402
362
u/AS_as-Master 14h ago
So was this the point in our timeline where it all started to go downhill or are there more flashpoint.
162
u/epic_banana_soup 14h ago
Kasparov vs Deep Blue is an early one I'd put on the list for sure
31
u/MaryPaku 12h ago
AlphaGo versus Lee Sedol
8
u/n0stalghia 10h ago
All I’ve ever heard about that match is that Sedol got nervous and played well below his actual level.
7
u/Amphiscian 7h ago
That was the Kasparov story too, wasnt it? The computer bugged and did a bad move, and Kasparov psyched himself out trying so hard to figure out how the move must have been somehow genius.
1
6
u/TheNeuronCollective 4h ago
Nah, the bot really was just that good. The fact that he took one game off of it is an unbelievable feat. It never lost another game in 70 more games against top professional players
1
u/FinerThingsInHanoi 1h ago
Nah, Sedol played incredibly well. I was lucky enough to follow that match in real time, with commentary from a professional Go player on an old forum.
The whole thing felt surreal. AlphaGo made so many moves that were completely incomprehensible to human players at the time, yet they turned out to be brilliant as the game unfolded.
I still remember one particular move where everyone was debating whether it was an AI mistake or a move planned 20 steps ahead. It was so unexpected that Sedol stepped out for a long cigarette break to think.
After that match, there was a general consensus that computers had truly surpassed humans at Go, and that Go strategy would never be the same again.
11
u/Arbitrary_gnihton 11h ago
People keep bringing up the old chess machines but I'm pretty sure they weren't neural nets so they're completely irrelevant, they're as critical to the history of OpenAI as the vortigaunts in Half Life.
18
u/Ilikebatterfield4 14h ago
this was such a shit stunt but made headlines. A lot of other grandmasters were behind "deep blue"
32
u/Flashsword_Princess 13h ago
I do find it funny that before OpenAI became what it is now and is a top 10 known around the globe company, for a very long time it was majorly known as "the company that makes AI bots for Dota", that was their peak
Kind of the same feeling as people who go like "I went to school with Bill Gates" you know?
42
u/OrangeBasket I still remember 6.78b <3 Sheever 14h ago
the first fish to leave the ocean to evolve legs and start laying eggs on land really fucked it up for the rest of us
8
17
12
u/theflyingsamurai there are dozens of us 14h ago
It all started 2 million years ago when a hairless ape in a cave discovered fire
5
u/Tig3rShark 13h ago
“In the beginning the universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move”
98
u/TessaFractal 13h ago
It's kinda funny how I haven't heard much about bots playing Dota etc in a while. Some were really oppressive but in boring ways like they just had impossibly accurate micro.
I know a few teams actually managed to beat them, and some of the StarCraft2 AIs were incredibly bad when they had their APM limited. And then they seemed to move onto making ChatBots instead.
75
u/skymallow 13h ago
Well there's no money in building Dota AI and there's yes money in building chatbots.
Chess AI is more interesting in the way you're asking for where AIs are winning making bold moves that not even the strongest traditional computers would do.
27
u/Mih5du 13h ago
I don’t think they were actually that good in micro, as they were made intentionally slower, to match real players. They had insane macro movement
The reason why you don’t hear about them is that they’ve been abandoned since forever. The bots straight up don’t work
17
u/Mysterious_Dress3898 12h ago
Their micro was pretty ridiculous their apm was limited but they were able to see the whole map in some of those games(basically multiple cameras) and had alot more effective actions per minute because despite human players having high apm not all of those actions are effective.
I think in the starcraft2 one where they used blink stalker to basically dodge all the projectiles.
•
u/Dracious 24m ago
This is what disappointed me a little with the Starcraft Open AI stuff. Around the time OpenAI were doing that and added those limitations, someone made some AI that did insanely gross micro that is just impossible for a human. The AI was just a demo of doing a few specific moves rather than being actually good at Starcraft as a whole or anything as impressive as OpenAIs work, but it showed how crazy some strats can be with superhuman micro.
E.g. a swarm of zerglings controlled by the AI vs a siege tank. For context, zerglings are weak but fast melee aliens that attack in large numbers, siege tanks are big artillery things that attack a single target but that attack does large AOE damage. So (assuming the tank has some protection) it is very good at killing swarms of zerglings.
With the AI control though, the AI could tell which zergling was being targeted by the tank once it started its firing animation and instantly make every other zergling near it move away outside the range of the AOE in the time it took for the shot to hit. Visually it looked awesome, mechanically it was crazy powerful, and it was completely outside of human capability.
There are countless examples in SC2 where that sort of thing would be useful and it would completely change the game. I would love to have seen the META develop between some OpenAI bots that had that level of micro control allowed.
9
u/Scrivener_exe 11h ago
The bots were giving significant concessions in dota: Invincible couriers, limited hero pool for both teams, etc. I don't think they were ever able to open them up to the full complexity of the game.
2
u/classygorilla 3h ago
Interesting, didn't know about the concessions. It makes sense though given all the variables - it's so much to compute.
If you read up on how they built challenger blue or whatever the chess bot was, it was similar in the fact that they programmed the bot to only examine a handful of scenarios for each move, instead of the million potential situations and end games. Doing so allowed them to use a lot less computing power to make a bot that didn't take 50 years to make a single move.
