AI will spoil any and all sense of immersion

Games Halo Infinite
1

Spartans are supposed to be the best of the best so how come the AI never reflect that? I know it’s just a game but the lore behind Halo paints such a professional picture of the Spartans only to be completely and utterly destroyed by the out of control AI. As ODSTs and marines haven’t gone through Spartan training then I think their AI can be a bit more jittery and relaxed when it comes facing enemies.

In the coming months the specs for the new console(s) are going to come out with this Tflops and that Tflops, with this CPU and that GPU, but whats the point of all that power when the behavior of the AI is just a roll of the dice?

Please 343i let the AI respond to player action rather then leaving it to random actions. Just rein the AI in a bit for Infinite or maybe the harder the difficulty is in the campaign the less random the AI actions are. H5 was a good beginning.

Do players want more control over AI allies in Infinite or just leave it to the Gods?

2

I liked how Reach did it. They were there for story purposes but in gameplay it still felt like it was only you doing everything. They couldn’t die so you didn’t have to worry about reviving them.

3

> 2533275031939856;2:
> I liked how Reach did it. They were there for story purposes but in gameplay it still felt like it was only you doing everything. They couldn’t die so you didn’t have to worry about reviving them.

As long as Blue Team’s still around at least for a while… :<

I’ll still find being able to order two-front attacks on an enemy in 5 to be entertaining though. “You move out over here, I’ll sneak around from behind and grenade 'em in the back!” Sometimes it even worked!

4

> 2533274851812176;1:
> Spartans are supposed to be the best of the best so how come the AI never reflect that? I know it’s just a game but the lore behind Halo paints such a professional picture of the Spartans only to be completely and utterly destroyed by the out of control AI. As ODSTs haven’t gone through Spartan training then I think their AI can be a bit more jittery and relaxed when it comes facing enemies.
>
> In the coming months the specs for the new console(s) are going to come out with this Tflops and that Tflops, with this CPU and that GPU, but whats the point of all that power when the behavior of the AI is just a roll of the dice?
>
> Please 343i let the AI respond to player action rather then leaving it to random actions. Just rein the AI in a bit for Infinite or maybe the harder the difficulty is in the campaign the less random the AI actions are. H5 was a good beginning.
>
> Do players want more control over AI allies in Infinite or just leave it to the Gods?

I say just take them out. I want blue team and Osiris to be in the game for story purposes, but Halo is best played as solo Master Chief. Not relying on anyone. There are some good moments where allied AI make the situation more fun, but they are rare.

I did not like controlling them in Halo 5. It felt like a task to me. I don’t want to have to think about telling other spartans what to do. If they keep it, remove the order aspect and make better AI as you mentioned.

Good allied AI to me is always going to be backup AI though. I don’t want them killing things the whole time. Maybe they can just have a couple missions with allied AI. The rest is Chief on his own.

5

Maybe it’s just an age thing. I’ve only played H5 once and that was on Legendary so I guess I was expecting something different when I found out you had command of a team, only to realize they’re a bunch of AI fruit cakes. Like trying to herd cats, dogs and chickens at the same time. I ignored reviews for 5 years until I’d finished the game this new years day.

When I come home from work I really don’t want to be sticking my neck out for the crazy -Yoink- AI who has the bloody fuel rod gun, and especially on Legendary. It got so annoying that after a while I just sent the team as far back into the map as I could until I’d cleared 70-80% of it.

If Infinite does have any form of AI team/allies then the intelligence has to scale with difficulty.
Play it on easy, hey it’s wild cat city. AI can do what ever it wants like Reach. Play it on Legendary, and your allies are as tight as the core of a Nova bomb…after it’s been detonated. They only break cover when they have a target set. An ally gets in trouble then they must seek cover and are out of action for 10-20-40-60 seconds, much like Elites, leaving them vulnerable to attack, but you don’t need to rescue them which gives a player more time to plan the next move or go it alone for a bit. You command them to go somewhere then they stay there until you triple tap to cancel the order. In theory you could completely lone wolf it if you so wanted.

