Does NBA2K12 CPU Want to Win?

Does the computer (AI) want to win? Does it get upset if it loses? I do. That's why gamers have to set house rules in some games. Because otherwise they'll exploit whatever they can for a win.

How can a CPU want to win, or express that in a video game?

Better AI programming.

"Better AI programming."

Meaning what? Is it the AI from NBA Jam, or something else?

No, not NBA Jam. At the current technology it's impossible for AI to feel the thrill of winning or get upset with losing.

Does the computer (AI) want to win?

No. It's programmed to achieve a certain or main goal, simply to have a higher value score over the condition it is being compared to (which is the human gamer).

Does it get upset if it loses?

No. It's only programmed to achieve the main goal. It could be programmed with other conditions to counter the conditions being implemented by the human gamer so it can achieve it's goal.

That's why gamers have to set house rules in some games. Because otherwise they'll exploit whatever they can for a win.

Which is what the CPU AI basically does in HOF difficulty for NBA 2K. It's pounds on every exploit it can to achieve its main goal.

lol is this guy seriously asking if the CPU will have emotions?

The CPU probably doesn't understand what winning is... It just plays the game...

The AI wants to win games in so much as that what it's programmed to accomplish. How often or how effectively it can accomplish that goal depends on how well it's programmed.

Comeback/rubber band logic is one example of the AI "wanting" to win. We're all familiar with it, none of our shots are going in, we're even missing dunks out of the blue while the CPU is just hitting everything, making all kinds of defensive stops, etc. As discussed in another thread, this is pretty cheap and certainly not an ideal way of keeping the CPU in the game and providing a challenge but because human intelligence wins out over artificial intelligence in the end, programmers have to do something to give the AI a competitive advantage.

As they develop better AI tech though, we'll hopefully see less of that and more situations where the AI can "learn" from the user. There's only a finite amount of situations that the AI can be programmed for and it's impossible for the programmers to anticipate absolutely everything a user might do, because there'll always be one bright spark that thinks outside the box well enough to find an exploit. Maybe that exploit can be patched up with a title release or fixed up next year but if they can get the AI to a point where it's learning and adjusting to counteract a strategy that the user is exploiting over and over again, then they're on the right track.

For the last few weeks me & the A.I. have had some great fights. Sometimes its smart, & sometimes it's not.

I won't call it "want" but rather "programmed to try and win".

How can a CPU want to win, or express that in a video game?

I guess there's no way. Even if there's a built-in chatbot programmed to trash talk you, they are only dependent on values (not moral values) and programmed "logic". Also if the CPU "wants to win" or "gets upset", it should quit an ongoing game when the CPU is losing.

Off-topic, but I just felt like posting this.

phpBB [video]

Creepy. That's why I don't want the CPU on games to "want to win" or "get upset".

This guy Czar, who makes excellent videos and worked with 2K this year for the game, says "don't play video games, play basketball." But humans who really want to win, for example in a tournament, have to play the video game and not basketball.

People who play online, and who get competitive about it, lab for hours, learning the ins and outs of the video game. No matter how well crafted, the video game isn't basketball, or whatever sport it represents.

People playing the game don't sweat, they don't have to make decisions while fatigued, they generally have a bird's eye view that people don't have in a real basketball game. Those are only some of the differences between a video game and the real sport.

The computer isn't acting like a human who wants to win until and unless it steps outside the rules of the video game. Until it takes advantage of the same things a human might, it's going to remain less of a challenge than a human player. That includes even the computer team "cheats" in games, such as increased shooting accuracy down the stretch.

Czar's creed does go out the window when it comes to online/user vs user. Not much you can do about that, I mean it's up to all users involved to play fair and as realistically as possible and not everyone's interested in doing that. You can program the game so that users are more or less forced to generally adhere to the concept of realistic basketball, but not to the same extent as user vs CPU.

That's the point. Even "sim" gamers in a sim league take advantage of things that wouldn't be found in basketball.

