echodot

Yeah which would make it plan A according to this administration.

It's also the only way they could actually win. Well other than just leaving, but they're not going to do that.

They're going to have to really redo their advertising if they're going to attract stoners. All that advertising is about how you can see the world (and then blew it up) and get free training (in skills that are utterly useless outside of the military) and become a hero (by having your legs blown off).

All of that sounds like way too much hard work. I just want to do my 8 hours and then go home. Also virtually every civilian job pays better. It's amazing anyone joins up.

Given the fact that Americans were so obsessed with religion it's probably necessary for any politician to pretend to be religious it doesn't mean they actually are.

That's my problem with this idea. As a game developer I want every aspect of my game to be defined I don't want some rogue element doing random things that I cannot predict or account for.

Randomly generated mysteries actually doing exist (obviously it's not actually random it's just picking from a list of possible choices).

It's a very small game though only a few city blocks but it can generate some interesting cases. I had one case where the cop who found the body turned out to be the actual murderer, which is honestly quite clever, I've also never had it do that again.

Hopefully somebody further down can tell you what the game is because I'm at work and I can't remember its name

Like the article says it seems really weird decision for a multiplayer game.

It seems like the worst of both worlds between just letting players guide each other and having a tutorial. All the downsides of unreliable individuals giving unreliable information (in humans for the sake of amusement, and in the AIs because of hallucinations) while simultaneously lacking the limited progression path and handholding of a guided tutorial.

I'm not asking whether the game was successful I'm asking if it was well received. Did people enjoy the AI integration did they think it added something to the game or would they have preferred the game not to have it.

As a game developer I would be extremely uncomfortable with the idea that my characters could just say whatever.

I think the point is mainly that using derogative terms in no way helps your arguement.

Well as long as they were slightly upset as children I guess it's okay for them to be murderous bastards now. I totally withdraw all objections.

The fact that I have no idea what you're talking about it's kind of my point really. There has been no successful AI game.