Would be nice to be able to select different types of AI. Reach, tweaked H5 or the one above.

I don’t mind lone wolf time away from team mates in Infinite but the ally AI really needs an overhaul if teaming up is to be any part of the game.

Maybe I’m a Created sympathiser…

6

AI certainly hasn’t been a top priority for Halo, for most game infact, for a long time.

If I recall, the Halo 5 AI team was 9 people, and I lost count of the graphics people at 30.
Now of course, larger teams doesn’t necessarily mean better things, especially considering AI and Art being two completely different fields.
However, in this instance, I do feel like the graphics part can be toned down, and the AI side, widened.

No matter how fancy they make the graphics, no matter how good the engine is for graphics, that visual part is quickly going to be normalised, while the gameplay underneath all of that is what sticks.

7

Friendly AI is a tricky thing to get right. You want them to be helpful to the player, but not so competent that they play the game for you. Despite its fantastic adverserial AI, the friendly AI has never been Halo’s strongsuit. Furthermore, games that get friendly AI right are often built around very strict game design rules such as the fantastic Republic Commando. Your squad in that game is pretty useful, but only because the entire game is built around squad combat: from the environment all the way to the enemy designs.

In this regard, Republic Command is similar to F.E.A.R: the game is designed in a way that makes the AI look far smarter than it actually is. Halo games have a far more expansive sandbox and thus making tight squad AI is tricky since there so many variables at play: vehicles, divergent weapon types, physics shananigans etc. Mind you, I’m not trying to white knight for 343 here: the squad AI for Halo 5 could definately been better implemented and there is a ton of room for improvement for when (or if) 343 decide to go for a similar approach for Halo:Infinite.

Personally. I’d much rather have Infinite follow the approach of the older Halo games (sans Reach, obv): just the Chief and a motley (and highly expendable) crew of marines/ODSTs. Have Blue Team/Fireteam Osiris delegated to cutscenes as backup in the occassional mission (like the Arbiter or sgt. Johnson).

8

> 2533274870884222;7:
> Friendly AI is a tricky thing to get right. You want them to be helpful to the player, but not so competent that they play the game for you.

Something just struck me.
What if, in most encounters where an AI companion kills an enemy, there’d be a respawn, or refresh wave of sorts.
Say you have twenty enemies to take out, and the AI manage to take out 6 or 7 of them. In a ten second timer, as many enemies the AI killed, a refreshment wave, which makes sense in some form, is delivered to the encounter, in a gameplay logical sense.
Restrictions would have to be implemented of course, if there are say 4 enemies left then that few wouldn’t be refreshed if the AI kills them, among other things.

This way, the player couldn’t rely on the friendlies to play the game, as any AI they do kill is re-instated into the encounter in some manner.
That’d then in its own way contribute somewhat to the larger scale of things during encounters, atleast where it’d make sense for new troops to get there.

9

> 2533274795123910;8:
> > 2533274870884222;7:
> > Friendly AI is a tricky thing to get right. You want them to be helpful to the player, but not so competent that they play the game for you.
>
> Something just struck me.
> What if, in most encounters where an AI companion kills an enemy, there’d be a respawn, or refresh wave of sorts.
> Say you have twenty enemies to take out, and the AI manage to take out 6 or 7 of them. In a ten second timer, as many enemies the AI killed, a refreshment wave, which makes sense in some form, is delivered to the encounter, in a gameplay logical sense.
> Restrictions would have to be implemented of course, if there are say 4 enemies left then that few wouldn’t be refreshed if the AI kills them, among other things.
>
> This way, the player couldn’t rely on the friendlies to play the game, as any AI they do kill is re-instated into the encounter in some manner.
> That’d then in its own way contribute somewhat to the larger scale of things during encounters, atleast where it’d make sense for new troops to get there.