The other night I was playing a game. It was my Bulls, which include MJ added to the current Bulls squad, vs the Utah Jazz. I play locked onto one player, for this association it's MJ. Down 1 with :14 seconds remaining, I ran a play for MJ (me). The CPU cut off my drive to the basket, I didn't feel confident with a jumper, so I ran back to the 3 point line, ran around a screen, cut off a second time, ran back to the FT line, ran around another screen, then went for the dunk with time expiring. I was fouled, hit the two FTs, won the game.

That situation could lead to a discussion of tweaking the game so a guy can't dribble like that, for so long, in and out of the lane and in traffic.

But gamers find the things they can do in the game, the "exploits" or things that are different in the video game when compared to real basketball. MJ would never dribble all around like that. He would have taken the jumper or found an open man. The CPU certainly never dribbles around like that. In fact, if sliders are set to make it harder to do that as a human player, then CPU controlled Kobe or Rose or Wade never score driving to the basket.

A "sim" minded gamer would not do that. It's not sim. That gamer self-limits what he'll do to make it seem sim. But if the game were human vs. human, if there was a bet like $100 on the line, the gamer would do it. He'd play NBA 2K, not basketball.

The CPU never does it. It doesn't look for the "exploits", even though in most games it has exploits of its own. But the traditional CPU exploits still don't make the CPU as competitive as a real human. The CPU doesn't want to win, and doesn't even appear to care about wins and losses, because it doesn't take advantage of everything available within the game. Human gamers do take advantage of the video game, the things available there, even if the result is less like real basketball.

During the Madden Challenge I told players "don't play football, play Madden". That's what they had to do to win the tournaments. The CPU would seem to want to win if it could play NBA 2K the video game.

The CPU certainly never dribbles around like that. In fact, if sliders are set to make it harder to do that as a human player, then CPU controlled Kobe or Rose or Wade never score driving to the basket.

The CPU never does it. It doesn't look for the "exploits", even though in most games it has exploits of its own. But the traditional CPU exploits still don't make the CPU as competitive as a real human. The CPU doesn't want to win, and doesn't even appear to care about wins and losses, because it doesn't take advantage of everything available within the game. Human gamers do take advantage of the video game, the things available there, even if the result is less like real basketball.

The CPU would seem to want to win if it could play NBA 2K the video game.

Because the cpu is programmed that way. Just imagine the complaints 2K would get from 'sim' gamers if the cpu did that. If the devs did allow the cpu to do that then it would end up 'arcadey' and not the sim basketball videogame they make it to be.
It's much better for the gamer to restrain himself from exploiting the system rather than have an unrestrained cpu playing the game in a 'non-sim' manner.

Besides the sliders are already there if you want it to be that way. Increase the Attack Basket tendency.

Even sim players exploit the game.

They exploit it in a basic way because they dunk and shoot and dribble in ways they can't in real life basketball. They're already exploiting a video game. They're not playing basketball because they can't.

Beyond that basic "exploit", playing basketball in a video game in a way they can't in real life, Sim players exploit the game in other ways. They play "sim," but they do some things that aren't so sim. And when there's real pressure they even break some of their own rules.

House rules or self restraint against the CPU would be like playing a real game but tying one teams' (CPU teams') shoes together so they can't run too fast or dribble around too much. The other team (the human controlled team) isn't physically restrained. They restrain themselves. They act as the judge when it comes to their running and dribbling. They want to remain "sim", so they don't let themselves go outside the boundaries of what the CPU can physically do.

But when the chips are down, when the game is close, their self restraint relaxes. They do something just a little non sim. They dribble, just once, in a way the CPU team physically can't.

Extend that to a tournament, gamer vs gamer, and those sim rules go out the door.

If the human player can do it, even if he won't, then the CPU that "cares" if it wins or loses will do it, or at least some of it.

They exploit it in a basic way because they dunk and shoot and dribble in ways they can't in real life basketball. They're already exploiting a video game. They're not playing basketball because they can't.

