Lucas is right, guys.
I've been playing ME3 a lot, and I've seen some bots, yes. But they're hilarious. The team treats them like pets because they're silly. They run into walls; They get confused as to where in the map they are; They shoot at the sky a lot, even when something is hurting them right in front of them; They stand still for banshees to one-shot them; They get into cover when nothing is shooting at them; They have no clue how to deal with objectives; And so, so much more. Ultimately it really is like having a zombie squadmate in a military scenario.
"Crap! We have two atlases, here! Get to cover!
So yes, the bots exist, but as I've pointed out many times, they can't actually play the game. With a GW2 bot, you can set it running and go to bed because it will just play the game for you. It'll farm, do events, and be very capable; There's really nothing a player can do that a GW2 bot can't. And the reason for this is because GW2 combat is essentially just button-mash zerging that doesn't rely on tactical awareness, nor reaction times. So a bot is easy to write for it. But when you actually have a game that involves tactical awareness and reaction times? That's when you get really bad bots, like the ME3 bots.
ME3 requires you to think, GW2 does not. Go and watch some videos of both and you'll understand what I mean. You can get past most content in GW2 just by the merit of having grinded for good gear. That doesn't work at all in ME3 because the game requires the player to use their brain and react quickly. A bot doesn't have a brain, it can just do set tasks. Very simple set tasks. And GW2 is very simple.
This is why, as Lucas points out, you won't be able to find a bot that successfully plays ME3. It'll just be hilariously bad. You'll be amused by just how bad it is. The ladies and gents that make up my ME3 team have been very amused when we've had to PUG one or two more people and one of them has actually been a bot. The bot is like a piñata; It'll get shot a lot and then it will die.
Just for blindude though who seems to be really oblivious to the topic at hand, I'll try and elaborate on why it's easy to write a successful bot for GW2, but hard to write one for ME3 (and impossible to make a successful one).
Okay, ME3 already has great AI. This is the thing. It's AI versus AI. If you have a team of people who've put together some truly amazing, tactical, reactive AI, then it's hard to write a bot that can play against that AI unless you have running access
to what the AI is doing. Try to think about this in technical terms, please
. I understand it might be hard, but try.
You're talking about writing a bot that can out think AI which can react to it tactically in a three dimensional space. This is actually a bigger deal than chess, because chess doesn't have the three-dimensionality of maps to deal with. Nor does GW2. GW2 is one, big open plain. If you get above a mob, all you get is 'invulnerable' ticks if you try to attack them. Sniping is not a thing in GW2. Mobs don't try to snipe you in GW2.
A mob can and will
use higher ground cover to snipe you in Mass Effect 3. This is very confusing for a bot to react to, because it doesn't know how to deal with the situation tactically. Let's say that there is an atlas bearing down on the position of a bot, a phantom closing in from a flanking position to do a stealth one-hit kill, and a sniper in cover.
The ME3 bot can't
understand the situation tactically. It can't evaluate the situation. It can't think and react in the way we can. The three-dimensionality of it just adds layers of confusion which makes it all the more difficult to write a bot for. You need a bot that can react tactically in a three-dimensional plane
. You need a bot that can work with team mates strategically
In GW2, you don't
need to work with team mates, you just have to be there spamming keys. In GW2, you don't
need to deal with three-dimensionality, because everything is on a flat plain. In GW2, you don't
need to worry about tactics because mobs make a bee-line towards you (mobs never run away, or try to lure you into an ambush).
GW2 is just a matter of hitting buttons, it has no tactical inclinations. Again, you can't even snipe.
These differences in game style are why you can make a successful bot for GW2, but not for ME3.
I'll add a bit more. Since... you know, people who don't code... it's hard to explain things.
Okay, imagine it like this. GW2 is a flat board. There are no 'floors' to worry about. It's perfectly flat. All of your skills work on a flat board, you can't target high or low, you can't snipe, it's basically a two dimensional plane. Let's work with that. Now, mobs will make a bee-line towards you and never try to flank you. So on that two-dimensional plane you'll have dots coming from the same angle. And all of these dots are always visible. You just have to turn the bot to face the attacker and hit some attack buttons. If health is low, hit a heal, it's easy.
Now add three-dimensionality. Mobs can come from below and above, and they can attack you from below and above. The bot can no longer solely turn left/right, it has to deal with a sphere of interactivity. Now add in the tactical elements of cover use and cloaks which make targets less visible. It's now dealing with dots that can come from above and below, and dots that can turn invisible. It's also dealing with dots that can come from any direction, rather than just the one.
Now add in concerns like needing ammo, ammo location, concealed dots camping near ammo. Add in concealed targets that are waiting for you to be alone and in the open in order to kill you (the AI of ME3 is designed to go after lone wolf characters, and at that point you need
to be able to communicate with other players that yu need an extraction, which a bot can't do). The bot has to deal with all of these extra concerns that aren't even an issue in GW2. This is why a successful bot hasn't been written for ME3, yet. There are so many variables
. There are thousands upon thousands upon thousands more variables in ME3, than the limited few in GW2.
And for me, those variables separate a good/fun game from a bad/unfun one.
Edited by DuskWolf, 12 December 2012 - 04:11 PM.