What makes good AI?

[FiftyBelowZero]

In the recent games, GT5 and GT6, one of the usual complaints is the opponent AI. A few people alikened the recent AI to "moving pylons." That's a way to explain them, haha. Other than the speed of their car, the AI travels very slowly, literally brakes in the middle of straights, and follows a bland, inefficient line.

Compare this to earlier games. While the first two games AI weren't great, GT3 and GT4 were definitely impressive. In the two games, the AI cars do not follow an established line (usually) and try to speed around corners as fast as they can. While in GT4, the AI was known to ram you out of the way, the AI drivers in GT3 drove efficiently, with finesse, and try to swerve their way around slower cars. As well, they speed up after you overtake them. While GT4's AI did follow a driving line, it wasn't too inefficient and the opponent racers didn't brake every two seconds.

Other than in B-Spec, GT5's AI was pathetic all through the game, but in GT6, by the time you reach the International B license, AI gets a little more aggressive. It's characterized by beginning to not follow an established driving line, and applying full acceleration more often. Earlier, cars usually let go of acceleration and start braking until they reach 10mph; when there's no need to slow down! Sadly, the AI in Seasonals doesn't get any more aggressive, and every race feels like an overtake challenge. Comparing to DIRT also gives good examples. In all DIRT games, opponents drive "naturally" as if you were playing online, overtaking when possible and only slowing down when necessary.

Good AI isn't completely characterized by how fast and efficiently AI drivers drive; driving errors like running off course also plays a role in making it feel like you're racing against people. In this case, I turn to Forza for comparison. While the AI in Forza drives slowly and in a boring fashion as well, in the fourth installment of the game AI drivers are known to crash into other AI drivers, skid out of control and run off course. If AI has these qualities as well, it makes for realistic, competitive driving.

tl;dr GT3 has the best AI ever

In your opinion, what makes a good opponent AI? Let's brainstorm some ideas.

 

[KingKlingeling]

Good idea 👍
I recently stopped playing GT (because PC) and the first thing which came in my mind was :

- GT7 needs an AI which is able to do a proper standing start.
I think the flying start is a good way to cover FPS drops but also to cover bad AI.
At this point, on a standing start, every average Driver is able to get from last to first in T1 ,which is ridiculous.
There are many things to add, but If the AI is able to do a standing starts and keep there positions in T1 , we're on a good way

 

[Griffith500]

It needs to be adaptive and autonomous. It should be capable of knowing when to drive defensively, how to probe out weaknesses in opponents and how to save fuel and tyres.

To do that, it needs an understanding of driving line: local versus global gains, short term versus long term. It needs a way of comparing itself to other drivers. And it needs to understand the energy / power limitations and tradeoffs of tyres, and precisely how and when to save fuel (probably the easiest part).

On top of that, and probably most importantly, you need a way of balancing those conflicting objectives via a sophisticated model of interpretation of the "world" around it to deliver high level goals, and some way of translating that into the tactics described above.

 

[JKgo]

At this point I'll shed a tear of joy just to have AI not try to kill me by recognizing I'm right next to them in corners!!

 

[Johnnypenso]

Primarily the AI should be on pace with you, given the same tires and car choice and without having to resort to trickery like rubber banding or grip boosts or anything of that sort. Other games do it, there's no reason GT can't, especially given the power of the PS4, unless they purposely design AI to continue the, "let you win as much as possible" philosophy. And of course they should follow the racing line like a real driver would. In order for you to convince yourself you're in a real race, they need to accelerate like you, brake like you and corner like you. After that you work on behaviour when you or other AI are close, frequency of errors, aggression, etc. and make them all scalable. Everything is built on getting the pace correct, if you can't get that right, the rest is pretty moot.

 

[Tornado]

In the two games, the AI cars do not follow an established line and try to speed around corners as fast as they can.

