Can AI fighters ever find peace?

Quake 3 bots column

The question of how smart can artificial-intelligence become is often at the core of any technological advancement, and after an “experiment” using Quake 3’s “adaptive” AI (which did prove to be fake), video games could provide the answer.

The original story came through a mysterious message board thread, which was posted to Imgur. The image showed a discussion where a gamer had claimed to be running a Quake 3 Arena simulation for four years. The original poster said that the bots, which had been killing each other for quite some time, had come to a complete standstill.

The assumption was made that the bots “learned” that fighting would end in a looping stalemate, and instead opted for peace.

The poster also claimed that the AI file for each bot was 512mb after learning, with an accumulated 8GB of tactical information learned over the four years.

“They would rotate to look at me,” said the original poster, who claimed to have jumped into the game and tried to get a reaction. “I walked around a little bit and they all just kept looking at me.”

The poster then fired a gun, and the bots “all ran for the nearest weapons, took me down and the server crashed”.

After the story caused a bit of a buzz, it came out that it was actually a joke from 4Chan; but, it does raise an interesting question.

Could AI non-playable characters adapt beyond their traditional programming models? Do you think bots could “learn” to understand the limitations of a game? It may be a stretch, but let us know what you think in the comments section and the MyGaming forums.

Source: Huffington Post

More gaming news:

Unreal Tournament bots show 50% “humanness”

Five scary robots designed by Boston Dynamics

Human Rights Watch wants to ban “killer robots”

Forum discussion

Related posts

  • Cyb0rt3x

    Source : 4chan

    RIP journalism.

    “Stock Quake 3 bots don’t use neural networks, folks.” – John Carmack (@ID_AA_Carmack)

  • Lycanthrope

    “Thought experiment.” I know it’s difficult for some people to actually read the articles, but for the love of reason, try.

  • Lycanthrope

    Despite it having been a hoax/joke I find the idea interesting to think about.

  • Rickster

    Wow, this is incredible, very interesting.

  • ArchieChoke

    My complete noob answer:-

    Looking at some Scripts and stuff of other game engines generating AI.I do not think that its possible as it is confined within a Readonly environment, where it only reads its behaviour and actions it based on some other information. Could be possible if there was a data store of situations developed during play, but then again,if the AI’s ultimate goal is to win with High K/D then i think then its just a matter of the programmer returning player information back to the AI giving it info on current position of said player.

    I think i should watch Hitch hikers guide.

    /Sits back and think do i know what im talking about really?

  • Cyb0rt3x

    I read the source post, actually, as well as this “article”. There was no experiment, only a troll post on 4chan.

    The question posed in the article is “Could AI non-playable characters adapt beyond their traditional programming models?”

    The answer is no, Carmack confirmed it. /thread.

    I know it’s difficult for some people to actually understand the whole picture, but for the love of reason, try.

  • James Etherington-Smith

    The question posed in the article is “Could AI non-playable characters adapt beyond their traditional programming models?”

    Carmack obviously answered a different question: “Stock Quake 3 bots don’t use neural networks, folks.” – John Carmack.

    So, your assertion that Carmack answered the question posed by our article is demonstrably false.

    This story was posted as a column, and it was made very clear at two points that the original story was a ruse, although an interesting one. We took that notion further and posed the question to our readers to stimulate conversation.

    Thought experiment defined:

  • Lycanthrope

    Comprehension… Some people get it… some people don’t. You, don’t.

    I wonder if, at the very least, you’ll be able to comprehend what James has written or if that, too, will fly straight over your head.

  • UltimateNinjaPandaDudeGuy

    lol! I was wondering if this was going to show up here! Epic story!

  • Jeremy Proome

    Haha, I get your point! 😛 The answer is 42!

  • Jeremy Proome

    Exactly :) Very interesting concept

  • Cyb0rt3x

    You must be really fun at parties

  • Cyb0rt3x

    I am well aware of the question posed, and by no means am I refuting the fact that this is a discussion around the question Jeremy has raised.

    Indeed it is an interesting question, the merits of such an abstract concept notwithstanding, however in the case of the quake3 bots it is little more than a fun bit of hyperbole.

    Perhaps I was rather harsh in my original critique, no offense was intended to the aforementioned.

    However contrary to your hastily dismissal of my argument, Carmack’s statement still rings true.

    “Could AI non-playable characters adapt beyond their traditional programming models?”

    No, they cannot. Anyone with even the most basic of programming knowledge, or indeed even someone whom rigorously observes logic and reasoning would know that it is not possible.

    Fun? Sure. Discussion value? Perhaps. Possible? No.

    Thank you for your link to the Wikipedia “Thought Experiement” page, as you already appear to be highly adept at google, I would recommend searching for “foundation of artificial intelligence” for your further perusal.

  • VirtualForce

    First sign I knew something was up was when I read “claimed to be running a Quake 3 Arena simulation for four years.”
    lol, sure. 4 years…

  • The Rich

    Somehow, you just took a copypasta comment that has been hilarious every time I’ve seen it used elsewhere, and made it the most unfunny thing I’ve read in all eternity and I think a part of me just died.

  • The Rich

    You win. We can all go home now.

  • The Rich

    Tl;dr. But I did notice quite a few big words in there. You sound like an ANC politician, spouting big words in the hope that your pseudo-intellectualism will overwhelm and confound us to such an extent that we’ll overlook the fact that your response is about as intelligent as the stress ball sitting on my desk.

  • Cyb0rt3x

    Your argument is about as sound as a potato.