tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5467358192600936682.post1967177917682394472..comments2024-02-17T14:52:52.122-05:00Comments on Lucid Phoenix Games: Is a Solo Game a Game and Other Thoughts on a Colloquium on Games of StrategyDoug Schulzhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03777717583854876582noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5467358192600936682.post-34967121868376458522017-04-19T10:05:27.016-04:002017-04-19T10:05:27.016-04:00Oh, we clearly need a board game AI Turing test!
...Oh, we clearly need a board game AI Turing test!<br /><br />After I wrote this, I got to thinking about how game designers might use Dixit, Skeath, and Reiley's thoughts on strategic games to create better AIs for solo and cooperative games. The more a designer can take their ideas into account, the more interesting I think the AI becomes, and said Turing test would be a great way to quality control that.Doug Schulzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03777717583854876582noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5467358192600936682.post-49805240409879171322017-04-17T20:35:34.436-04:002017-04-17T20:35:34.436-04:00At first I thought that solo games are clearly not...At first I thought that solo games are clearly not strategy games by the Dixit-Skeath-Reiley definition, because there is no other player with whose decisions yours would interact. But then your observations about AI systems, particularly in computer or video games, made me think of the Turing test. So, if you are playing a computer game against an AI that is indistinguishable in its behavior from another human player, then your approach to the game is the same as if it were in fact a human player, your decisions truly are interactive, and it is to all intents and purposes a game of strategy that you would approach in the same way. So at that level, a solo game really becomes a game of strategy. That is not a conclusion I expected to reach.Paul Owenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02260814589584723033noreply@blogger.com