Quantcast

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Worlds first ever RPG with 'dungeon master ai' and 'story engine' in the works

2»

Comments

  • VrikaVrika Member EpicPosts: 6,428
    anemo said:
    I'ts called Procedural generated games. ring a bell?
    Most procedurally generated games only really have the ability to "generate" at the start of world generation.   The ability to realize that it needs to increase the number of "crafting encounters" because the player is starting to run out is pretty rare. NPCs realizing that the player likes to get in on "This type of job, so we should get them in on this one",  is also pretty rare for procedurally generated worlds.
    There is stuff like radiant quests in Skyrim, so it's not a new idea.

    Also there are a lot of games that focus on farming, crafting, or manufacturing something that generate you orders to complete.

    The issue is not "ability to realize that it needs to increase the number".  That's really simple programming. The issue is that players get bored because procedurally generated quests aren't fun enough.
    Palebane
     
  • AmatheAmathe Member LegendaryPosts: 7,383
    It's not a real dungeon master AI until it can laugh and cry at the same time when a player cracks a fart in the den.
    cameltosisAlBQuirkykitaradKyleran

    EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests

  • agamennagamenn Member UncommonPosts: 67

    AlBQuirkynewbismxNyctelios
  • agamennagamenn Member UncommonPosts: 67
  • WizardryWizardry Member LegendaryPosts: 17,852
    edited February 2
    The exact opposite of what i am looking for.
    I do not enjoy spending my time inside dungeons,they are bland,boring and look cheap.

    I want an immersive world and not one that simply reacts to my actions.Instead i want the npc's to react realistically,like a character would react in a real world and not something that might look like a tabletop game or something that looks fake.

    Nice play on words "story engine"..haha good one.All these games have stories FFX been my fave story of all time with great characters.They actually seem to be contradicting themselves because a GREAT story would feel realistic and not look like computer code or some "story engine".

    Bottom line is that i am not looking for fancy terms,or devs telling us their game is going to be FUN or they are listening to feedback,game design is both simple and difficult to do well.I just want an immersive world with as many systems as it takes to make the world feel alive and real.I am not looking for a tabletop D&D game because D&D is very dated and not good design anymore.

    Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.

  • WizardryWizardry Member LegendaryPosts: 17,852
    The Q/A seemed like hand picked questions that allowed for meaningless VAGUE answers.I really couldn't care less WHO is working on the game,past accolades have proven VERY little of late with Smedley's and Lord British dudes providing us with  very poor efforts.

    This game is NOT gaining any accolades until i actually see something that looks promising.

    Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.

  • PalebanePalebane Member RarePosts: 3,930
    Sovrath said:
    Mendel said:
    agamenn said:
    "How do they intend to abstract an action they haven't anticipated and coded?"

    In an interview that Julian gave, he said he wants to put in neural network and machine learning to create the AI.

    AI would essentialy take action based on what the developers made it learn, and as it is 'dungeon master' the AI would be only limited to certain things it can do.

    I guess by 'dungeon mater' they mean the AI would create stories for you, basicaly quests - you go into a town and the AI creates a story for you in that town..... you go into a cave instead of a town and the AI creates a story for you in the cave.
    My initial point was that players are inventive, computers aren't.  When faced with a chest that they can't pick, players are likely to try to take the entire chest, or burn the chest, or pour acid in the lock.  What exactly is the UI icon to suggest pouring acid in the lock?  How is that icon distinct from one for pouring water in a lock or pouring acid over the hinges?  That's what is going to be difficult.  Words can be precise and flexible, graphic icons not so much.

    In order for a computer to react to an action, the player needs to first input that action.  Without the ability to input a specific action, even the best computer learning machines can't learn.



    But that's the thing, that's not really hard. As long as it's within the context of what the object can reasonably receive as actions.

    The player comes to the chest. He "can" take it. As long as he/she can carry it. Done. Take it into town. That's not hard to do.

    As far as the lock? Assign the "pick/break/acid/whatever" and then some outcomes with die rolls.

    My guess is that all the actions a player might do will be there. Not hard. Now, "other things" such as fill the lock with feathers or any number of creative things, won't be there. But that's for players to temper their expectations.
    Thats all been done before. Thousands of times. Part of the problem is that people have tempered their expectations too much already, imo.

    Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.

  • AlBQuirkyAlBQuirky Member EpicPosts: 6,250
    "Library of Logos" - My first thought was "Massive Lore Dump."

