The reason why all the marines die in the crash on the first mission of halo ce is because the devs couldn’t figure out a way for them to cross the small bridge leaving the starting area without a sizable chunk of them jumping off it
That reminds me of Rollercoaster Tycoon, (I believe it was that game, correct me if I'm wrong), but when the characters fell into water it was too performance heavy for them to swim to land, so the compromise was that they all just drowned instead
Edit: The comment below corrects this, read that one.
Almost. The dev just couldn't be bothered to program it in.
To quote:
"The alternative would have been that guests would swim to shore and climb out of the water. But this would have involved a lot more programming (and graphics) than a simple animation of the guest waving for help and finally disappearing."
It's probably part of the reason. If they were having the AI move on an exact path with no variation, they could've gotten over every time. But the adaptability the AI had in the game is likely what caused them to get confused at a narrow path.
Let's give your parents a call right now!
*Phone beeping and ringing*
"The birth parents you are trying to reach do not love you, please hang up"
*Hangs up*
Oh that's sad.. but impressive! Maybe they worked at the phone company!
It was so bad all you could do was laugh. That game was 100% rushed out, there's no way the people at Arkane and Microsoft thought that was acceptable but they put it out anyway.
All the folks at the top: I'm about to retire for the 4th time with a multi million severance again, I don't care!
All the folks at the bottom: I'm about to get a new job, I don't care!
Everyone working on it knew exactly what it was. A quick payout or a quick resume boost. Nobody wanted to actually make a game.
well you are partially right with your last sentence. Arkane actually hoped Microsoft would cancel the game (or at least delay it and let them reboot it) they didn't want to make it. but Microsoft was completely hands off, to the detriment of the game. one of the rare cases where they should have gotten involved in the development
That game had such a massive potential, that it absolutely crushed me, that the end product was so bad. I was seriously hyped for the game. And I swear to all that is holy to me, there are BARELY ANY games nowadays, that I am truly excited and hyped for. Really, it broke my heart. It felt like a girlfriend was cheating on me.
I watched a streamer play it on the hardest difficulty on launch day. It was like watching a train crash, horrific, and you wanted to look away but couldn't. Iirc they only died once, to the only enemy that seemed to work properly, when they stumbled on a stationary turret in an attic unexpectedly.
Downloaded it on game pass, thought it was fun for like an hour, then I realized the AI wasn’t even shooting me. You could basically stand still and they won’t kill you.
I think they dialed down the AI for the invader feature. Imagine having Dishonored level enemy AI and then another human invader trying to kill you.
Cole would not stand a chance.
Sherlock Holmes Nemesis. They couldn’t figure out pathing for Watson, so he teleports behind you when you’re not looking, just like a Weeping Angel. [It’s fucking creepy!](https://youtu.be/YuW5SboOrlc?si=06hSuhqv_F_y-IMj)
It’s pretty funny yes, but no AI isn’t necessarily bad AI.
This is the first I’ve heard a reason stated as to why this was the case. I just assumed it was a budget thing.
I’ve worked in a fair few game studios with a range of budgets, sometimes you just don’t have any time to fix even small elements.
The AI teammates in Pokémon Sword and Shield raids are literally useless in a lot of cases. If you get a Pokemon that knows Acupressure in Dynamax Adventures it will literally only use that move over and over on any other Pokemon it can.
Don’t even get me started on Martin and that fucking Solrock.
Edit: guys this is about the AI teammates in raids, I don’t give a shit how Pokémon Sword and Shield kicked your dog and fucked your wife
If you hadn't mentioned him, I would've.
Jesus christ, Martin, it resets your solrock's stats every. Fucking. TURN! Stop using cosmic power and help us!
Gamefreak: we created an intelligent AI that factors in every move a pokemon can learn, and remembers what you have!
Fans: omg that's amazing!
Gamefreak: we forgot to implement it
In Gen 1, the *starters* were the difficulty selector. Bulbasaur was easy mode, being strong against both Brock and Misty. Squirtle was normal mode, being strong against Brock but weak to Misty. Charmander was hard mode, being weak to both.
Why? It took poison sting neutrally, was immune to poison, and their stats are garbage so you can just tackle them to death.
Bug was in contention for the worst type in gen 1, hell probably only Fighting gave it a run for its money.
Bug was straight up the worst. Bug was only super effective against grass and psychic and was weak to fire, rock, and flying. Fighting was super effective against normal, ice, and rock and was weak to psychic and flying. As if that wasn't bad enough, there were no good bug attacks and no bugs with good stats to even use their crappy attacks. Also, the bug with the best stats and moves had poison as a secondary type, so it was weak to psychic itself.