In GT4, yes, they very much did. Even moreso than the games before. Because with GT4 they removed rubber banding, lap times across many lap races by the AI would be near as makes no difference to identical. Even racing other AI would barely change anything for laptimes, because outside of drafting they would just cleanly line up besides each other on straights rather than fight each other through turns. Lap after lap after lap after lap the same cars would crash in the same corners the same way. Go to that French street circuit in any race the AI drove an FF car. They would get on the power on that sweeping left turn and drive right into the wall. They would drive right off the loop on Autumn Ring. They would shoot right off the end of the track on the Nurburgring or Le Sarthe. GT4 was nothing but a regression from the AI of the previous game, just like GT6's was for GT5. GT3's AI was kind of mindless towards the player, but it would adapt to other AI. It would make mistakes like occasionally overcooking a turn when attempting a pass, spin out when going too fast (especially on Laguna Seca, which I suspect is a holdover from GT2 when really powerful RWD cars occasionally did too) or braking too early when under pressure. For GT4 they removed the rubber banding finally, but in it's place they put... nothing. In endurance races in particular it was easy to see that the AI "skill" was irrelevant compared to whatever car had the right balance of outright speed and tire/fuel wear.



GT5's AI in comparison was a complete revelation. A driver in a slower car in a B-Spec race has a real chance of winning anyway, and not just the player's driver. Different races could be won by different cars if the cars were close enough in specs (See: Dream Car Championship B-Spec, where 5 different cars had legitimate shots at the win if that stupid Jaguar wasn't in the race. See: The Nurburgring 4 Hour Enduro if the stupid Amuse S2000s aren't in the race). It's a real shame that they turned the aggression down in the A-Spec game (and had such horrendous car selection by the AI drivers) and made it such a complete snore when they removed standing starts from GT5; and it's even more of a shame that they basically slowed it down to nothing in GT6 until the rubber banding turns back on. PD really should be commended with what they put together for GT5, even if they pretty much ruined it in execution. It was a somewhat slow AI, even on the mythical "Arcade on 10" mode, but one that was fairly reactive both to other drivers and to it's own actions. In B-Spec in particular with some tweaks to how the behavior settings worked it could have been a truly fantastic system, since the "Hot/Cool" system really did seem to take into account at least some of the listed attributes. Push a driver with crappy attributes too hard and he would almost certainly crash all but the most benign cars; whereas a driver with better skills still really risks crashing but also might turn out a scorching lap even compared to when he is in the "optimum" zone. Ditto with the AI drivers in relation to you.






And then they replaced it for GT6 with AI that lets off the gas if it's about to win the race.

 

[JR98]

I believe good AI is them being aware of where you are and acting accordingly, sticking to a racing line, occasionally making mistakes, you know, like a real racing driver

 

[Griffith500]

Pace is the easiest thing to get right if you make it your focus. Rubber banding from boosting grip or power or both can provide a perfectly adaptable opponent. There are other more subtle methods that basically equate to the same cop out.

Somehow I feel that's not acceptable. So something else is the focus, in reality.

I suspect it's a realism of control: the AI must be as fast as you (which is a huge range of absolute pace, in practice, depending on player ability) using the same controls and information as you. It therefore must also struggle with those controls in the same way we do, but that's a natural result of searching for pace.

You need an AI that understands the circle of traction, momentum, torque curves, braking distances, balance changes (due to e.g. fuel level, damage, surface conditions etc.), drivetrain layout, downforce / lift - most importantly it needs to anticipate with all of these things, not just react. In order to do that, you need the tactics layer I described previously: strategy -> tactics -> skills.

It should not have access to absolute grip levels, geometric representations of driving lines and other cheats that we can't use. Any information it needs or wants, it should get from its environment in the same way we do.
That means an AI must have experience to draw from, so PD will have to train it, BSpec style, before they release it against us. What's fun is that the strategy and / or tactics layers can be applied to your own driving in the form of an AI "race engineer".

In practice, it's often found to be much easier and more effective to cheat with some kind of rubber band style fudge, but in a non-adaptive way (i.e. by putting in a rubber band style "scale of pace" controllable via a slider in a menu somewhere).

I don't know how PD would ensure matching of AI pace to the player's pace, but in many ways that's a game design issue: there is no right or wrong difficulty level. Making it user adjustable, and finely so, is therefore a must, and probably all that is required.

Incidentally, LFS used to have learning AI, but it was removed when the control method was changed. The control method was changed because the AI wasn't fast enough. Which was a shame, because teaching them my bad habits was great fun!

