By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Microsoft - Exposed: Natel Milo smoke and mirrors by Peter Molyneux

heruamon on 07 June 2009
Akvod said:
heruamon said:
Akvod said:
heruamon said:
ROFLMAO...sony fanboys are seething with jealousy....indeed!

I'm a Sony fanboy and I'm not jealous. I'm more creeped out about making a little boy a plaything (whether or not you're already a mother or not) than the ultra violence (and unrealistic) violence in God of War III.

It's also wierd to think about excercise games with NATAL. Won't you think it's a bit ridiculous to even need NATAL when you're asked to do free weight activities with no equipment (push ups, crunches, etc).

LOL...I'm glad that you're a siftware engineer and have figured out these serious flaws in Natal...I'm not really sure WHY a sony fanboy would be concerend about it, when you'd think sony fanboys would be worried about how to keep the ps3 from laggin even further behind Wii and 360.  If they would have used an adult man...there would have ben gripes there as well, and on and on.  It was a TECH DEMO...to show what the system can do, not some attempt to say they had created AI...WHO the heck even hinted at that by M$?  AI...WTF...are people THAT stupid!

What flaws did I talk about? I think NATAL works awesomely, and that the little hiccups (like the "Bam!" thing) can easily be resolved. I was reffering to how ridiculous some of the application of NATAL is (and in genereal, motion control) for things such as exercising. I think that with NATAL the illogical need for a motion control device and a software for popular things such as fitness games are profoundly evidident. You're essentially doing what you could have done now, instead of waiting for this orgasm of technology.

I admit being a Sony fanboy, but you're the one making assumptions and being irrational. Please, being a fanboy doesn't mean you share the same opinions/tendancies of fellow fanboys. Fanboys only mean that you're a pationet (sp?) fan of something/body.

I'm using the EA Active, and it was REALLY effective at Cardio, but I didn't get to weight training, and I'm not sure there is one...but the elastic band is effect, and it could help simulate weight lifting...jsut on a resistance level.

Were one of the HUGE advantage of Natal is ducking and cover in Shooters, and even reloading weapons.  In a game like Mass Effect, and if you've not played it or any of the KOTR games, NATAL would be perfect for non-combat NPC exhanges...absolutely perfect!  Even some as trivial as looking in your inventory...



"...You can't kill ideas with a sword, and you can't sink belief structures with a broadside. You defeat them by making them change..."

- From By Schism Rent Asunder

Around the Network
Dgc1808 on 07 June 2009
Guess we should all just wait for the real thing

4 ≈ One

damndl0ser on 07 June 2009
Akvod said:
heruamon said:
Akvod said:
Squilliam said:
Akvod said:
daroamer said:
JaggedSac said:
LOL. What was deceptive about it? The voice recognition, facial recognition, etc? Did people actually think they had developed the most sophisticated AI of all time?

Exactly.  Plus, Peter himself admitted the demo was using a lot of "tricks" to be able to do what it did.  That doesn't mean it was deceptive.

But if you don't admit those tricks on the spot (E3 conference), then it is deceptive.

Magicians don't need to admit they used tricks because it's already assumed that they are. In this case, it's almost like a person doing something that seems magical, and not admitting that it was only a magic trick in the end.

Yeah,  the whole 3d graphics rendering you see in games is one big deception. I expect you to now go off on one big thread about how game artists and programmers have been deceiving you.

Your thread awaits, go to it!

 

I'm not reffering to the 3D graphics rendering (if you read my previous posts in the same thread), but how the presenters implied that Milo has emotions, and is an actual sentinent AI.

Please don't put words in my mouth, and use straw mans.

I think you decieved yourself...in thinking that "Milo" was a sentient AI...WTF...did you REALLY think Lionhead had created AI in 4 months...you're kidding me, right...please tell me you're kidding me...

I told you all, that the whole point is that the detractors never thought that the AI was sentinent in the first place, otherwise why would we be arguing agaisnt it? It's very simple logic is it not? How could we say something's not real, if we didn't think it wasn't real in the first play?