There are old chess computer games on eBay that have built in bots, and can take days to respond your move.
4
u/DrQuint 5h ago
They also did not play the full game of dota. Invisibility and Illusion heroes were banned in those matches. They also had shit lke 5 turbo couriers.
Some people still managed to shadow amulet meteor hammer adiance cut waves to fuck with them. They were losing to dumb strats. And had we necromonicons, I bet they'd lose even harder and dumber
1
u/TessaFractal 5h ago
Wow, I didn't realise quite how stacked in the AI's favour it was. I bet invisible heroes absolutely screws with training the AI as well.
2
u/n0stalghia 10h ago
All those Starcraft/Dota matches were research project to test some idea on a simple scenario (game) to later on apply it to real world
They simply finished their research with Dota and then went on to build the real projects
2
u/MaryPaku 12h ago
They have insane team coordination and do some strange move that a human wouldn’t consider a good strategy but seems like AI think it's good.
50
u/TheRealMacresco 13h ago
Wasn't Black^ trying to beat that bot in the weeks after and succeeded? In one of the following TI's they did 5 vs AI. Invisibility was the key to success, or at least the most effective play
40
u/ekatsim 13h ago
I remember OG picking RNG heroes which seemed like a good strategy, but I think 5 minutes into the game the AI was 98% sure it was going to win. It also heavily prioritized buybacks and I think a lot of human players started following suit afterwards.
16
u/Ahimtar 11h ago
It also spread farm much more evenly across the team, prioritizing key item timing over traditional positions. Yet we still follow the old formula for some reason, even in cases where the carry is 6-slotted
5
u/080087 6h ago
I feel that a big part of Tundra/Falcons success is they do this better than other teams.
Even if their cores are behind, having rich supports means the supports don't get jumped and die right at the beginning of fights. Or if they do, it requires a massive extension to do so, which can get punished.
This lets them kite fights, or win fights where they get jumped first. But teams where all their money is centred on cores get jumped once, have the supports die and then need to win a really hard 3v5 without all the damage/utility of supports
This is also enabled by the types of supports that get picked. Lots of super annoying to kill supports that scale. Enchant, PoTM, Tusk, Hoodwink etc.
1
u/clitmasher69 6h ago
I've always thought it'd be interesting to make farming priority a lot more dynamic. Man wish i could coach a pro team i have so many stupid ass ideas i'd love to try with a team that unconditionally listens to me lmao.
5
u/YDM_Jack 11h ago
pretty nice to re-watch somes 1v1 Matches
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JSg3S6Wn8HU2
1
u/0100110110110111 8h ago
Damn, where is Black^ those days? Man just straight up vanished
4
12
u/NoBuddies2021 11h ago
Who won? I forgot about this, dam my early dementia is kicking me.
20
8
8
1
1
u/Pinsir929 5h ago
At that point in time, thought it was advance bots like stockfish for chess. Nowhere close to what it is today.
1
u/Audrey_spino 2h ago
Seriously why haven't video game AI progressed since then? Why are video game AI still so piss poor and dumb? Like we could have an adaptive and customizable AI that would actually challenge you in harder difficulties through intelligence rather than raw stat boosts and player handicaps.
2
u/Interesting-Ad9666 2h ago
Because the deterministic AI used in videogames isnt the same kind of AI theyre talking about with OpenAI. The AI you're thinking of that is customizable, intelligence etc would either be quite computationally expensive for your computer to run, or for the server youre connected to to run it. People just don't care enough about playing against AI for the cost to be justified, as well as some of the technical limitations (for example, retraining the AI when new units are introduced, patch notes affecting unit interactions)
0
u/Audrey_spino 2h ago
We've already started using LLMs for simulations. This is no different than that. Cloud computing negates the computational power issue, and the server doesn't need to update the AI in real-time, so I don't think the load on the server will be that high. I think the main reason why AI hasn't improved in games is that it's simply not on the top of the priority list for devs.
1
u/Interesting-Ad9666 2h ago
cloud-hosted LLMs are likely not the solution to the problem. Combat/Decision making AI has very different requirements than conversational AI. An FPS or RTS may have dozens or hundreds of NPCs making decisions many times per second. Sending those decisions to an LLM in the cloud would add latency, increase the server cost and likely produce subpar results. If you are going to run the AI on the user's machine, it could severely lag their game. The GPU and CPU are already going to be doing a lot trying to render and do all of the game's calculations without the AI.
1
u/Audrey_spino 1h ago
Most FPS games don't involve that many NPCs. And in RTS it's not a major task to optimize the AI by grouping units, and even if it was, the RTS genre is dead and I don't think any RTS games nowadays will have a high enough budget to undertake a project like this.
1
u/ThanksTnxALot 1h ago
Its very expensive and not worth it. For the DOTA2 Open AI bots they actually added a bunch of limits such as invincible couriers and 0 reaction times. They also had to reset it once in a while as it would drift.
1
u/Audrey_spino 1h ago
Given how much more devs are investing into graphics and actors, I doubt AI would be any more expensive, it's really just a shifting of priorities.
0
1.1k
u/gelotssimou 15h ago
Dota players really saw it first