 

[sems4arsenal]

I haven't tried that Drivatar solution Forza does but I'd like something like that.

Good AI needs to adapt to what's happening, needs to go into defense mode when under pressure and have multiple solutions to overtaking (ramming not being one), I'm sure with the added power of the PS4 (the CPU ain't the greatest but should be enough for decent AI) PD will improve a lot better.

Also they need to get rid of rubber banding, no place for that in a sim.

Oh and to add, the AI needs to behave a bit more human, make the occasional mistake and not take the perfect racing line 99% of the time, which again something akin to drivatar will work, correct me if I'm wrong but Driveclub seems to adapt a dynamic AI which is a better solution than rubber banding.

 

[Neddo]

I just hope that BSpec AI slipstreams opponents if Bspec comes. And no sudden slowing down after 1st lap! For every AI car

 

[JR98]

Pace is the easiest thing to get right if you make it your focus. Rubber banding from boosting grip or power or both can provide a perfectly adaptable opponent. There are other more subtle methods that basically equate to the same cop out.

Somehow I feel that's not acceptable. So something else is the focus, in reality.

I suspect it's a realism of control: the AI must be as fast as you (which is a huge range of absolute pace, in practice, depending on player ability) using the same controls and information as you. It therefore must also struggle with those controls in the same way we do, but that's a natural result of searching for pace.

You need an AI that understands the circle of traction, momentum, torque curves, braking distances, balance changes (due to e.g. fuel level, damage, surface conditions etc.), drivetrain layout, downforce / lift - most importantly it needs to anticipate with all of these things, not just react. In order to do that, you need the tactics layer I described previously: strategy -> tactics -> skills.

It should not have access to absolute grip levels, geometric representations of driving lines and other cheats that we can't use. Any information it needs or wants, it should get from its environment in the same way we do.
That means an AI must have experience to draw from, so PD will have to train it, BSpec style, before they release it against us. What's fun is that the strategy and / or tactics layers can be applied to your own driving in the form of an AI "race engineer".

In practice, it's often found to be much easier and more effective to cheat with some kind of rubber band style fudge, but in a non-adaptive way (i.e. by putting in a rubber band style "scale of pace" controllable via a slider in a menu somewhere).

I don't know how PD would ensure matching of AI pace to the player's pace, but in many ways that's a game design issue: there is no right or wrong difficulty level. Making it user adjustable, and finely so, is therefore a must, and probably all that is required.

Incidentally, LFS used to have learning AI, but it was removed when the control method was changed. The control method was changed because the AI wasn't fast enough. Which was a shame, because teaching them my bad habits was great fun!

This is a brilliant idea. About the scaling of difficulty, SIMBIN games have difficulty sliders for AI (80%-120%) which could work.

 

[FS7]

Things that need to be implemented in order to have decent races against AI:

-having the option to adjust difficulty: this is an option that's available in pretty much every other racing game there is, even old ones on PS2. Ideally there should be option to adjust pace & aggression separately (pace would define how fast the AI is around corners, how late they brake, how early they get on the throttle coming out of corners, etc, aggression would define how often they get off the racing line to pass or defend position), or at least have a few levels of difficulty so that the player can choose an AI difficulty level that is somewhat close to his skill level.
-AI drivers that are aware of other cars on track: this is a must. AI drivers that leave the inside wide open then turn into my car and knock me off the track are simply stupid. Same goes for AI drivers that stick to their line and push me off the track when I try to overtake on the outside. Not sure if this makes sense, but if the AI in the Burnout games is aware of my position on the track and tries to take me out shouldn't it be possible for developers to do the other way around? AI that is aware of my position on the track and tries to avoid contact with my car?
-standing starts: there's a number of motorsport disciplines that have standing starts, therefore standing starts should be in the game, as well as normal rolling starts in the disciplines that have them in real life. Having catch-the-rabbit rolling starts to compensate for bad AI and give a false sense of difficulty was a terrible idea.
-balanced grid: aside from a few events races against AI generally have very unbalanced grids. Not only is the fastest AI car considerably below the PP limit but also the difference in performance between the fastest AI car and the slowest can be pretty huge. PD should program every AI opponent to use cars that are as close as possible to the PP limit of the event, or maybe program every AI car to use the same car with the same upgrades/tires the player is using. That combined of the ability to adjust AI difficulty would be a major improvement in offline races.
-mechanical damage/flags & penalties: like standing starts these are obvious things that should be available in offline races, after all real races have them and they totally change the way people play against AI.
-optional practice & qualifying: these are also present in real life races and should be in the game too. Free practice is more useful than a regular time trial because you get to compare your lap times against the AI's lap times, therefore it gives you an idea on whether you need to improve your pace or adjust the difficulty level. Qualifying gives you the chance of starting on a better position, which when combined with all the stuff mentioned above can make races a lot more interesting.