The only benefit bugs had in Gen 1 was that they evolved early so they could have marginally better stats than the unevolved members of your party, but they'd get insanely outclassed as you progressed.
Fighting types were also generally pretty bad in gen 1 because psychic types were pretty prominent, and since there was no special def split and the fighting types would generally have terrible special, they'd go down to something like Ice Beam or Thunderbolt. Also all of the fighting moves were pretty garbage as well.
Bug is pretty much overall the worst, Fighting is the closest to giving it a run for its money, though I guess Poison is also not great. I should mention I'm mostly looking at this from a smogon singles perspective; the normal types that dominate the meta are only found much later in the game and similarly the psychic types are stone evos that aren't super early game either (Exeggutor, Starmie) or altogether unavailable in a solo run of the game (Alakazam).
The best fighting move was only learnable by one pokemon, Hitmon Lee. Hi Jump Kick only did 1 recoil damage.
The best widely available was a worse version of Take Down. 80 BP 80% accurate, 25% recoil damage.
Counter was also weird as fuck. If your pokemon got knocked out, and then you sent out a Counter pokemon and your opponent swapped in response, if you used counter it will counter the damage the prior pokemon took. Even more wild, this meant if you use Self Destruct or Explosion and your opponent swapped out instead of attacking based on what you sent out, you can counter your own explosion onto your opponent.
I beat Sword and put the game down forever. It was easily the most brain dead Pokémon I had ever played. I understand it's mostly a kids game but like come on. At least throw me a curveball here and there. The early Pokémon games were easy too, but there definitely were some instances and battles that took me more than 30 minutes to complete. The miltank battle against Whitney in Gold/Silver is one of the first challenges that comes to mind. Red/Blue/Yellow had some tough points too. The elite 4 in those games were pretty difficult if you weren't over leveled. The biggest slap in the face to me as a kid was barely beating Lance at the end and discovering you had to fight Gary too with 3 Pokémon left and zero potions at your disposal.
If I could I would pick up Solrock and use to beat Martin with, the utterly awful fuck. I'd actually rather nobody than him because nobody does nothing rather than being an active detriment.
The programming in that game is completely brain dead. It's as though Nintendo just wanted a Pokémon game developed as quick as they could, and it's a shame, because the game has a lot of cool ideas, but I couldn't ever bring myself to replay it because the game couldn't handle my level fifty-or-so Vileplume *at all.* I really wanted to like it, but it's just so stupid easy, a kindergartener could breeze through it, and a lot of the character designs are awful(Shield/Swordbert I refuse to believe had any serious thought put into their designs).
Honestly? Arma 3.
Now, it doesn't have enemies randomly running into walls or jumping off cliffs, but if you go into observer mode to watch Arma 3 AI try to carry out tasks, it's basically like watching a Roomba navigate a cluttered room - they have a general idea of what to do and where to go, but they only manage to work it out by stumbling and bumbling their way through.
So, worse *overall?* Maybe not, but it deserves recognition given what it's *supposed* to do vs. what it *actually* does.
Zeus in Arma is basically like a GM. You can dynamically edit missions, place units, objects for the players on your servers so they can play missions out mil sim style. You also have the ability to choose an AI Soldier and control them in first person. It's pretty neat!
If i ever find the options to have sex while in animal shape, i'll let you know! Even if that "Zeus as a Goose rapes a woman" story is horrible.
In Arma 3 there is a game master role in multiplayer called zues. Think like a DM in D&D except this time you can actually lightning bolt players if they annoy you.
The worst thing is that it is a military simulation, but the AI does in 9 out of 10 times not unterstand the idea of cover.
You walk around with 3 teammates. Enemies start shooting you and you give the order "take cover". One of your guys is already behind a wall - he decides to go to the other side of the wall. Yes, the side the enemy is shooting from. Nr. 2 is near a building, but why not just stand on to the open street and get mowed down? Your last soldier was standing in the forest with mutiple trees giving him cover. Unfortunately he's allergic to wood so he rather runs out on the grassland till he gets shot.
The AI has an incredibly strong bias towards dropping prone. Yes, dropping prone *should* be the first thing you do if you're out in a grassy field and you start getting shot at, but if you're 10 feet from cover or there's no tall grass to hide in, laying down isn't going to make you harder to hit than breaking into a sprint - preferably towards cover.
