Slashdot Mirror
EA Created An AI That Taught Itself To Play Battlefield (kotaku.com)
Electronic Arts' Search for Extraordinary Experiences (SEED) Division has created a "self-learning AI-agent" that has managed to teach itself how to play Battlefield 1 multiplayer. From a report: In this blog post, Magnus Nordin from SEED details how his team, inspired by Google's work with old Atari games, wondered "how much effort it would take to have a self-learning agent learn to play a modern and more complex first person AAA game like Battlefield." So they tried to find out. The results are an "agent" that, while inferior to human players, "is pretty proficient at the basic Battlefield gameplay." The agent changes behaviour if it's low on health or ammo, and while more complex behaviours like knowing the details of each map are beyond it (at the moment), EA has found that "while the human players outperformed the agents, it wasn't a complete blowout by any stretch."
I am waiting for Elon Musk, Stephen Hawking, e.t.c. to place statements about A.I.
Not that hard. Because they're not trying to mimic human behavior, they're simply trying to win a known system.
This is nothing but a PR puff piece to market EA. Actual people have been doing "AI plays game" for years upon years. YouTube has TONS of channels dedicated to just that.
I programmed an AI when I was at university over a decade ago that was a foul mouthed chatbot. Seems like it's the same thing except it's better at teaching itself new words.
I'm 99% sure that the majority of game play in Battlefield is actually just 12 year old's screaming at each other. With an Aimbot.
There are no stupid questions, just stupid people.
Probably, but it reduces the problem to refining the game until it's close enough to reality.
Play Command HQ online
> When it comes to driving cars they sometimes forget to brake for people
So do people, with greater frequency.
There will never be a perfect AI. Well-surpassing average, imperfect people is advance enough.
Given that the new AI rush started about 6 years ago, where we stand is pretty impressive. Progress may stagnate hereafter, until the next leap, but the advances are undeniable and practical.
It is my understanding that calculating astronomical events within the solar system is easier than predicting the weather on earth. Even though it may appear to some that calculating how events millions of miles away unfold ought to be more difficult than those nearby, astronomical events such as a solar eclipse actually involves fewer variables than a weather pattern. Similarly, the AI's ability to understand games may be because games have more limited sets of rules, while real life involves far more calculations and possibilities.
There was that recent story about video games and machine learning and how long it takes humans and AIs to learn to play a custom video game. One of the conclusions they came to was that humans learned their custom video game faster because of societal queues that they already know from outside of the video game. For example, they saw a man and assumed that was their character, saw a ladder and assumed they had to walk over and press up, jump across gaps, jump over what must be bad guys since they have angry faces. Their machine learning bot took a lot longer to learn the game since it was trying to figure out a lot more details about the game than the humans did.
This got me thinking: why hasn't anyone created a more generic AI that learns how to play *TONS* of our old video games? Start them off with older games and work them up to newer and newer ones. This way it would carry all those past experiences and draw upon them when faced with a new and unfamiliar video game. It would have knowledge of the meta of video games. I think this would be awesome, but scary at the same time. Could you imagine an AI that learned everything it knows about humans through video games only?
What would be really cool is an AI that play a decent commander spot. B2 is a great game I still love it when a good squad gets together, but playing minus a good commander is not nearly as fun, but playing commander is to be honest sort of boring. An active AI commander capable of meeting the needs of squad requests, following a strategy and assisting in the taking of command points could add a HUGE amount of enjoyment to the game. I know many people who play a good commander but it gets boring after a few rounds, and the side without a decent commander is crippled.
errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
EA executives, horrified, immediately unplug the AI. EA is saved.
Why did the chicken cross the road? Because Elon Musk put an AI chip in its head.
Unfortunately, after playing for a few hours a licensing glitch caused the AI to be misidentified as a game pirate. The system was blacklisted from all Battlefield 1 servers; and then, once EA's License Enforcement team discovered the IP address was from within the company, they forcibly powered-down the system - leading to the complete loss of the AI.
#DeleteChrome
In mmo games they need to do away with taunt as it is built around terrible AI rather than a human DM. Bury it and the "tank" concept and make weaker challenges that fight a hell of a lot better.
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
Looking at the video, specially in first person mode they look exactly like bots.
Was hoping for something more.
They follow walls and snap on target basically. Which also creates the bug when each time is being another wall and it loops. They either see through or hear through precisely and don't try to jump over or set explosives on the walls. That's quite basic.
I'm pretty sure battlefield 1942 had bots in it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Yep. Good job EA, you re invented something you already invented 20 years ago.
-
The only winning move is not to play.
Palaces, barricades, threats, meet promises
I would categorise the creation of the first gaming noob as a significant milestone in artificial intelligence
It's about creating strategies to work well in increasingly complex situations. Solutions can then use this to develop AI more able to navigate the real world. Using a game is easier to control and accelerate training for, and develop required techniques faster.
How much do you guys get paid to post this marketting crap?
There is zero "specialness" about a huge company, having some guy employ basic neural nets. The difficulty is not "can AI learn" it's "can AI act like a human" and that's the hard part. THAT is why Quake 3 had ZERO neural nets in their AI.
This is nothing but a PR blurb.
There are tons of actual AI videos (and channels!) on YouTube of people teaching AI to play 2-D and 3-D games from scratch. Post those here. But they wont... because nobody is getting paid off.