I'm simply arguing that in my humble opinion, that the people who presented Milo, at the E3 conference (not in subsequent interviews, or on the floor showcases in the rest of E3), they implied that Milo was a sentinent AI, with emotions, that could be interacted with as if it were a real living boy.

 

I never took it that way one bit, I took it that this may be possible in the future. 



"If you've got them by the balls their hearts and minds will follow."

Quote by- The Imortal John Wayne, the original BADASS!

 

 

 

Akvod on 07 June 2009
heruamon said:
Akvod said:
heruamon said:
Akvod said:
heruamon said:
ROFLMAO...sony fanboys are seething with jealousy....indeed!

I'm a Sony fanboy and I'm not jealous. I'm more creeped out about making a little boy a plaything (whether or not you're already a mother or not) than the ultra violence (and unrealistic) violence in God of War III.

It's also wierd to think about excercise games with NATAL. Won't you think it's a bit ridiculous to even need NATAL when you're asked to do free weight activities with no equipment (push ups, crunches, etc).

LOL...I'm glad that you're a siftware engineer and have figured out these serious flaws in Natal...I'm not really sure WHY a sony fanboy would be concerend about it, when you'd think sony fanboys would be worried about how to keep the ps3 from laggin even further behind Wii and 360.  If they would have used an adult man...there would have ben gripes there as well, and on and on.  It was a TECH DEMO...to show what the system can do, not some attempt to say they had created AI...WHO the heck even hinted at that by M$?  AI...WTF...are people THAT stupid!

What flaws did I talk about? I think NATAL works awesomely, and that the little hiccups (like the "Bam!" thing) can easily be resolved. I was reffering to how ridiculous some of the application of NATAL is (and in genereal, motion control) for things such as exercising. I think that with NATAL the illogical need for a motion control device and a software for popular things such as fitness games are profoundly evidident. You're essentially doing what you could have done now, instead of waiting for this orgasm of technology.

I admit being a Sony fanboy, but you're the one making assumptions and being irrational. Please, being a fanboy doesn't mean you share the same opinions/tendancies of fellow fanboys. Fanboys only mean that you're a pationet (sp?) fan of something/body.

I'm using the EA Active, and it was REALLY effective at Cardio, but I didn't get to weight training, and I'm not sure there is one...but the elastic band is effect, and it could help simulate weight lifting...jsut on a resistance level.

Were one of the HUGE advantage of Natal is ducking and cover in Shooters, and even reloading weapons.  In a game like Mass Effect, and if you've not played it or any of the KOTR games, NATAL would be perfect for non-combat NPC exhanges...absolutely perfect!  Even some as trivial as looking in your inventory...

Again, that's why I said that with NATAL (not EA Active) it's profoundly evident how ridiculous something like a NATAL fitness would be. At least with the EA Active you have physical resistence bands (although you didn't need to buy the game for it...), but with NATAL you're literally doing exercises you can do, right now, on the floor.

Again, let me emphasize that I said "Some", not all uses. I think that NATAL could be used for improved controls in RTSs (although not as good as Keyboard+Mouse). Although I don't dig your personal ideas about ducking and reloading (if you're a competitive player, I think you're more interested in the most efficient, (not immersive) controls.

PS: What do you mean, by "[my] inventory"?



CAL4M1TY on 07 June 2009
Reasonable said:
I don't think anything was that deceptive, but I do see many people were very over receptive - i.e. not understanding the limitations and inherent elements of a tech demo like that and just taking it at face value.

Best post in the thread.


I was one of the very receptive people. I was cautious because it was a video (many sony fanboys were quick to point it out, so I took notice), but I thought the potential was there. I think Molyneux was doing his thing (promising big), but he did say that Milo "reacts" to the tone of your voice/emotion in your voice. People interpret that as it being sentient and then the internet goes on a rampage because they say that MS implied that it was, when it was peoples interpretation that caused the stir. Same could be said about the level of accuracy Nintendo supposedly "promised" with the original Wii Mote, people thought they meant 1:1, they never said it did to begin with.