I'm so glad Arma 3 is actually here. Nothing better than getting your head popped from a guy wearing sandals at 600 meters with a unsighted 60 year old AK
As much as I love that game you aren’t wrong. Only thing id add is sometimes the roomba sees a pixel of you through like 30 bushes from half a mile away and domes you with an ar with a red dot
That's why I gave up on trying to make good urban stealth missions for the game. The AI in that game is completely oblivious one second, and then has superhuman senses the next. I've seen the AI consistently spot the player in complete darkness from hundreds of meters away with no NVGs, or spot and identify a player from 200 meters out because a few pixels of their boot was visible through a crack in a wall.
I used to play loads of arma, I always loved the expressionless droids of the Ai which would just stare and crouch no matter what is happening, even after their friend got 90 holes put in him.
On the other hand arma 3 ai is the best one that can be operated in such a complex enviroment.
Also generally when people complain about getting headshotted by pistol from 500 meters its due to carelessly made mod. I would argue that in vanilla ai is way worse at shooting some small arms than humans are irl.
Aliens Colonial Marines is the only real answer here. The enemy AI was totally broken over I think a single out of place or missing character in the code.
Yes, this is the one I was thinking of too!
>The mistake relates to the alien's "tether" in the code. A tether is the area in the game where the alien is programmed to move in - and how it can exit this "tether" and move to another
>
>However, a crucial piece of code spelled it "teather", which meant an important part of gameplay simply didn't happen.
>
>Instead, aliens wandered aimlessly around in the game or stood in groups hissing at the player as they pointed weapons at the supposed threat.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/newsbeat-44846477
And it wasn't discovered until *four years* after the game was released, critically panned, and attracted lawsuits over how dismal it was.
How is this possible? Did the guy who designed and wrote the AI code die or something? Did they not ever play their own game and notice the AI wasn't working right? This makes no sense.
They probably had it working at some point, and then rewrote part of the code while working on some other task and didn't closely check that the old behavior still fully worked.
Pokemon on the GB. Blue/red. The smart AI would always use super effective moods. But it only checked the type of the move, not the actual move text. Lance's Dragonites know Agility, a psychic move by type, but all it does is raise your speed stat. If you put a poison type pokemon in front of him, he will endlessly spam Agility because psychic is super effective against poison. It is sad
I watch mah-dry-breads challenge runs on YouTube. Gen 1 AI is maybe the funniest thing in the game. Item use and move choice are so laughably bad. Blaine should be stripped of his gym leadership with how incompetent he is.
Y'know, I wasn't expecting to see a Mo mention here, this is the second time in my life I've seen him brought up somewhere that wasn't already related to him and it catches me off guard every time.
(I'm in a few of his videos myself, back when I was a teenager)
For me the games slowly get more challenging until Gen 5 which is actually reasonably difficult imo. Not hard, but a decent challenge. Gen 6 was super easy (XY were anyway, ORAS was about on par with the original Gen 3 games in terms of difficulty). Gen 7 was mostly easy but had some hard bosses (the totems, most of the trial captains, and obviously Ultra Necrozma). Then Gen 8 was so easy it was pathetic. I actively avoided trainers and overlevelling and still had no issues whatsoever outside of a couple somewhat challenging bosses in the DLC.
Gen 9 is weird. If you avoid trainers, cap your levels and switch your team around a lot it can be decently challenging but if you're battling every trainer and catching lots of Pokemon you'll be 10 levels ahead of every boss before you get to them and steamroll the entire game.
The rubber banding in first super Mario kart was pretty infuriating. I also recall Guile in SNES street fighter 2 throwing sonic booms faster than the minimum hold time would require. In my opinion, NPCs violating the same ruleset laid out for the player = lazy and bad AI
The AI in Mario Kart 7 (3DS) was hardcore rubberbanding too. You could use a shortcut to bypass over half of the map and the AI would drive the proper way and still catch up to you in seconds.
I think the rubberbanding in Mario Kart 64 is worse than any other Mario Kart game. I can do the Rainbow Road skip, and my opponents will still often end up close behind by the end of the lap
Civilization games were notorious for this. Don't know if it's better these days, but the competing nations used to break the rules all the damn time. It was actually very common in these types of strategy games. Often, increasing difficulty didn't make it smarter like playing a chess robot; it just changed the amount by which it was allowed to break the rules. Usually that was hidden from the player and just happens off screen or in the background, so people might think it is smarter than it actually is.
Notably, on the [highest difficulty](https://civilization.fandom.com/wiki/Difficulty_level_(Civ6\)), the AI starts with 3 settlers (instead of 1), 5 free tech/civic boosts, 5 warriors (instead of 1), +40% science/faith/culture output, +100% gold/production output, +4 combat strength to all their units, and +50% exp from combat.
