A big complaint leveled at Halo 4 and Halo 5 are it’s bland, uninteresting, and repetitive enemy AI. However, I have an idea that will solve all those problems in Halo: Infinite(Halo 6, probably) while also enhancing replayability of the game. This idea should be easy to implement, as far as my greater-than-average, but still amateur, understanding of game design can tell. This idea is a new system that handles AI behavior, and features three phases:
-
Evaluate At random intervals during combat, the AI will evaluate the situation it/they are in. How many enemies they’re facing, what weapons they(and their enemies) have, and what types of allies are nearby for example.
-
Decide Once evaluated, they will then choose from a pre-programmed, comprehensive(but not massive) list of different strategies to enact, choosing only from ones that are compatible with the weapons and allies they have available.
-
Act They then will act on their strategy.**What do I mean by different strategies?**Here’s a few ideas:
-
If more than one Jackal with an energy-shield is present, the AI could decide to form a Jackal Phalanx, in which they stand close-together, their shields providing overlapping protection as they slowly advance toward the player and his/her allies. (Remember when they did that in the Halo 2 E3 demo from 2003?)
-
If an Elite is present and that Elite’s shields go down, it’s allies could provide Cover Fire, in which the Elite flees to cover for it’s shields to recharge while all other enemies in the area begin to fire quickly and sporadically at the player.
-
If two Elites are present, they could engage in Alternating Fire, in which one Elite will fire it’s weapon until it overheats, then the other elite would fire it’s weapon until it overheats, and this would repeat with one Elite firing while the other’s weapon cools down.In addition to new ideas like that, a few familiar events could be rolled into this new system:
-
If an Elite is killed and a grunt (or more) is nearby, that grunt could decide to Kamikaze, in which it performs the classic tactic of rushing at the player with active grenades.
-
If an Elite’s shields go down, it could choose to become Enraged, engaging an energy sword and charging at the player.
-
If a Grunt feels it isn’t in danger(most likely right as it spawns, before players get to it), it could choose to Nap, as-is so common for Grunts to do.This idea could even be extended to enemy vehicles, including dropships:
-
In the common scenario where a phantom or spirit arrives to deliver troops, the types of enemies it drops off could be randomized, based on specific situations. If the player has a rocket launcher, for example, it could randomly(but not be guaranteed to) drop off a Pair of Hunters.
-
If several Banshees are present, they could choose to Fly in Formation, and perform coordinated strafing runs.
-
If a ghost is present, it could choose to attempt to Ram the player.A few additional notes:
-
If wanting to take it further, this idea could also be used to choose which enemies to spawn and which weapons they have, thereby making each playthrough unique. - Specific, open locations could be designated as “Dropship-Accessible”, at which point the game could choose whether to spawn a dropship or not. - This system could be fitted to handle dialogue and non-combat scripted events as well(remember when Crawlers would attempt to drag bodies? Remember that one Sunaion grunt that was on fire?) - This could work for all factions, including Prometheans, Flood, Covenant, and even the player’s allies.In closing, I feel this system would be perfect for replayability by making the AI dynamic and interesting to fight and by making each playthrough unique. However, in order for this system to work, a pretty comprehensive list would need to be devised for a variety of scenarios to ensure it isn’t entirely predictable.
What are your thoughts? Any ideas for additional strategies that could be implemented? Post them here!
> 2533274974033696;1:
>
Because it’s a.I it’s hard to tweak it to a human style of anticipation and thinking.Humans soldiers would usually sweep areas and have constant communication and work as a unit while video game a.i’'s dont really do any of that
> 2533274830166194;2:
> > 2533274974033696;1:
> >
>
> Because it’s a.I it’s hard to tweak it to a human style of anticipation and thinking.Humans soldiers would usually sweep areas and have constant communication and work as a unit while video game a.i’'s dont really do any of that
It doesn’t have to be constant. As I said, it would be done at random times in random intervals - in between these intervals, the AI would perform as it normally does by running around and shooting. Computers are already fully capable of taking several inputs and then choosing from a list, so we’re capable of a system like, if not identical to, this idea.
> 2533274974033696;3:
> > 2533274830166194;2:
> > > 2533274974033696;1:
> > >
> >
> > Because it’s a.I it’s hard to tweak it to a human style of anticipation and thinking.Humans soldiers would usually sweep areas and have constant communication and work as a unit while video game a.i’'s dont really do any of that
>
> It doesn’t have to be constant. As I said, it would be done at random times in random intervals - in between these intervals, the AI would perform as it normally does by running around and shooting. Computers are already fully capable of taking several inputs and then choosing from a list, so we’re capable of a system like, if not identical to, this idea.
That would be weird though,a.i’'s being hyper aggressive sometimes but not other times
I think you hugely underestimate how complex programming AI can be.
> 2533274796457055;5:
> I think you hugely underestimate how complex programming AI can be.