I'm not saying MS wasn't being deceptive, what I'm saying is that people must be held accountable for their expectations and interpretations of what they saw as well. It's like, was Sony deceptive with the E3 KZ2 trailer because it was CGI but they didn't explicitly say it was at the time and people intrepretted it as being in-game? I thought it was CGI, so I don't believe Sony was being deceptive.

It's obviously in the early stages of development so some of it had to be staged. I said it in another thread, if Milo was as perfect as that video, it would have been given a precise launch date at E3, it was just announced at E3. IGN said that it works as long as you "play" within the confines of what Molyneux has said. Since it's only in the early stages of dev, who knows how far it can go. I remember Volvo-bot on MSN Messenger. That thing is certainly not perfect, but it provides an indication that the technology is there (reactionary speaking, movements etc). It's definately not sentient AI, MS never said that (You could tell because in that video Milo reacted, it didn't initiate, from the moment that woman stepped into camera view).

But finally, and more importantly, does it really matter whether it was smoke and mirrors? Isn't the important thing that someone is actually trying to push AI technology (even if it is only theoretical?). I'm not saying I want sentient beings, all I'm saying is that at least MS is attempting to make AI that reacts perfectly to what you do, which is something severely lacking in 3D games.

You played any of the big hits late? "ZOMG he flanks me automatically!!!", aside from our expectations should be higher this generation to expect something better than them to automatically flank, the worst part is that not all games (barely the majority I would say) have these decent preset tactics.

At least somebody is trying to push for better.



Around the Network
Akvod on 07 June 2009
damndl0ser said:
Akvod said:
heruamon said:
Akvod said:
Squilliam said:
Akvod said:
daroamer said:
JaggedSac said:
LOL. What was deceptive about it? The voice recognition, facial recognition, etc? Did people actually think they had developed the most sophisticated AI of all time?

Exactly.  Plus, Peter himself admitted the demo was using a lot of "tricks" to be able to do what it did.  That doesn't mean it was deceptive.

But if you don't admit those tricks on the spot (E3 conference), then it is deceptive.

Magicians don't need to admit they used tricks because it's already assumed that they are. In this case, it's almost like a person doing something that seems magical, and not admitting that it was only a magic trick in the end.

Yeah,  the whole 3d graphics rendering you see in games is one big deception. I expect you to now go off on one big thread about how game artists and programmers have been deceiving you.

Your thread awaits, go to it!

 

I'm not reffering to the 3D graphics rendering (if you read my previous posts in the same thread), but how the presenters implied that Milo has emotions, and is an actual sentinent AI.

Please don't put words in my mouth, and use straw mans.

I think you decieved yourself...in thinking that "Milo" was a sentient AI...WTF...did you REALLY think Lionhead had created AI in 4 months...you're kidding me, right...please tell me you're kidding me...

I told you all, that the whole point is that the detractors never thought that the AI was sentinent in the first place, otherwise why would we be arguing agaisnt it? It's very simple logic is it not? How could we say something's not real, if we didn't think it wasn't real in the first play?

I'm simply arguing that in my humble opinion, that the people who presented Milo, at the E3 conference (not in subsequent interviews, or on the floor showcases in the rest of E3), they implied that Milo was a sentinent AI, with emotions, that could be interacted with as if it were a real living boy.

 

I never took it that way one bit, I took it that this may be possible in the future. 

Like I said, in my humble opinion. As for the "future" thing, they were implying that they had it done now (also making a sentinent AI will be dependant on software advance, not motion control).



heruamon on 07 June 2009
Akvod said:
heruamon said:
Akvod said:
Squilliam said:
Akvod said:
daroamer said:
JaggedSac said:
LOL. What was deceptive about it? The voice recognition, facial recognition, etc? Did people actually think they had developed the most sophisticated AI of all time?

