With some curiosity, i've been following stardock's progress on their latest edition of their 'popular' SF 4x :P. Especially with the addition of an AI that helps with creating unique races with a couple of lines of text input, the game seems to be on the forefront of using this technology in gaming. Oh, i'm talking about Galactiv Civilization IV, and its beta released DLC addition called supernova (available today)

Personally, i can't wait for the arrival of some more human approached opponents in many strategy titles (if that will ever be the aim O.O ;) ) but i do wonder. Are others as eager to be confronted with an AI in their favourite genre's as I am? Or is this an development that should be approached with a lot of care.... seeing how gaming in its self fits perfectly in behavioural patterns of people who are from an character approach easy targets to addiction?

Did you say Stardock ? I avoid that developer like plague .

Various types of heuristic algorithms have been around for ages in the "AIs"/computer opponents of RTS/TBS games. If you mean neural network AIs, then no, I'm not eager for them at all. Because you need to train them in order to get anything good and to train them you need a large dataset of games played by actual human opponents. So that means DRMed multiplayer and snooping in on user activity. Not my cup of joe.

AI for opponents and recent trend with AI used for generating quests, dialogs or NPC's which currently many people experiment with (most notably modders for games like Bannerlord or ArmA 3 but also Bethesda announced using this technology in future games) are two very different and unrelated things. I know nothing about GalCiv IV and not sure which one OP refers to but sentence about creating unique races suggests the latter.

I can see that as potentially appealing in space 4X game, assuming the generator would impact not only largely meaningless look and flavor texts of such races but also their actual technologies, abilities etc.

Maybe i'm looking at it with too much pink in the glasses. Take for example a game such as Total War Warhammer 3 where all the individual races behave like they are described in the novels. The orcs and skaven for example, or Knights of Brettonia both on a strategic and tactical plane. Orcs just looking for bloodshed anywhere etc all with a coherent (as much as possible) flavoured experience. No more loopholes that can be easily exploited outside racial weakness etc etc.

That is what i imagine when i foresee an ai future in my mind <3

Another post earlier this week made me think about a 1984 wargame that included several (ai) opponent choices that were made diverse. You had the rusher, the thinker, the in between, the fanaticist, the essentialist etc etc..... It seems that current games or maybe the games released in the past 2 decades have become so complex from a certain point of view that the developers only manage to guarantee a playthrough as they envision with cutting back on the complexity of the ai opponents

So do I. Thankfully, I'm not interested in their games also, so it's rather easy to give them shit for their predatory business practices. If you look at character and creature design in the past, at design icons like H. R. Giger, Terryl Whitlatch, Jim Henson, Ray Harryhausen etc., you'll find that an AI will not create anything new, it will scavenge the huge database that is the internet for bits and pieces and assembles those to something new.

This is a design process that eliminates most of all the human, empathetic, creative and therewith "intelligent" parts. The machine does not think, it does not understand. Neuronal networks mean reassembling from a vast database. The machine does not understand the art it creates, and never will.

I guess such a process is just about enough for bland strategy games from developers who'd rather not even hire artistic talent as those tend to need reimbursement.

Which is why Brad W. of course never intended to hire Shredded Moose, but that might lead us too far off topic.

You don't need a full fledged (neural network) AI for that really. Unit "AI"s with specific behavior have been around in some games since like forever also. For example in the Close Combat series units may ignore your orders and act on their own, however they see fit, based on morale (that includes jumping too eagerly into combat or fleeing like cowards).

I guess in some games it may be beneficial to have a (neural network) AI as a game-master, to fine tune the world and behavior of other units for better realism, but the benefits are debatable. As I said you'd still need to train it on actual game data so that it knows what a "good game" is and how to adjust everything, and that involves data collection and snooping about.

Race creation sometimes feels like a whole subgenre in 4x gaming though

I do have another standpoint involving that snooping around though i'm certainly not saying that i am less biased or more able to judge in a manner of speaking. That said, i do feel that the creation of a sorts of game-master could ultimately benefit but only if the society progresses in an equal manner healthy manner. (sjeezzz...) for now i'll stick to my pink glasses and with the eternal hope that within my lifetime i do manage to encounter something of my dream :P

I've read a lot about what's possible today and I'm now more convinced that this hits the hammer on the head and destroys the whole idea of an artificial "intelligence" at work here.

The machine reassembles shreds of artwork that it has stolen from the internet.

Bizarrely enough, that is the only thing an "AI" is able to do.

A perfect fit for Stardock! May Brad eat his own medicine and be buried miles deep in the earth under copyright claims.

Anyone see the dumb as shit AI in No Man's Sky ? It creates new animal life forms that are impossible, even on planets where life is impossible. You cannot have life on a planet with boiling atmosphere.

But, it's a game, and not real life. That is why games can be fun, because they can be (and usually are) far removed from reality.

So.... i am curious. What is your bang with Stardock products?

Just took a scroll around the internet and most complaints seem to be aimed at Stardocks choice of handling customer support through their forum.

Personally i did had a bad experience with Galciv III both with the game and support received through the steam page. It does seem fair to say that the bad support experience could be blamed on both sides..... Let's leave it at unruly customer with unfair demands coupled with young egotastic support care taker. We all know that is a recipe for trouble.
Concerning the game.
I guess it was also the time spirit. Quantity over Quality.........

Are they really calling that "AI"? That's just another variant of "procedural generation".

Don't tell me you are mad at me for mentioning the company Stardock in public (in a non-negative manner)

(no worries though, i'm just speculating after noticing you seem resistant to answering any of my directly aimed questions/comments on your input)