    Sovrath said:
    Mendel said:
    agamenn said:
    "How do they intend to abstract an action they haven't anticipated and coded?"

    In an interview that Julian gave, he said he wants to put in neural network and machine learning to create the AI.

    AI would essentialy take action based on what the developers made it learn, and as it is 'dungeon master' the AI would be only limited to certain things it can do.

    I guess by 'dungeon mater' they mean the AI would create stories for you, basicaly quests - you go into a town and the AI creates a story for you in that town..... you go into a cave instead of a town and the AI creates a story for you in the cave.
    My initial point was that players are inventive, computers aren't.  When faced with a chest that they can't pick, players are likely to try to take the entire chest, or burn the chest, or pour acid in the lock.  What exactly is the UI icon to suggest pouring acid in the lock?  How is that icon distinct from one for pouring water in a lock or pouring acid over the hinges?  That's what is going to be difficult.  Words can be precise and flexible, graphic icons not so much.

    In order for a computer to react to an action, the player needs to first input that action.  Without the ability to input a specific action, even the best computer learning machines can't learn.



    But that's the thing, that's not really hard. As long as it's within the context of what the object can reasonably receive as actions.

    The player comes to the chest. He "can" take it. As long as he/she can carry it. Done. Take it into town. That's not hard to do.

    As far as the lock? Assign the "pick/break/acid/whatever" and then some outcomes with die rolls.

    My guess is that all the actions a player might do will be there. Not hard. Now, "other things" such as fill the lock with feathers or any number of creative things, won't be there. But that's for players to temper their expectations.
    I missed this before. How does one code "whatever?" That's what Mendel is talking about. Also, taking a chest can be as easy comparing weight carried vs weight of chest, or as complicated as to how to move it, like dragging it, carrying it, carried between 2 people, in a cart.

    How many ways can you think of to open a door? Knock? Pick a lock, if locked? Break it down? Simply turn the handle? How about tunneling under it? Maybe remove the hinges? I have a spell that turns rock to mud, so I make the walls on either side of the door turn to mud. And this is just one person using 1 minute to think about this. How many more ways will thousands of other players think of, that coders just can't cover?

    One of the things I like about watching D&D streams is how players use the same spells, skills, or abilities that other players have in new and inventive ways. AI is unable to cope with that :)

    Players constantly talk about what games DON'T allow them to do. This is because whatever action happens, there must be code to handle that action. If it's not coded, it can't happen, or most of the time just ignored by the game.

    Also AI can't "intuit" things, nor read subtlety into conversations. At least not at present :)
    MendelnewbismxPalebane

    - Al

    Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.
    - FARGIN_WAR


  • AdamantineAdamantine Member RarePosts: 4,430
    Frankly ? Meh.

    Procedually generated content cannot have the quality of handcrafted content.

    No matter how complex you make such a random generator, the computer doesnt even have the first clue about actual originality. So you will necessarily see the same things happen over and over. Sooner or later it will be boring.

    AlBQuirky
    Please set a sig so I can read your posting even if somebody "agreed" etc with it. Thanks.
  • KajidourdenKajidourden Member EpicPosts: 3,025
    Frankly ? Meh.

    Procedually generated content cannot have the quality of handcrafted content.

    No matter how complex you make such a random generator, the computer doesnt even have the first clue about actual originality. So you will necessarily see the same things happen over and over. Sooner or later it will be boring.

    And even if they did manage to pull it off it would just push people away because they can't figure out how to beat encounters lol.
    AlBQuirky
  • MaridMarid Member UncommonPosts: 128
    Can someone explain why we can't have both procedurally generated content and manually generated content in the same game? FUNCOM did it nearly 20 years ago in Anarchy Online...a modern MMO should have both, and it should be 10x better than it was back then. I just don't understand this "either/or" mentality.
    newbismxAlBQuirkyPalebane
  • SovrathSovrath Member LegendaryPosts: 28,621
    edited February 4
    AlBQuirky said:
    "Library of Logos" - My first thought was "Massive Lore Dump."

    Sovrath said:
    Mendel said:
    agamenn said:
    "How do they intend to abstract an action they haven't anticipated and coded?"

    In an interview that Julian gave, he said he wants to put in neural network and machine learning to create the AI.

    AI would essentialy take action based on what the developers made it learn, and as it is 'dungeon master' the AI would be only limited to certain things it can do.