Exactly.  Plus, Peter himself admitted the demo was using a lot of "tricks" to be able to do what it did.  That doesn't mean it was deceptive.

But if you don't admit those tricks on the spot (E3 conference), then it is deceptive.

Magicians don't need to admit they used tricks because it's already assumed that they are. In this case, it's almost like a person doing something that seems magical, and not admitting that it was only a magic trick in the end.

Yeah,  the whole 3d graphics rendering you see in games is one big deception. I expect you to now go off on one big thread about how game artists and programmers have been deceiving you.

Your thread awaits, go to it!

 

I'm not reffering to the 3D graphics rendering (if you read my previous posts in the same thread), but how the presenters implied that Milo has emotions, and is an actual sentinent AI.

Please don't put words in my mouth, and use straw mans.

I think you decieved yourself...in thinking that "Milo" was a sentient AI...WTF...did you REALLY think Lionhead had created AI in 4 months...you're kidding me, right...please tell me you're kidding me...

I told you all, that the whole point is that the detractors never thought that the AI was sentinent in the first place, otherwise why would we be arguing agaisnt it? It's very simple logic is it not? How could we say something's not real, if we didn't think it wasn't real in the first play?

I'm simply arguing that in my humble opinion, that the people who presented Milo, at the E3 conference (not in subsequent interviews, or on the floor showcases in the rest of E3), they implied that Milo was a sentinent AI, with emotions, that could be interacted with as if it were a real living boy.

Dude...I've watched that video so many times, and I've been amazed by it, but I NEVER once got the feeling that they were trying to come across like "Milo" was sentinent.  It was just a very well written demo to display the potential of the system to receive and process inputs and relay sensible outputs...just like in dialogue radial in RPGs.  Sorry, but I didn't walk away with impression, and as you say, further more, I've seen NO reports has tried to say that M$ and Lionhead were  talking AI.



"...You can't kill ideas with a sword, and you can't sink belief structures with a broadside. You defeat them by making them change..."

- From By Schism Rent Asunder

JaggedSac on 07 June 2009

MikeB started this stupid shit storm. What are his thoughts?



Akvod on 07 June 2009
CAL4M1TY said:
Reasonable said:
I don't think anything was that deceptive, but I do see many people were very over receptive - i.e. not understanding the limitations and inherent elements of a tech demo like that and just taking it at face value.

Best post in the thread.


I was one of the very receptive people. I was cautious because it was a video (many sony fanboys were quick to point it out, so I took notice), but I thought the potential was there. I think Molyneux was doing his thing (promising big), but he did say that Milo "reacts" to the tone of your voice/emotion in your voice. People interpret that as it being sentient and then the internet goes on a rampage because they say that MS implied that it was, when it was peoples interpretation that caused the stir. Same could be said about the level of accuracy Nintendo supposedly "promised" with the original Wii Mote, people thought they meant 1:1, they never said it did to begin with.

I'm not saying MS wasn't being deceptive, what I'm saying is that people must be held accountable for their expectations and interpretations of what they saw as well. It's like, was Sony deceptive with the E3 KZ2 trailer because it was CGI but they didn't explicitly say it was at the time and people intrepretted it as being in-game? I thought it was CGI, so I don't believe Sony was being deceptive.

It's obviously in the early stages of development so some of it had to be staged. I said it in another thread, if Milo was as perfect as that video, it would have been given a precise launch date at E3, it was just announced at E3. IGN said that it works as long as you "play" within the confines of what Molyneux has said. Since it's only in the early stages of dev, who knows how far it can go. I remember Volvo-bot on MSN Messenger. That thing is certainly not perfect, but it provides an indication that the technology is there (reactionary speaking, movements etc). It's definately not sentient AI, MS never said that (You could tell because in that video Milo reacted, it didn't initiate, from the moment that woman stepped into camera view).