The problem with the proposed approach is that it makes tight encounter design almost impossible. In a traditional Halo encounter you have a set number of enemies and enemy types (can vary based on difficulty levels) and carefully placed tools (weapons and vehicles) tailored so the player can dispatch the opposition in the most efficient way possible. Adding an enemy respawn variable messes with that. Imagine that you are playing on Legendary and you’re almost out of ammo for both weapons. Your AI teammates just killed some more enemies and the game spawns a bunch of Grunt Ultras and Elite Ultras (since this is Legendary and we can’t have nice things).

So you die, because the encounter designer couldn’t predict that you would be out of ammo at this exact moment due to the random variable of AI teammates triggering the respawn system. You could go around this by making sure reinformcements only include low level enemy types, but then what would be the point? KIlling fodder wouldn’t improve the combat encounter, just make it tidious. Also imagine the horror of designing Flood encounters with this reinforcement system in place?

No, I think the only way to make a Halo game where your squad is anything more than “somewhat helpful” is to make it a squad based spin-off tailored around this type of gameplay. It could be, for example, a game where you play as a squad of Spartan 3 Headhunters behind enemy lines with limited resources. Squad AI in Halo:Infinite could be imrpoved over Halo 5, but it wouldn’t be immersively competent.

10

> 2533274795123910;6:
> AI certainly hasn’t been a top priority for Halo, for most game infact, for a long time.
>
> If I recall, the Halo 5 AI team was 9 people, and I lost count of the graphics people at 30.
> Now of course, larger teams doesn’t necessarily mean better things, especially considering AI and Art being two completely different fields.
> However, in this instance, I do feel like the graphics part can be toned down, and the AI side, widened.
>
> No matter how fancy they make the graphics, no matter how good the engine is for graphics, that visual part is quickly going to be normalised, while the gameplay underneath all of that is what sticks.

I’ve read more about the colour of the Chief’s suit in the last reveal than gameplay.

> 2533274870884222;7:
> Friendly AI is a tricky thing to get right. You want them to be helpful to the player, but not so competent that they play the game for you. Despite its fantastic adverserial AI, the friendly AI has never been Halo’s strongsuit. Furthermore, games that get friendly AI right are often built around very strict game design rules such as the fantastic Republic Commando. Your squad in that game is pretty useful, but only because the entire game is built around squad combat: from the environment all the way to the enemy designs.
>
> In this regard, Republic Command is similar to F.E.A.R: the game is designed in a way that makes the AI look far smarter than it actually is. Halo games have a far more expansive sandbox and thus making tight squad AI is tricky since there so many variables at play: vehicles, divergent weapon types, physics shananigans etc. Mind you, I’m not trying to white knight for 343 here: the squad AI for Halo 5 could definately been better implemented and there is a ton of room for improvement for when (or if) 343 decide to go for a similar approach for Halo:Infinite.
>
> Personally. I’d much rather have Infinite follow the approach of the older Halo games (sans Reach, obv): just the Chief and a motley (and highly expendable) crew of marines/ODSTs. Have Blue Team/Fireteam Osiris delegated to cutscenes as backup in the occassional mission (like the Arbiter or sgt. Johnson).

If the Chief is to have any support it might be a good idea to be in an arrow formation with the big guy at the front with support never allowed to get in the firing line unless ordered, be it team mates, ODST , marines and or indestructible guests. Level design will be for single player, but the AI will always be ever so slightly to the side and behind you, giving the player the illusion of a team if they’re an essential part of the story-line at the time.

As for AI aiming imagine a large invisible archery board thing centered around your aim. In the center is 100% and the furthest from center is 20%. AI are not allowed to hit anything in the center, if there are other enemies on the screen, but they can hit anything in the 80-40% zone. This makes AI targeting vaguely based on your aim unless given a target or sent somewhere thereby eliminating the odd random targeting that AI seem to do. The main aim is to assist the player but they won’t play the game for you. It’s all about the illusion of a team.