    I guess by 'dungeon mater' they mean the AI would create stories for you, basicaly quests - you go into a town and the AI creates a story for you in that town..... you go into a cave instead of a town and the AI creates a story for you in the cave.
    My initial point was that players are inventive, computers aren't.  When faced with a chest that they can't pick, players are likely to try to take the entire chest, or burn the chest, or pour acid in the lock.  What exactly is the UI icon to suggest pouring acid in the lock?  How is that icon distinct from one for pouring water in a lock or pouring acid over the hinges?  That's what is going to be difficult.  Words can be precise and flexible, graphic icons not so much.

    In order for a computer to react to an action, the player needs to first input that action.  Without the ability to input a specific action, even the best computer learning machines can't learn.



    But that's the thing, that's not really hard. As long as it's within the context of what the object can reasonably receive as actions.

    The player comes to the chest. He "can" take it. As long as he/she can carry it. Done. Take it into town. That's not hard to do.

    As far as the lock? Assign the "pick/break/acid/whatever" and then some outcomes with die rolls.

    My guess is that all the actions a player might do will be there. Not hard. Now, "other things" such as fill the lock with feathers or any number of creative things, won't be there. But that's for players to temper their expectations.
    I missed this before. How does one code "whatever?" That's what Mendel is talking about. Also, taking a chest can be as easy comparing weight carried vs weight of chest, or as complicated as to how to move it, like dragging it, carrying it, carried between 2 people, in a cart.

    How many ways can you think of to open a door? Knock? Pick a lock, if locked? Break it down? Simply turn the handle? How about tunneling under it? Maybe remove the hinges? I have a spell that turns rock to mud, so I make the walls on either side of the door turn to mud. And this is just one person using 1 minute to think about this. How many more ways will thousands of other players think of, that coders just can't cover?

    One of the things I like about watching D&D streams is how players use the same spells, skills, or abilities that other players have in new and inventive ways. AI is unable to cope with that :)

    Players constantly talk about what games DON'T allow them to do. This is because whatever action happens, there must be code to handle that action. If it's not coded, it can't happen, or most of the time just ignored by the game.

    Also AI can't "intuit" things, nor read subtlety into conversations. At least not at present :)
    Again, players are overthinking. There aren't that many ways to open a door given your example above.

    Not that many ways to carry a chest. we aren't talking about 100 options and 100 options aren't needed.

    And to add, sure, players can use spells (given a fantasy setting) a variety of different ways but dungeon masters do make decisions on what players can and can't do.

    You aren't going to use a light spell to open a door. I still don't think this is as hard as players want it to be. 


    AlBQuirkyKyleran
  • AlBQuirkyAlBQuirky Member EpicPosts: 6,250
    edited February 4
    Sovrath said:
    AlBQuirky said:
    "Library of Logos" - My first thought was "Massive Lore Dump."

    Sovrath said:
    Mendel said:
    agamenn said:
    "How do they intend to abstract an action they haven't anticipated and coded?"

    In an interview that Julian gave, he said he wants to put in neural network and machine learning to create the AI.

    AI would essentialy take action based on what the developers made it learn, and as it is 'dungeon master' the AI would be only limited to certain things it can do.

    I guess by 'dungeon mater' they mean the AI would create stories for you, basicaly quests - you go into a town and the AI creates a story for you in that town..... you go into a cave instead of a town and the AI creates a story for you in the cave.
    My initial point was that players are inventive, computers aren't.  When faced with a chest that they can't pick, players are likely to try to take the entire chest, or burn the chest, or pour acid in the lock.  What exactly is the UI icon to suggest pouring acid in the lock?  How is that icon distinct from one for pouring water in a lock or pouring acid over the hinges?  That's what is going to be difficult.  Words can be precise and flexible, graphic icons not so much.

    In order for a computer to react to an action, the player needs to first input that action.  Without the ability to input a specific action, even the best computer learning machines can't learn.



    But that's the thing, that's not really hard. As long as it's within the context of what the object can reasonably receive as actions.

    The player comes to the chest. He "can" take it. As long as he/she can carry it. Done. Take it into town. That's not hard to do.

    As far as the lock? Assign the "pick/break/acid/whatever" and then some outcomes with die rolls.

    My guess is that all the actions a player might do will be there. Not hard. Now, "other things" such as fill the lock with feathers or any number of creative things, won't be there. But that's for players to temper their expectations.
    I missed this before. How does one code "whatever?" That's what Mendel is talking about. Also, taking a chest can be as easy comparing weight carried vs weight of chest, or as complicated as to how to move it, like dragging it, carrying it, carried between 2 people, in a cart.