But finally, and more importantly, does it really matter whether it was smoke and mirrors? Isn't the important thing that someone is actually trying to push AI technology (even if it is only theoretical?). I'm not saying I want sentient beings, all I'm saying is that at least MS is attempting to make AI that reacts perfectly to what you do, which is something severely lacking in 3D games.

You played any of the big hits late? "ZOMG he flanks me automatically!!!", aside from our expectations should be higher this generation to expect something better than them to automatically flank, the worst part is that not all games (barely the majority I would say) have these decent preset tactics.

At least somebody is trying to push for better.

I think that in this case it wasn't the inference of the people (since they didn't believe Milo was sentinent anway), but the implications of Microsoft that was at fault and question. There's nothing wrong with using smoke and mirrors, as long as the audience knows it is smoke and mirrors beforehand, or it is told immedietly afterwards, not in subsequent interviews. I understand that it's less impressive to say "Of course, we're using some smoke and mirrors, to make Milo seem more impressive", but the fact that they didn't, in favor of making Milo seems more impressive is deceptive on it's own.

But, that's my personal perspective.



Akvod on 07 June 2009
heruamon said:
Akvod said:
heruamon said:
Akvod said:
Squilliam said:
Akvod said:
daroamer said:
JaggedSac said:
LOL. What was deceptive about it? The voice recognition, facial recognition, etc? Did people actually think they had developed the most sophisticated AI of all time?

Exactly.  Plus, Peter himself admitted the demo was using a lot of "tricks" to be able to do what it did.  That doesn't mean it was deceptive.

But if you don't admit those tricks on the spot (E3 conference), then it is deceptive.

Magicians don't need to admit they used tricks because it's already assumed that they are. In this case, it's almost like a person doing something that seems magical, and not admitting that it was only a magic trick in the end.

Yeah,  the whole 3d graphics rendering you see in games is one big deception. I expect you to now go off on one big thread about how game artists and programmers have been deceiving you.

Your thread awaits, go to it!

 

I'm not reffering to the 3D graphics rendering (if you read my previous posts in the same thread), but how the presenters implied that Milo has emotions, and is an actual sentinent AI.

Please don't put words in my mouth, and use straw mans.

I think you decieved yourself...in thinking that "Milo" was a sentient AI...WTF...did you REALLY think Lionhead had created AI in 4 months...you're kidding me, right...please tell me you're kidding me...

I told you all, that the whole point is that the detractors never thought that the AI was sentinent in the first place, otherwise why would we be arguing agaisnt it? It's very simple logic is it not? How could we say something's not real, if we didn't think it wasn't real in the first play?

I'm simply arguing that in my humble opinion, that the people who presented Milo, at the E3 conference (not in subsequent interviews, or on the floor showcases in the rest of E3), they implied that Milo was a sentinent AI, with emotions, that could be interacted with as if it were a real living boy.

Dude...I've watched that video so many times, and I've been amazed by it, but I NEVER once got the feeling that they were trying to come across like "Milo" was sentinent.  It was just a very well written demo to display the potential of the system to receive and process inputs and relay sensible outputs...just like in dialogue radial in RPGs.  Sorry, but I didn't walk away with impression, and as you say, further more, I've seen NO reports has tried to say that M$ and Lionhead were  talking AI.

I had the feeling they were trying to come across, but that's personal opinions, and I respect your's (as I hope you respect mine). As for "well written", I think that, or as other say in a more negative tone, "scripted", itself is disengenous.

They claimed that the woman was interacting with Milo for the first time, and it didn't seem like that to me, and if you were right and it was a well written tech demo to show the potential (when in fact, they were saying, "look, this woman is interacting with Milo for the first time, unscripted, and it worked perfectly". Far from being a well written tech demo that's only showing what's possible, rather than what is) then that means that they were deceptive, as they said that the woman never interacted with Milo before.

Microsoft (why would you use M$?) and Lionheart were talking about Milo, which is the name, I thought, of the AI. Am I wrong?