 

[JR98]

Things that need to be implemented in order to have decent races against AI:

-having the option to adjust difficulty: this is an option that's available in pretty much every other racing game there is, even old ones on PS2. Ideally there should be option to adjust pace & aggression separately (pace would define how fast the AI is around corners, how late they brake, how early they get on the throttle coming out of corners, etc, aggression would define how often they get off the racing line to pass or defend position), or at least have a few levels of difficulty so that the player can choose an AI difficulty level that is somewhat close to his skill level.
-AI drivers that are aware of other cars on track: this is a must. AI drivers that leave the inside wide open then turn into my car and knock me off the track are simply stupid. Same goes for AI drivers that stick to their line and push me off the track when I try to overtake on the outside. Not sure if this makes sense, but if the AI in the Burnout games is aware of my position on the track and tries to take me out shouldn't it be possible for developers to do the other way around? AI that is aware of my position on the track and tries to avoid contact with my car?
-standing starts: there's a number of motorsport disciplines that have standing starts, therefore standing starts should be in the game, as well as normal rolling starts in the disciplines that have them in real life. Having catch-the-rabbit rolling starts to compensate for bad AI and give a false sense of difficulty was a terrible idea.
-balanced grid: aside from a few events races against AI generally have very unbalanced grids. Not only is the fastest AI car considerably below the PP limit but also the difference in performance between the fastest AI car and the slowest can be pretty huge. PD should program every AI opponent to use cars that are as close as possible to the PP limit of the event, or maybe program every AI car to use the same car with the same upgrades/tires the player is using. That combined of the ability to adjust AI difficulty would be a major improvement in offline races.
-mechanical damage/flags & penalties: like standing starts these are obvious things that should be available in offline races, after all real races have them and they totally change the way people play against AI.
-optional practice & qualifying: these are also present in real life races and should be in the game too. Free practice is more useful than a regular time trial because you get to compare your lap times against the AI's lap times, therefore it gives you an idea on whether you need to improve your pace or adjust the difficulty level. Qualifying gives you the chance of starting on a better position, which when combined with all the stuff mentioned above can make races a lot more interesting.

1: Definetely should be an option, Forza has it, as far as I know, and alot of others too
2: Every other sim has this, why cant GT?
3: Definetely, I was on GT5 and bought a C3 Vette (Thinking it had 350HP when it had 295HP) and did a race where the AI ranged from a 400HP Corvette C3 to a 320HP Buick GNX, I came 3rd. AI performance should be similar to the player's car
4: I know GT is a sim but its not a hardcore racing sim like GTR or Assetto Corsa, flags are not necessary, and besides, GT was fine before any damage at all, they should either have Forza level damage or no damage at all
5: Yes, Practice would let you compare yourself to AI (Just let us skip it if we don't want to do it) and qualifying would make races more interesting, if you want to start last, dont qualify, wanna start up in the grid, qualify

Overal, great ideas

 

[Johnnypenso]

I believe good AI is them being aware of where you are and acting accordingly, sticking to a racing line, occasionally making mistakes, you know, like a real racing driver

Real race drivers rarely make mistakes when running solo, most "incidents" occur with contact, and that's something that should be scalable if possible. Running a sprint race in career mode and having 2 or 3 cars spin out in a 5 lap race lasting 7 minutes isn't realistic either so there has to be a balance or some adjustability.