I understand it can be complex, certainly, but I also understand that Halo needs better AI. Shouldn’t we always strive for better, no matter how complicated it may be? They’ve got the basics down already. Regardless, it’s a good idea, isn’t it? We don’t HAVE to immediately destroy good ideas because they aren’t feasible…
> 2533274830166194;4:
> > 2533274974033696;3:
> >
>
> That would be weird though,a.i’'s being hyper aggressive sometimes but not other times
That’s… what they already do, though. Just without logic or reason.
I still believe that Halo’s AI should be outsourced to another company. Yes, programming AI is a very difficult thing to do, but there are plenty of other companies who can do it well. As talented as the people at 343 are, making good AI just isn’t their strong suit.
The AI for the Halo series has always been terrible. Look at Halo 3 for example, on Tsavo highway Marines frequently act in stupid ways and will often times not recognize warthogs as valid entities. In my opinion the AI has slightly improved in the new games. Does it still need work? Yes, and alot of it. I think the AI just needs to be given a higher degree of freedom in it’s logic, perhaps even allow it to have some machine learning elements so it makes smarter choices the longer you play.
> 2533274902628105;8:
> The AI for the Halo series has always been terrible. Look at Halo 3 for example, on Tsavo highway Marines frequently act in stupid ways and will often times not recognize warthogs as valid entities. In my opinion the AI has slightly improved in the new games. Does it still need work? Yes, and alot of it. I think the AI just needs to be given a higher degree of freedom in it’s logic, perhaps even allow it to have some machine learning elements so it makes smarter choices the longer you play.
I completely disagree on this notion!^^’
H4 and H5G both had less complex routines compared to Reach and the prior Halo titles. Reason why Covenants often stood still in the middle of the battle, why suddenly they repeat mistakes in a row while that wasn’t the case prior outside of Firefight, why they react less to comrades and why they had to add homing projectiles and one-hit melee kills to H5 - 343i had to add difficulty to the game somehow. H2 up to Reach was in another league. The only saving grace in H4’s AI imho was how the enemy units exploited the surroundings. Sadly in the actual battle and race interaction the behavior tree got cut significantly for what I can tell.
Friendly AI though - especially while driving - was always pretty bad sadly. It has its reason however: if your comrades are too good or reactive in battle you (the player) got less targets to shoot at. It needs balance, and that’s a problem pretty much every Halo had, especially in H5G and Reach (as much as I praise the AI overall in the prequel, Bungie downed down Marines and SIII way too much).
I hope 343i will add the following:
- better driving routines in general - letting AI jump everywhere (right now jumping actions are reduced to specific areas or props) - different use of action areas(when you leave a certain zone enemies stop shooting or following you even if they can see you and use covers based on your position. This is especially noticable in HCE, ODST HUB, H3 open levels and the Oni Sword Base mission in Reach)
> 2533274974033696;6:
> > 2533274796457055;5:
> > I think you hugely underestimate how complex programming AI can be.
>
> I understand it can be complex, certainly, but I also understand that Halo needs better AI. Shouldn’t we always strive for better, no matter how complicated it may be? They’ve got the basics down already. Regardless, it’s a good idea, isn’t it? We don’t HAVE to immediately destroy good ideas because they aren’t feasible…
>
>
>
>
> > 2533274830166194;4:
> > > 2533274974033696;3:
> > >
> >
> > That would be weird though,a.i’'s being hyper aggressive sometimes but not other times
>
> That’s… what they already do, though. Just without logic or reason.
Then make them that aggressive all the time
The A.I could better utilize strategic locations in addition to cover. It could also utilize weapons on the battlefield in addition to turrets and vehicles. The A.I could be a bit more aggressive with its flanking and such, the combat has been more like run and stop to shoot from afar rince and repeat occasionally.
The kamikaze grunts and enraged elites really need to make a return for sure. The napping ones could be more for scripted events rather than grunts going to sleep after a while of waiting around.
Not sure about the phalanx though, it could be a bit too noticeable place for a grenade and leave the jackals too little room for grenades, covering vulnerable allies of them could work though.
The vehicles really could use some tactics like distractions and formations more, the ramming has been rather common though, at least for wraiths.
Though i dont think i would like the randomized enemies given the campaign is a story about a certain perspective. The only changing factors i would prefer for enemy placements would be difficulty setting (like last enemies in the beginning room in the ship at the level “truth and reconciliation” in Halo: Combat Evolved ranging from jackals to hunters for example) or easter egg type of things like club errera in Halo: Reach.
And same flanking, strategic positioning and such could go for both allies and enemies. And maybe change with difficulties.
Though surely it would be complex to make such A.I.
I don’t really know how AI function anyways. Haven’t researched how to design a “good” AI. I remember hearing F.E.A.R. had cool AI but idk. It’s not like you can type suggestions into the AI brain matrix and it follows, I think.