AI
Those of you who know me personally probably know I play a lot of Bridge Baron. There are many great things about the game of Bridge – and it’s implementation in ‘Baron – but I think one of the biggest draws in the computerised version is that when I play it I am somehow in training for my “real” bridge play (I play for Oxford Uni in various capacities, but I’m really not especially good). For me, having somewhat real world meaning to my single player gaming is quite a draw.
Bridge Baron’s AI is pretty damn good. In fact, it’s extremely good. Presuming you were trying to make it more like a human (and that’s a bit of a presumption) you’d probably just make it slightly less consistant – human players make amusing mistakes at the strangest times, whereas the Baron’s are mildly predictable. But really, playing against the Baron AI is actually properly good training. As long as you don’t factor in that a pause in his play guarantees he has more than one card in the called suit. And you don’t use the undo key too much.
Of course, a massive part of my love of Bridge comes from it’s social nature. On a normal bridge night you will meet thirty-odd new people in a situation where you can safely completely ignore them or start a conversation. I joke that it’s like speed dating but really it’s like speed dating + 10. Anyway, removing the human competition obviously removes a lot of the appeal. But by no means all of it.
This post has been rambling, but it does have a point. Can any Chess fans here tell me how they feel playing against Chess AI? I believe that Chess AI is even more “human like” than Bridge AI. How important is social contact in Chess?
Leave a Reply
What's This?
- Visiting the Village is Mode 7's blog and podcast.
Latest Episode
RSS Feeds
- Everything
- Just Podcasts
- Blog Comments
Mailing List
The Village Twit
Find Out More...
- Find out...
Chat
- Join our IRC channel in your browser
Play Determinance
- Download the demo
Search
Useful
Archives
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
- May 2006
- April 2006
Categories
- Competions (2)
- Development updates (7)
- Monday Night Live (10)
- News (778)
- Paul's Re-education (1)
- Podcast (49)
- PR trials and tribulations (12)
- Registered User Bigup! (1)
- The Encounter With Dracula (9)
- The Massive Reading Test (3)
- The Mode 7 Pub Challenge (2)
- Touch and Go (3)
- Uncategorized (278)
One Response to “AI”
§ November 24th, 2008 at 12:01 pm
With chess, AI always feels like practice to me. Chess against people feels totally different because you have to take their skill into account – correct me if I’m wrong, but there’s less people who ‘know’ bridge in a loose way but aren’t too confident. Thouuuuusands of people loosely play chess with little confidence, so you have to take that into account, so the social aspect is almost like teaching a lot of the time and you feel inclined to make concessions. Likewise, if you’re playing someone better than you, you feel hugely inclined to win and it’s straight competition. Social contact doesn’t even matter, and I’ve found there to be very little in such games.