Im surprised all the ppl in this thread are taking the concept to such silly extremes! Evolution exists in this world, and things are still killable. The key thing is that evolution takes time and in the case of learning (which is different from simply evolving) a certain level of intelligence.

If you have a game like an RPG (best use for this kind of stuff), and it is of a fair length with a fair variety of monsters, then this idea can and probably should be considered. Assuming a medievel setting with standard medievel RPG weapons, especially thinking along the lines of Ultima mixed with Nahlak, lets examine our band of orcs. Orc encampments can be found in several main places on the map, they are villages of sorts. Orcs fleeing combat could report to their commanders, and slowly over the course of the game, the orcs get better in the tactics tehy use against u.

They dont have to start off as idiots that rush at u, seeing as they have probably fought battles before, but they could change the type of weapons/armor/sp eqp that they wear while out patrolling. If you are found to be of a large enuff danger, they would begin training in specific skills that would be effective against you. The important thing is that this would happen very gradually, and u would not get some super orcs that cant be killed unless u literally played the game for years. And even then, i dont think the orcs would ever develop lightning resist, except as lightning resistant armor (which tends to take off 10-50% lightning damage depending on game).

Most orcs on the map belong to one of the encampments and each encampment has it''s own sheet of ur tactics. Thus if u use different tactics against the orcs in different parts of the world (this would be especailly realistic if the terrain differed and the orcs at different encampments also had different fighting styles to begin with). Orcs belonging to an encampment where an orc was attacked and fleed from you would hear the news of the attack pretty quickly, and the cowardly orc could reveal ur battle tactics. However, news between encampments would spread also, but far far slower, since transporation is likely to be a problem, plus the player might even be allowed to kill orc messengers if he finds them walking along.

This can be appleid to many other races in many other ways. There is nothing wrong with the concept behind this, it''s just that designers seem to feel that the only way to implement this is through extreme measures. Many games have AIs that learn the player''s tactics and adapt. Just dont go stupid.

--------------------------------------------------
1) If you fry one orc with lightning, how do the others find out that you did this?

2) How would orcs become resistant to lightning in a very short period of time?

3) If these orcs had this immense adaptability, why are they not already invulnerable? Others would have tried frying them with lightning, fire, etc., before.

4) How is the player expected to get past/defeat these uber-orc-borg creatures? Would this be fun/interesting to figure out, or nearly impossible?

5) If you have a super-adaptive species with a sort of hive mind, how do other species survive at all? Or are they merely being herded for the orcs food?

In other words, the end result of a super adaptive species is ecological disaster.

The mighty cockroach, while very well adapted, took a long, long time to get there. Maybe faster at adapting than other species, but not on the time scale of a few days. And, they''ll always be easily squished.
-----------------------------------------------

Actually, if you think about it, it would be better called the Influenza theory, considering the flu basically does all that, it evolves every year, possibly even faster, but I wouldnt say without any knowledge, since the flu travels from person to person, so basically, the flu is natures uber-orc-borg creature. Of course, the way humans survive is obvious: we adapt too. Suggesting another addition to this theory:

Why can''t the player adapt if the orc can?

-----------------------------

A wise man once said "A person with half a clue is more dangerous than a person with or without one."

The Micro$haft BSOD T-Shirt

WOW... I thought up orcs and lightning as an example to ILLUSTRATE, not to imply directly. Luckily, LordElectro has said what I was implying, so thanks LE.

I can see how an enemy that becomes immune to an attck will basically remove that attack from your repertoire, eventually leaving you with nothing. What I meant, was that we need more intelligent opponents who think strategically based on what they see/know etc, as part of the games design, adapting to our tactics like we do to their''s.

If games are to become more believable, and since the power of computers is constantly increasing, why would it be wrong to assume the casual gamer wouldn''t accept four enemies that can adapt, as opposed to 50 spaceships that explode with one bullet and keep moving in a zig-zag, even when everyone''s been shot and they''re the only ones left?

Also, would the game designer be responsible for incorperating this type of evolutionary model in the game, or is it for the AI programmer to think up?

BTW don''t take examples so literally...

quote: Original post by ImmaGNUman
Actually, if you think about it, it would be better called the Influenza theory, considering the flu basically does all that, it evolves every year, possibly even faster, but I wouldnt say without any knowledge, since the flu travels from person to person, so basically, the flu is natures uber-orc-borg creature. Of course, the way humans survive is obvious: we adapt too. Suggesting another addition to this theory:

ROFL - We are merely herded for food by the flu :D And if the flu were 5 feet tall and had a propensity for playing with sharp things...

But seriously, adaptive AI isn''t a bad thing to include in a game. Just keep it either transparent to the player (don''t let it learn too quickly), or provide a plot device, like the orc messengers mentioned previously to avoid the whole hive mind thing. Unless the opponents really do have a hive mind.

This task should be shared between the designers and the AI programmers. Play balance (not making it too difficult to beat the AI), tactical patterns, etc. should come from the designers with the AI programmers providing the framework and keeping the designers within the AI limitations.

BTW I couldn''t resist taking the example literally

We could smash all these ideas together and come up with two cool things....

1)
We have a species of creatures, sort of a recluse bunch that is rarely ever encountered. They are constantly learning from their mistakes, so if the player continues, they can learn how to beat this enemy (us). Just like what was said above somewhere.

2)
If this game has a set plot and story, the final boss, or main villian can have this adaptive combat thing going on, and each time you fight him, he can adjust to your play style so that when it comes time for a final confrontation, he is the right level for the player. Lots to work out but definately something to mull over.

well to make it i think more enjoyable would be to reverse the idea and use what asherons call does and decrease the use of spells that you use over and over forcing you to change tactics other wise it would get eponentially more difficult

A method I have seen used well is in a magic using game every time some one casts a spell you draw manna accros from the magical whatever dimention. If you use your magic too much in the one area you draw the you dimentions closer and closer together untill magical beings, monsters whatever can jump the gap. So basicly use your magic when you have to but abuse it and you get punished.

As Mr Cup always says,
''''I pretend to work. They pretend to pay me.''''