Now you're just going way off with that. Way waaay off. Of course it's unrealistic to play a basketball videogame compared to playing real basketball.



So what's your point? You want the CPU to go all out against human opponents? Sliders. Tweak it.
You want the human players to be restrained from doing so? Doesn't matter, like what has been said before people will always find an exploit to counter the restraints placed on them in the game. It's much better to give the gamer options on what to do rather than limit on what they can do.

Again, what's your point?

When it comes to user vs user games, I'd say most people want to win at all costs. Competitiveness overrides an inclination to play as realistically as possible, as does lag online which can make jumpshots and a slower pace an unsafe strategy. The more user controlled players in the game, the more the experience changes. There's only so much that can be done about that, programmers can account for what the AI and CPU controlled players do but they can't account for the attitude/behaviour/strategy of all the gamers out there.

Aside from strictly enforced sim-oriented play on certain leagues/servers, I think it's always going to be a case of the CPU offering the more authentic sim experience, while online/user vs user is more about "gaming".

I remember playing a team can't remember, I was the Pacers, man I had to play my ass off that game and control the game or I would have gotten housed on HOF setting!!! You have to set the game where the computer competes hard against you

Sliders - the problem with sliders is the CPU doesn't know they've been changed. The CPU keeps taking the same number of outside shots even if the CPU shooting slider are lowered.

The human player knows the sliders have been changed. So they'll drive to the basket more, or throw the ball into the post more.

When there are sliders the gamer continuously tweaks the game. The gamer doesn't know if a 10 game streak of holding the CPU opponent to 90 points or less is because the gamer is playing better D, or because the sliders need adjusting.

Similarly, if a human wins a string of games by 20 or more, is that skill and a hot streak or sliders? If a human team loses 5 games in a row by 20+, is that lack of skill and a bad roster, or is it time to adjust sliders?

Sliders - the problem with sliders is the CPU doesn't know they've been changed. The CPU keeps taking the same number of outside shots even if the CPU shooting slider are lowered.

The human player knows the sliders have been changed. So they'll drive to the basket more, or throw the ball into the post more.

Of course it wouldn't know, because that's not the way the AI is programmed by default (I guess). The CPU will always do what is programmed of it, the sliders exist to limit the range of what the AI is capable of (ideally). So you lower the global shooting sliders but you didn't touch the shooting tendencies, the CPU will still continue shooting unlike "smart" and aware humans that the sliders are now lower. The CPU AI is a program coded by programmers so there will always be limitations based on its code, what you're asking for is a self-aware AI.

When there are sliders the gamer continuously tweaks the game. The gamer doesn't know if a 10 game streak of holding the CPU opponent to 90 points or less is because the gamer is playing better D, or because the sliders need adjusting.

Paralysis by analysis? Slider hell? That's why most people who tweak sliders use stat results as a basis and reference.

Similarly, if a human wins a string of games by 20 or more, is that skill and a hot streak or sliders? If a human team loses 5 games in a row by 20+, is that lack of skill and a bad roster, or is it time to adjust sliders?

It's different for each people on what the cases are but I've noticed that for most people it's about enjoying the game. If they go on a 20 game win streak with either a 1+ or 20+ margin and find that they no longer enjoy the game, they'll tweak it. Same if a person loses 5 games in a row with a 20+ deficit and yet they'll let the sliders be if they still enjoy playing the game.

Sliders have a huge affect. I remember playing a high rated bulls team. Anticipating a tough match, I went right after them, and was blowing them out by the first half. The entire reason was becauae of Derrik Rose. He never penetrated, shot pull up jumpers and deferred to his teammates. I tithes the attack the basket tendency up by 1 and played the gane over. He was almost unstoppable after that.

There are ways to limit your own cheesing, you just have to recognize the way you exploit, and find the slider combinations to keep you honest.

The situation you describe with mj shows how the defensive programming needs to be improved.

fjccommish, I think you need some sun bro. Get out and play some ball.. Leave video games for fun and nothing morr.

I rofled at the first few posts in this thread.