    How many ways can you think of to open a door? Knock? Pick a lock, if locked? Break it down? Simply turn the handle? How about tunneling under it? Maybe remove the hinges? I have a spell that turns rock to mud, so I make the walls on either side of the door turn to mud. And this is just one person using 1 minute to think about this. How many more ways will thousands of other players think of, that coders just can't cover?

    One of the things I like about watching D&D streams is how players use the same spells, skills, or abilities that other players have in new and inventive ways. AI is unable to cope with that :)

    Players constantly talk about what games DON'T allow them to do. This is because whatever action happens, there must be code to handle that action. If it's not coded, it can't happen, or most of the time just ignored by the game.

    Also AI can't "intuit" things, nor read subtlety into conversations. At least not at present :)
    Again, players are overthinking. There aren't that many ways to open a door given your example above.

    Not that many ways to carry a chest. we aren't talking about 100 options and 100 options aren't needed.

    And to add, sure, players can use spells (given a fantasy setting) a variety of different ways but dungeon masters do make decisions on what players can and can't do.

    You aren't going to use a light spell to open a door. I still don't think this is as hard as players want it to be. 


    I see what you're saying. There are certainly some combinations of actions that just won't work. If you want it to feel like a "live DM", those have to be coded in, too.

    I used to watch Critical Role and my favorite line of their DM is, "You can certainly try..." when his players describe what they want to accomplish. Then, he breaks down their actions and decides how to resolve it with dice rolls.

    If you think about it, game makers want "other players" to test their games because they bring in new ways to look at things. These players will try things the devs never thought of. Good testers seek ways to break the games they're testing. The devs can't possibly foresee every possibility, is what I'm getting at. Yes, there are certain actions that have a finite list of possibilities, but what about those actions that don't?

    - Al

    Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.
    - FARGIN_WAR


  • SovrathSovrath Member LegendaryPosts: 28,621
    AlBQuirky said:
    Sovrath said:
    AlBQuirky said:
    "Library of Logos" - My first thought was "Massive Lore Dump."

    Sovrath said:
    Mendel said:
    agamenn said:
    "How do they intend to abstract an action they haven't anticipated and coded?"

    In an interview that Julian gave, he said he wants to put in neural network and machine learning to create the AI.

    AI would essentialy take action based on what the developers made it learn, and as it is 'dungeon master' the AI would be only limited to certain things it can do.

    I guess by 'dungeon mater' they mean the AI would create stories for you, basicaly quests - you go into a town and the AI creates a story for you in that town..... you go into a cave instead of a town and the AI creates a story for you in the cave.
    My initial point was that players are inventive, computers aren't.  When faced with a chest that they can't pick, players are likely to try to take the entire chest, or burn the chest, or pour acid in the lock.  What exactly is the UI icon to suggest pouring acid in the lock?  How is that icon distinct from one for pouring water in a lock or pouring acid over the hinges?  That's what is going to be difficult.  Words can be precise and flexible, graphic icons not so much.

    In order for a computer to react to an action, the player needs to first input that action.  Without the ability to input a specific action, even the best computer learning machines can't learn.



    But that's the thing, that's not really hard. As long as it's within the context of what the object can reasonably receive as actions.

    The player comes to the chest. He "can" take it. As long as he/she can carry it. Done. Take it into town. That's not hard to do.

    As far as the lock? Assign the "pick/break/acid/whatever" and then some outcomes with die rolls.

    My guess is that all the actions a player might do will be there. Not hard. Now, "other things" such as fill the lock with feathers or any number of creative things, won't be there. But that's for players to temper their expectations.
    I missed this before. How does one code "whatever?" That's what Mendel is talking about. Also, taking a chest can be as easy comparing weight carried vs weight of chest, or as complicated as to how to move it, like dragging it, carrying it, carried between 2 people, in a cart.

    How many ways can you think of to open a door? Knock? Pick a lock, if locked? Break it down? Simply turn the handle? How about tunneling under it? Maybe remove the hinges? I have a spell that turns rock to mud, so I make the walls on either side of the door turn to mud. And this is just one person using 1 minute to think about this. How many more ways will thousands of other players think of, that coders just can't cover?

    One of the things I like about watching D&D streams is how players use the same spells, skills, or abilities that other players have in new and inventive ways. AI is unable to cope with that :)

    Players constantly talk about what games DON'T allow them to do. This is because whatever action happens, there must be code to handle that action. If it's not coded, it can't happen, or most of the time just ignored by the game.

