right now, it’s all just very simple scripts. Enemies feel about as robust as pet rocks, including most bosses. Maybe they’re trying to fix that.

I wouldn’t be surprised if they had to outsource to fix a more basic element of their own game. Now if they outsourced everything, there’s a chance you’d have a great game that should have been here two years ago.

I’ll keep my hope quiet in the corner about ranger pets…don’t want to end up disappointed.

What I most want to know is when they think it will be implemented.

Nick.6972:

They’ll be adding AI to NPCs so they can advertise gem sales.

Now NPC will follow us to battle shouting what is new and how much gold you can get for 800 gems.

Brilliant, I already love it, I won’t miss anything!!!!!!111!!oneone!!

Praise the lord and ANet if they finally are able to get a potent AI.
That would solve half the problems I have with the current state of the game.

It would be a huge step if the AI would not only act but also react.

I would be really happy if they were to improve AI design. Maybe some new dungeons while we are at it using that new AI design.

Ah, I remember these guys at GDC a couple years back.
Programming’s not quite my forte’, but as far as I can follow the concept, their Utility AI stuff is pretty fascinating.

As far as I can figure what we have now is just straight responding to thresholds, like, if you get ‘x’ distance away Subject Alpha will use Dragon Tooth. The sort of stuff these guys specialize in is choosing a response based on non-linearly weighing factors relative to eachother. Like, the farther you get from Subject Alpha the more exponentially likely it is he’ll use Dragon’s Tooth on you, but he may or not actually do that, because (hypothetically) he also tries to Down low HP players and your ally’s HP is lower than you are farther away.

Throw in enough responses and a dash of random, and it’s a pretty solid illusion of thought process by mimicking situational awareness and prioritization.

EverQuest Next is supposedly going that route, too.
So good on Anet for keeping it competitive.

Vox Hollow.2736:

tl;dr mobs will be less predictable and walk out of aoe’s/chanelled skills

They better be removing defiant if this ends up happening or it will be the end of my pugging.

Haha, sorry. I suppose that was a bad example. The game designers can define the ‘factors’ as anything they want, I just picked ‘walking out of AOE’ at random.
Let me change that so it’s less confusing.

First I would like to see pets to have selectable skills for the skin+effect combo…

GW1 AI > GW2.

GW2 took such a HUGE step backwards in terms of AI, its even worst than its own predecessor. I really hope it gets better but after 2 years I don’t have much hope it will ever be anything close to GW1.

This is a very interesting find. It’s obvious they are looking to improving the existing AI. If ANET pulls this off correctly, the new AI could spell the end of zerging and stacking in dungeons.

Remember during the first BWE, pve mobs had the same fleeing from AOE like they had in Guild Wars 1.

I wonder why they removed it. Maybe something’s borked in their AI system. Pets being linked to mob AI and pathing doesn’t help, too.

Finally mobs’ AI will become something!

I’d love to see AI running hammer trains in PvE in some new war zone map.

RoyalPredator.9163:

I don’t really think AN should invest in such a serious process like AI programming in the first place. Life-like behavior can be made mutch cheaper and ~same good~ with proper animations, skill designs and emotes.

Animations don’t help when you can literally run circles around the enemy.

Hyper Cutter.9376:

Xae Isareth.1364:

And give enemies very strong healing abilities, so poison can have a place in the game other than a really bad DoT.

“an enemy that heals constantly is fun to fight”…

…said no one ever.

GW1.

But then again, enemies fought as a team- a feat not seen in GW2 since the Molten Protectors.

Wanderer.3248:

RoyalPredator.9163:

I don’t really think…

Animations don’t help when you can literally run circles around the enemy.

They can. If the skill that they use includes a CC, or a target-lock leap/something, running around them wouldn’t be a problem. All they need to know is when use and what of good stat/animated skills. Like if you run around it, the AI says “yay, didn’t hit the player for like 6 seconds, let’s leap on its face” – or “Arrgh, this one tries to kite me, let’s CHARGE-locked” – or “Hey hey hey he knocked me down and damages me heavy! Retreat strafe back, block, if gets close just kick it awaaaay!”

Kind of

Mesket.5728:

GW1 AI > GW2.

GW2 took such a HUGE step backwards in terms of AI, its even worst than its own predecessor. I really hope it gets better but after 2 years I don’t have much hope it will ever be anything close to GW1.

yup i must agree.

GW1 AI > GW2 AI

mobs in GW1 resurrect their dead allies.

Well, a bit early to get all hyped up as we can not be sure what this is about, but improving general enemy AI would be a huge step forward for this game.

RoyalPredator.9163:

Wanderer.3248:

RoyalPredator.9163:

I don’t really think…

Animations don’t help when you can literally run circles around the enemy.

They can. If the skill that they use includes a CC, or a target-lock leap/something, running around them wouldn’t be a problem. All they need to know is when use and what of good stat/animated skills. Like if you run around it, the AI says “yay, didn’t hit the player for like 6 seconds, let’s leap on its face” – or “Arrgh, this one tries to kite me, let’s CHARGE-locked” – or “Hey hey hey he knocked me down and damages me heavy! Retreat strafe back, block, if gets close just kick it awaaaay!”

Kind of

If you’d changed an existing skill or add a new one to have that functionality that would not be a real AI change, but what you are describing could be a textbook example of AI. Also, the animation of a skill has no effect on how it works, only on how it looks and possibly on how players react to the skill. I find it funny how you say AI changes are not needed and then describe an AI change as a possible “alternative”, I think you actually agree with the sentiment in this thread without being aware of it.