 

[JR98]

Real race drivers rarely make mistakes when running solo, most "incidents" occur with contact, and that's something that should be scalable if possible. Running a sprint race in career mode and having 2 or 3 cars spin out in a 5 lap race lasting 7 minutes isn't realistic either so there has to be a balance or some adjustability.

Well, I still want a challenge, maybe scale the skill of the AI from clumsy (80% chance of AI spinning) to Realistic (10% chance of AI spinning/wrecking etc. Maybe like B-Spec where the more pressure an AI has (e.g. Tailgating them) the more likely they are to make a mistake, I believe JUICED had a similar system

 

[Johnnypenso]

Well, I still want a challenge, maybe scale the skill of the AI from clumsy (80% chance of AI spinning) to Realistic (10% chance of AI spinning/wrecking etc. Maybe like B-Spec where the more pressure an AI has (e.g. Tailgating them) the more likely they are to make a mistake, I believe JUICED had a similar system

It's possible to have a slider for both speed and likelihood of errors. So if you're like me, you'd turn the errors down to near zero, but the key of course is that it would be great if everyone could adjust things to their own preference for the AI.

 

[JR98]

It's possible to have a slider for both speed and likelihood of errors. So if you're like me, you'd turn the errors down to near zero, but the key of course is that it would be great if everyone could adjust things to their own preference for the AI.

And NOT for people to put the AI super slow and always crash lol. I'd probably have AI pace at about 95%, AI aggresion at 90% and AI error likelihood at about 70% (If 100% was crashing alot and 50% was never crashes)

 

[FS7]

I know GT is a sim but its not a hardcore racing sim like GTR or Assetto Corsa, flags are not necessary, and besides, GT was fine before any damage at all, they should either have Forza level damage or no damage at all.

When I mentioned penalties & damage obviously I meant they should be optional, not mandatory. If you don't like them you simply turn them off while other players have the option to turn them on to make races more realistic & challenging (btw I do think having the option to have terminal damage would be great, especially in longer races).
Those things are already in GT6 and they can be adjusted but unfortunately they are available only online. PD should make all options available in all game modes, including offline.

 

[JR98]

When I mentioned penalties & damage obviously I meant they should be optional, not mandatory. If you don't like them you simply turn them off while other players have the option to turn them on to make races more realistic & challenging.
Those things are already in GT6 and they can be adjusted but unfortunately they are available only online. PD should make all options available in all game modes, including offline.

Well that's fine. I JUST WANT BLOODY TIRE AND FUEL DEPLETION ON ARCADE MODE DAMMIT WHY CANT WE HAVE THAT!!!!

 

[JKgo]

One of less intrusive way to incorporate varying AI difficulty is re-introduction of qualifying: even if you decide to put a slider to adjust AI's "harshness", there's a chance a casual gamer might not find it and find the default setting too tough. I'm not saying that this casual gamer will try qualifying, but to me this may have a higher chance of happening- as it will be a part of "visible" gameplay element.
As for how a qualifying can improve the game beyond the obvious - automatically adjustable AI. I'm guessing here but me thinks PDI has a.....certain benchmark lap time established on each of the tracks that exists in the game. When you do a qualifying lap time, and AI compares your time against this benchmark, and if you exceed it then AI will set itself to "murderize" you automatically; but if you are waaaaaaay off, then AI treats you with kiddie gloves.
And the AI will constantly monitor your pace through out the career mode, or/and even some online races, and gradually ramp up the intensity as you improve.
As for not punting you off the road, well ............................

 

[AlexMk7]

I think the question we should be asking ourselves here is "what makes a good driver?" and try to derive what a "good AI" would be from the answer to that question. From what I have learned about racing so far, a good/fast driver stands out from other drivers by: 1. Their ability to maximize the capabilities of their vehicle (i.e. car control/feel), 2. Their ability to anticipate the behaviour of other drivers and the conditions of the course, and 3. How consistent their are (e.g. mental strength, focus, stamina, etc.). The most obvious issue with the current AI, in my opinion, is that all they do is (try to) follow a pre-established racing line (the one you see if you turn the assist on) around every course with no regards to the vehicle they are controlling. The only times they deviate from that line is when the "interaction with other drivers" or "mistake" scripts kick in. Maybe as they improved on the physics engine, Polyphony had to take away from the "AI" to free up processing power?

