Browse thread
[Caml-list] Caml productivity.
[
Home
]
[ Index:
by date
|
by threads
]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
| Date: | -- (:) |
| From: | Jonathan Coupe <jonathan@m...> |
| Subject: | Re: Games (Re: [Caml-list] Caml productivity.) |
----- Original Message ----- From: John Max Skaller <skaller@ozemail.com.au> To: Jonathan Coupe <jonathan@meanwhile.freeserve.co.uk> Cc: <caml-list@inria.fr> Sent: Thursday, August 01, 2002 4:39 PM Subject: Re: Games (Re: [Caml-list] Caml productivity.) > >>Chatting with game/CG professionals around me _strengthened_ this > >>impression: the symbolic parts seem even more non-trivial in realistic > >>applications. > >I am a games and realtime 3D professional - and I have to tell you, in the > >nicest way (I hope) this really isn't how things are. I'd suggest that your > >conversations have naturally reflected your own interests. If you want to > >make a balanced assessment of what people do in the real world, try looking > >at some representative books and collections of conference papers - the > >Graphics Gems and Game Gems series would be good starting points. > > > The issue isn't what is done in the real world, by companies that don't > really know > how to develop a game, but what *ought* to be done. It might be your issue; it wasn't *the* one Eijiro and I were discussing. Eijiro was under the mistaken impression that symbolic problems are dominant in the graphics industry. > > It would be nice, for example, if a military game had some small > resemblance to > actual warfare. Military units have intelligence. They operate with > stranding orders > with some reason to believe the orders are effective. They move from > point A to > point B with some kind of common sense. > > Now look at the utterly abysmal routing in most military games, > the totally absurd actions units take, etc. Yes, routing is often poor. It's possible to vastly improve on it. Language change isn't necessary, it's purely a matter of algorithms. People just don't bother. It's easily done with a few heuristics and possibly some stochastic evaluation. - Jonathan ------------------- To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners