Should the Monster Play Fair?: Reception of Artificial Intelligence in Alien: Isolation

Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F00216208%3A11230%2F20%3A10413102" target="_blank" >RIV/00216208:11230/20:10413102 - isvavai.cz</a>

Výsledek na webu

<a href="https://verso.is.cuni.cz/pub/verso.fpl?fname=obd_publikace_handle&handle=p9sGcORctF" target="_blank" >https://verso.is.cuni.cz/pub/verso.fpl?fname=obd_publikace_handle&handle=p9sGcORctF</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

—

Jazyk výsledku

angličtina

Název v původním jazyce

Should the Monster Play Fair?: Reception of Artificial Intelligence in Alien: Isolation

Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

The article addresses the gap in scholarship on reception of game AI by qualitatively analysing forum discussions about the Alien monster in the game Alien: Isolation (Creative Assembly, 2014a). The game&apos;s Alien is a rare example of a recurrent, undefeatable AI-driven adversary, designed to represent a sublime monster. Its behaviour is governed by behaviour trees and simulated sensory perception (on the level of foreground AI), but also by the Director component, which monitors the global state of the game to maintain gameplay tension and periodically sends the creature near the player&apos;s location (on the level of background AI). Upon the game&apos;s release, however, very little information about its AI was disclosed. The article follows players&apos; efforts to theorize and evaluate the game&apos;s AI, and their discussion about its (un)fairness. It outlines two basic approaches to enemy AI: experientialist, which focuses on how the opponent &quot;feels,&quot; and simulationist, which sees the monster as a simulated animal-like creature. While experientialists accept AI tricks and shortcuts, simulationists expect the Alien to be a discrete, autonomous entity, ontologically separated from its environment. The latter, for example, find it unfair that the Alien has access to information outside of its sensory perception, and seem upset by the actions of the AI Director module, which they interpret as collusion between the Alien and the game. Moreover, simulationists object to the idea that the Alien should be able to teleport or be &quot;tethered&quot; to the player character. The article points to an important paradox of AI in games. On the one hand, players welcome a degree of unpredictability, variation and mystery afforded by AI routines. On the other hand, many expect to be able to completely account for and understand the behaviour of computer-controlled opponents -- even if they are science fiction monsters.

Název v anglickém jazyce

Should the Monster Play Fair?: Reception of Artificial Intelligence in Alien: Isolation

Popis výsledku anglicky

The article addresses the gap in scholarship on reception of game AI by qualitatively analysing forum discussions about the Alien monster in the game Alien: Isolation (Creative Assembly, 2014a). The game&apos;s Alien is a rare example of a recurrent, undefeatable AI-driven adversary, designed to represent a sublime monster. Its behaviour is governed by behaviour trees and simulated sensory perception (on the level of foreground AI), but also by the Director component, which monitors the global state of the game to maintain gameplay tension and periodically sends the creature near the player&apos;s location (on the level of background AI). Upon the game&apos;s release, however, very little information about its AI was disclosed. The article follows players&apos; efforts to theorize and evaluate the game&apos;s AI, and their discussion about its (un)fairness. It outlines two basic approaches to enemy AI: experientialist, which focuses on how the opponent &quot;feels,&quot; and simulationist, which sees the monster as a simulated animal-like creature. While experientialists accept AI tricks and shortcuts, simulationists expect the Alien to be a discrete, autonomous entity, ontologically separated from its environment. The latter, for example, find it unfair that the Alien has access to information outside of its sensory perception, and seem upset by the actions of the AI Director module, which they interpret as collusion between the Alien and the game. Moreover, simulationists object to the idea that the Alien should be able to teleport or be &quot;tethered&quot; to the player character. The article points to an important paradox of AI in games. On the one hand, players welcome a degree of unpredictability, variation and mystery afforded by AI routines. On the other hand, many expect to be able to completely account for and understand the behaviour of computer-controlled opponents -- even if they are science fiction monsters.

Druh

J_ost - Ostatní články v recenzovaných periodicích

CEP obor

—

OECD FORD obor

50802 - Media and socio-cultural communication

Projekt

—

Návaznosti

I - Institucionalni podpora na dlouhodoby koncepcni rozvoj vyzkumne organizace

Rok uplatnění

2020

Kód důvěrnosti údajů

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Název periodika

Game Studies [online]

ISSN

1604-7982

e-ISSN

—

Svazek periodika

20

Číslo periodika v rámci svazku

2

Stát vydavatele periodika

DK - Dánské království

Počet stran výsledku

35

Strana od-do

—

Kód UT WoS článku

—

EID výsledku v databázi Scopus

—