 

[FiftyBelowZero]

I think the question we should be asking ourselves here is "what makes a good driver?" and try to derive what a "good AI" would be from the answer to that question. From what I have learned about racing so far, a good/fast driver stands out from other drivers by: 1. Their ability to maximize the capabilities of their vehicle (i.e. car control/feel), 2. Their ability to anticipate the behaviour of other drivers and the conditions of the course, and 3. How consistent their are (e.g. mental strength, focus, stamina, etc.). The most obvious issue with the current AI, in my opinion, is that all they do is (try to) follow a pre-established racing line (the one you see if you turn the assist on) around every course with no regards to the vehicle they are controlling. The only times they deviate from that line is when the "interaction with other drivers" or "mistake" scripts kick in. Maybe as they improved on the physics engine, Polyphony had to take away from the "AI" to free up processing power?

This

 

[Neddo]

however that old Corvette always slides in Apricot Hill endurance. The only interesting opponent so far

 

[Earth]

I was looking through some rfactor files and I was really surprised how deep AI customization went. I would like to see something similar in GT7. Heres a few examples

AI Brake_Grip Usage="0.92250" The higher the number the more of the maximum braking efficiency the AI will use. Think the AI brake too early? Turn this up.

AI Corner_Grip Usage="0.96000" The higher the number the more of the maximum cornering efficiency the AI will use. Think the AI corner too slowly? Turn this up.

AI to AI Collision Rate="20" How often the AI collide with each other

AI Limiter="0.00000" "Rubber banding". 0.0 turns it off, 1.0 is the maximum effect

AI Mistakes="0.10000" How often the AI make a mistake and miss a corner. I found with this set to 0.1 the AI make a realistic amount of mistakes over a 200km race

GT7 doesnt have to have 5 decimal places of precision, a simple 1-100% slider for each of these will do just fine.

 

[rixtar]

I was looking through some rfactor files and I was really surprised how deep AI customization went. I would like to see something similar in GT7. Heres a few examples

AI Brake_Grip Usage="0.92250" The higher the number the more of the maximum braking efficiency the AI will use. Think the AI brake too early? Turn this up.

AI Corner_Grip Usage="0.96000" The higher the number the more of the maximum cornering efficiency the AI will use. Think the AI corner too slowly? Turn this up.

AI to AI Collision Rate="20" How often the AI collide with each other

AI Limiter="0.00000" "Rubber banding". 0.0 turns it off, 1.0 is the maximum effect

AI Mistakes="0.10000" How often the AI make a mistake and miss a corner. I found with this set to 0.1 the AI make a realistic amount of mistakes over a 200km race

GT7 doesnt have to have 5 decimal places of precision, a simple 1-100% slider for each of these will do just fine.

GT6 has something similar to this, although not with the same degree of precision.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=725281&page=156

See the eighth post down. Apparently the game selects 16 AI from a list of 32.

 

[rixtar]

I think the question we should be asking ourselves here is "what makes a good driver?" and try to derive what a "good AI" would be from the answer to that question. From what I have learned about racing so far, a good/fast driver stands out from other drivers by: 1. Their ability to maximize the capabilities of their vehicle (i.e. car control/feel), 2. Their ability to anticipate the behaviour of other drivers and the conditions of the course, and 3. How consistent their are (e.g. mental strength, focus, stamina, etc.). The most obvious issue with the current AI, in my opinion, is that all they do is (try to) follow a pre-established racing line (the one you see if you turn the assist on) around every course with no regards to the vehicle they are controlling. The only times they deviate from that line is when the "interaction with other drivers" or "mistake" scripts kick in. Maybe as they improved on the physics engine, Polyphony had to take away from the "AI" to free up processing power?

"Maybe as they improved on the physics engine, Polyphony had to take away from the "AI" to free up processing power?"

I agree with your post in general but I think you are spot on with your last sentence. I reckon there are many compromises being made due to the limitations of the PS3. I also think that within those limitations PD has done a reasonable job with the AI.

