| oli2 said: As a long follower of this type of forums on Internet, i have seen posters defending the arguments here given by * for a long time. They see gaming from a technological point of view. They claim things they generally don't master because they simply don't have the formation, and think that by reading one or 2 articles they understand the technology. |
I agreecompletely in this one. It's pretty painful to see people saying such ridiculous things, you know they don't understand one bit of what they're talking about. For example, it made me cringe when I saw someone write about"better AI thanks to branch prediction on processor". Of course, branch prediction has absolutely nothing to do with AI. I've come to apply some heuristic rule, that someone that start talking about AI in games don't know anything about what it means. The SNES could do the most sophisticated AI you'd need, and anyway, what's limiting an AI is NOT computing power, but memory.
So from knowing that, you can see how ridiculous and clueless nearly all the posts about AI look to me. And this without citing the fact that you don't need complex AI like neural systems for most games. Simple heuristics will be far more efficient most of the time.
I can understand people amazed by technology, when it's sth new to them.
Must be why I'm not impressed at all by the PS3 or XB360 games, and not threatened at all by the Wii.
Essay Pro