    Also AI can't "intuit" things, nor read subtlety into conversations. At least not at present :)
    Again, players are overthinking. There aren't that many ways to open a door given your example above.

    Not that many ways to carry a chest. we aren't talking about 100 options and 100 options aren't needed.

    And to add, sure, players can use spells (given a fantasy setting) a variety of different ways but dungeon masters do make decisions on what players can and can't do.

    You aren't going to use a light spell to open a door. I still don't think this is as hard as players want it to be. 


    I see what you're saying. There are certainly some combinations of actions that just won't work. If you want it to feel like a "live DM", those have to be coded in, too.

    I used to watch Critical Role and my favorite line of their DM is, "You can certainly try..." when his players describe what they want to accomplish. Then, he breaks down their actions and decides how to resolve it with dice rolls.

    If you think about it, game makers want "other players" to test their games because they bring in new ways to look at things. These players will try things the devs never thought of. Good testers seek ways to break the games they're testing. The devs can't possibly foresee every possibility, is what I'm getting at. Yes, there are certain actions that have a finite list of possibilities, but what about those actions that don't?
    I think the best way for any developer is to define how any object can have an interaction.

    Then, during initial testing they can see where players want to deviate from that.

    Additionally every object has its properties including what it's made of.

    At some point all the mundane or "usual" things will be covered and they can decide how the unusual will be applied.

    outside of a certain set of parameters there can be a message indicating "you x but nothing happens"

    "x" being what you did.

    There are only so many things that one can do with an object. Provided that each object has its parameters defined, including weight/mass, it shouldn't be an issue to cover "what can be done."

    I think, per the point that a lot of non-game players are always disappointed to discover they can't do something (this is true from my experience) I think the larger issue is that the games they play aren't about a player doing certain things.

    But if, besides story, the developers include player interaction with the environment, a good many things can be covered.




    AlBQuirky
  • TheocritusTheocritus Member EpicPosts: 7,671
    Well if that DM is anything like the real ones then get ready for full on suck....No you can use a spell because players are in the way, no you cant shoot an arrow there, no no no no NO!
    AlBQuirkyKyleran
  • centkincentkin Member RarePosts: 1,526
    They need to show him as a little guy with big feet aka the cartoon.
    AlBQuirky
  • agamennagamenn Member UncommonPosts: 67
    New video


    KyleranAlBQuirky
  • KyleranKyleran Member LegendaryPosts: 36,357
    My only experience with AD&D is on a PC, and I'm guessing same is true for a larger portion of the gaming market. 

    While these folks will not easily be able to recreate the table top experience I think it's quite possible they can provide a significant improvement to what I am familar with, so it could be fun, at least for gamers like me.

    Besides,  it will greatly appeal to solo players who have zero interest in gathering around a table to socialize. (Isn't that what bars are for?)

    ;)


    AlBQuirky

    "See normal people, I'm not one of them" | G-Easy & Big Sean

    "I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant

    Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing FO76 at the moment.

    Fools find no pleasure in understanding, but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV

    Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™

    "This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon






  • NycteliosNyctelios Member EpicPosts: 3,818
    edited March 3
    Well if that DM is anything like the real ones then get ready for full on suck....No you can use a spell because players are in the way, no you cant shoot an arrow there, no no no no NO!
    You need a better DM.

    No DM should ever say yes nor no. He just narrates the consequences of players actions. He can't dictate what they should do.



    About the project.

    Text based Dungeon Master AI exists and it sucks... a lot. 2 lines deep and it already breaks - and it is considered a 'masterpiece' (I can't imagine how). It forget genders, roles, key elements and so on. And, it makes the same mistake that begginers commit (which makes me think is more a mentality rather than lack of experience): It forces you to follow his story.


    RPG is about doing 'whatever you want and facing the consequences'. Besides Larian Studios, companies are sure forgetting that. RPG is not about levels, nor equipment, nor spending points in skills. RPG stands for Role Playing Game - people should repeat that out loud more often... because it seems they forgot.
    AlBQuirky
    Steam ID Discord ID: Night # 6102 - GoG ID - 

    Current playing: 
    Final Fantasy XIV: A Realm Reborn - Shadowbringers; EvE Online

    "There is a fine line between consideration and hesitation. The former is wisdom, the latter is fear." Izaro Phrecius, Holy Emperor of the Eternal Empire, Last of Royal Phrecius Family.
Sign In or Register to comment.