It is really educational to watch replays and to sit myself in the AI cars and just watch what goes on. On most occasions when I think the AI has unfairly shunted me in some way it turns out that I had made a move outside of accepted racing regulations, such as not leaving adequate racing room for the AI or cut across the racing line in front of them etc. They do in fact brake and change their line to avoid collisions. You can often see them sometimes racing each other, jockeying for position haha. The way the AI slows down and brakes on corners drives me nuts, but racing rules allow them to do it and it is my responsibility to avoid ramming them in the rear.

That said, however, it seems to me that there are a lot of programming tricks going on to create an illusion of reality in the way the AI "drives". It's obvious that each AI car is programmed to carry out the exact same maneuvers in every iteration of the race until there is an "interaction with other drivers" or a "mistake", even though mistakes are pre-programmed too. It all saves processor cycles.

I don't believe that there is very much of true AI in GT6 at all. I suspect that its usual behaviour is more like those programs that are designed to seem human in their responses to verbal interactions with real humans. There is no real intelligence there. The only exception to that is perhaps when you actually run in to an AI that is really ready to race. Every now and then there's one who really does power round the corners and is incredibly hard to beat. But perhaps even then there is more of an illusion of intelligence to the AI than any type of true intelligent calculation going on. Just a pre-programmed set of routines which are called up in response to a set group of conditions.

I'd love to think that the AI are driving the cars like we are, but I doubt it.

 

[FiftyBelowZero]

I thought about this. Being able to adjust the AI's difficulty and skill could allow more players to pass the game easily, and then take credit online that they "beat the game, no sweat." Let's do this legitimately, having players adjust the AI is an easy way out. If PD really did that, that would just be cheap.

 

[Imari]

Being able to adjust the AI's difficulty and skill could allow more players to pass the game easily, and then take credit online that they "beat the game, no sweat."

Is this really a problem?

It doesn't seem to be a problem for all the other games that have difficulty levels with an "easy" setting. This has been going on for decades. Why is it an issue for Gran Turismo?

Frankly, beating GT6 is more of an indication that you've spent a lot of time on it than any indication of skill. It's not like it's hard to beat races when you can simply overpower most of them with tuning and car choice. If anything, adding difficulties could make beating GT more of an achievement, because then you could legitimately say that you beat a game which presented some pretty stiff challenges.

If people actually care, then do it like Wipeout or GTL where the races are marked as to the result and the difficulty that result was achieved on. Then people who just want to experience the game on easy can do so, and people who want to be challenged can do so and feel that there's something that distinguishes their achievement (if they need that sort of ego boosting).

I'm quite happy to do races on Novice in Wipeout when I just want to unlock stuff, but I feel a sense of achievement when I've completed a group on Elite because sometimes it's actually hard. Why would this be bad for GT?

 

[Johnnypenso]

I thought about this. Being able to adjust the AI's difficulty and skill could allow more players to pass the game easily, and then take credit online that they "beat the game, no sweat." Let's do this legitimately, having players adjust the AI is an easy way out. If PD really did that, that would just be cheap.

Easy to combat and actually an opportunity for boasting. The game only needs keep track of your overall average difficulty. If it's 0-100 then you can complete the game but you might get a 100%/83 difficulty rating. Or you might get a 100%/92 difficulty rating. The higher your difficulty rating, presumably the better the bragging rights.

 

[mr_serious]

You know good AI when you come up against it, because you stop noticing the graphics, sound, or failings of the physics and find yourself simply concentrating on improving each & every corner by the tiniest margin. Picking the right corner to pass the car in front. Compromising your line to defend from the guy behind. Being happy just being able to make up a single place in a three lap race.

It should take great skill or lots of practice (preferably both) to beat the AI in its hardest mode

Making a mistake is not just spinning out, it can be going just a little to deep into a corner, locking a wheel under braking, or being offline and failing to modify your brake and turn in points etc... The winner is the one who goes the fastest, with the least mistakes.

Fortunately , there are several (actually most other) racing games out there, even on the PS3 who do this quite well.

If crap AI is the price to pay for graphical fidelity, I would take decent AI any day of the week.