> 2533274795123910;8:
> > 2533274870884222;7:
> > Friendly AI is a tricky thing to get right. You want them to be helpful to the player, but not so competent that they play the game for you.
>
> Something just struck me.
> What if, in most encounters where an AI companion kills an enemy, there’d be a respawn, or refresh wave of sorts.
> Say you have twenty enemies to take out, and the AI manage to take out 6 or 7 of them. In a ten second timer, as many enemies the AI killed, a refreshment wave, which makes sense in some form, is delivered to the encounter, in a gameplay logical sense.
> Restrictions would have to be implemented of course, if there are say 4 enemies left then that few wouldn’t be refreshed if the AI kills them, among other things.
>
> This way, the player couldn’t rely on the friendlies to play the game, as any AI they do kill is re-instated into the encounter in some manner.
> That’d then in its own way contribute somewhat to the larger scale of things during encounters, atleast where it’d make sense for new troops to get there.

I’ve only ever played MWarfare 4, I think, once, and experienced the power of respawns, and I’ve never played a MW game since because of it. There should never be respawns of any kind in a Halo campaign. I do get where you’re coming from though, but I must agree with NINJAinTIGHTS1. Yeah imagine a flood level :-(.

> 2533274870884222;9:
> > 2533274795123910;8:
> > > 2533274870884222;7:
> > > Friendly AI is a tricky thing to get right. You want them to be helpful to the player, but not so competent that they play the game for you.
> >
> > Something just struck me.
> > What if, in most encounters where an AI companion kills an enemy, there’d be a respawn, or refresh wave of sorts.
> > Say you have twenty enemies to take out, and the AI manage to take out 6 or 7 of them. In a ten second timer, as many enemies the AI killed, a refreshment wave, which makes sense in some form, is delivered to the encounter, in a gameplay logical sense.
> > Restrictions would have to be implemented of course, if there are say 4 enemies left then that few wouldn’t be refreshed if the AI kills them, among other things.
> >
> > This way, the player couldn’t rely on the friendlies to play the game, as any AI they do kill is re-instated into the encounter in some manner.
> > That’d then in its own way contribute somewhat to the larger scale of things during encounters, atleast where it’d make sense for new troops to get there.
>
> So you die, because the encounter designer couldn’t predict that you would be out of ammo at this exact moment due to the random variable of AI teammates triggering the respawn system. You could go around this by making sure reinformcements only include low level enemy types, but then what would be the point? KIlling fodder wouldn’t improve the combat encounter, just make it tidious. Also imagine the horror of designing Flood encounters with this reinforcement system in place?
>
> No, I think the only way to make a Halo game where your squad is anything more than “somewhat helpful” is to make it a squad based spin-off tailored around this type of gameplay. It could be, for example, a game where you play as a squad of Spartan 3 Headhunters behind enemy lines with limited resources. Squad AI in Halo:Infinite could be imrpoved over Halo 5, but it wouldn’t be immersively competent.

I do agree with the spin off team based games but make them as short as possible to help keep the teams at 343 motivated. I’m not talking about another series of Spartan Ops!!

Yes the main thread should be a mainly single player title, and in the years in between those big games could be team based or character development titles. Those games could give 343 a chance to get feedback from new and old fans before piling all resources into the main title incorporating feedback from the spin-off game(s).
Halo 4> Halo:Osiris. Short intro game to Locke and the rest of Osiris and the new squad based AI. Feedback > Halo:Break Down < lame title. Blue Team with Chief starting to get PTSD/hearing voices. >Fine tune/change squad AI and other bits and bobs from feedback which leads to Halo 5. Feedback > Tune AI /character developmental game(s). Cliff hanger > Feedback > Halo Infinite…
Anyway, whatever happens during and after Infinite I hope, if possible, 343 make smaller side games to at least try out new AI teams, and develop characters and story in game before they hit the big titles.