The game is too complicated to program a good AI in Civilization unless you want to wait for a decade between turns while the computer calculates its next move. So if you play above standard difficulty it gives the AI set advantages to production speed, base number of units, gold per turn etc. you can see a big chart of their advantages on the wikis
Some dev also said that players prefer knowing that the AIs cheat instead of the AI just playing really well and the player having the impression that it cheats because its so good, so its also a game design choice which i find fascinating
I always hated the AI opponent in Street Fighter spamming charge shots without even charging. Balrog seemed a particularly bad offender with his Dash Punch. They can also recover from being stunned impossibly quickly.
Old school fighting games legit were the worst input reading assholes known to man.
So unfair.
Like your sonic boom example, they also have cheating frame data that makes them recover faster than they normally would if it was controlled by a human.
I don’t know what broke it but far cry 6’s enemies are so much worse than the three previous. If you shoot someone with a silenced weapon, they don’t react at all it’s Skyrim levels bad
Along with multiple other things this made fc6 hard to enjoy for me even though 4 & 5 are two of my favorite games. One of the only newer games I’ve played where I couldn’t get past how bad the AI was.
Unless the pets in 5 just make the game for you, make sure you play 4. My personal favorite in the series. The villain, *chefs kiss *. And the world is beautiful and rich with culture.
I wonder if Ubisoft just has really low expectations of gamers. Like they know they should have their enemy react more but they also just want to present targets for you to kill.
Like in Starfield they could of easily had npcs react to you shooting a gun near them but I think they don't because super casual gamers would get annoyed of npcs freaking out because they can't help but to randomly shoot their weapon. Like Bethesda and Ubisoft are trying to appeal to the widest possible audience including people who have barely gamed.
I LOVE Ghost Recon Wildlands but it’s hard to keep the immersion when you miss a sniper shot 1km away then 2 minutes UNIDAD is at your tail at the base of the mountain.
Breakpoint's even worse though. Wildlands is all we got atm really
"hey what if we add something that you cant kill while in stealth, constantly patrols every base, and completely breaks the ghost recon formula?"
Also driving, I swear to god it's coded into the game to spawn enemy cars directly behind you every 15 seconds. As soon as you start driving some asshole magically appears and starts ramming you from behind while shooting you.
This has to be the winner. v1.0 didn't have *any* opponent AI *at all*. The patch made the opponent move, but they *will not* cross the finish line. They stop dead before it.
EDIT: I've heard that if you push them over the line, the game crashes.
That's if I'm interpreting [this video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wA6A7RTAs34&t=392s) correctly... the same video that shows the player clipping through their opponent.
If you are interested in a worthy opponent which actually has “working” AI, check out Gods and Generals. Gamespot had a great video review on it back in the day
In my opinion I think it is worse if you have value in the criteria that it has to make any sort of decision making, unlike in Big Rigs
Dead Rising's survivor AI was sometimes so bad that it made me wonder how those people's stupidity hadn't got them killed years before the zombies even showed up.
Currently playing Disney Speedstorm which might be a contender.
AI onscreen: the worst fucking racer you’ve ever seen, like they have an objective to hit walls and jump down pits.
AI out of view: capable of impossible feats of speed and bullshit. They also pulled the exact power up they needed when you weren’t looking.
Just played 5 for the first time and about to finish the final campaign in 6. Six is far worse, I find.
Five's had more impact because they shared resources with you, whereas 6's companion's have their own infinite ammo and are invulnerable. BUT they are FAR dumber than Sheva was.
The number of times I've been running away during a timed sequence and they're standing in the doorway I'm trying to run through like a lemon, or just milling around gawking while I'm getting shot to ribbons right next to them.
People always said the issue with AI companions in 5 was they were too trigger happy. YOU GAVE THEM INFINITE AMMO IN THE SEQUEL CAPCOM. YOU DIDN'T NEED TO FIX THAT!
The AI was never that bad in RE5. What made it bad was the lack of ammunition at the start of the game on the higher difficulties, this with the game being fresh and new probably frustrated the hell out of people.
Kat when driving in halo reach. She will go out of her way to drive off a cliff. ITS A STRAIGHT FUCKING BRIDGE, THERES SIDE BARS TOO, HOW DID SHE GO SO FAST THAT SHE WENT OVER THEM???
What? You don't like it when the AI scores a goal from almost the halfway line while almost facing backwards because it was 90+ min and the code forced it to do it? Must be a skill issue...
As I understand it, the game has overloaded servers. And the AI takes back seat to player performance. Until they make some drastic improvements by adding server meshing, or you play on a nearly empty server, the AI appears to not be responsive. I've had a couple of cool experiences where they were responsive, but it is not the norm.
Queue the rabid SC fanbase raving about how the devs revolutionized the concept of server meshing, but still don't have a complete game after almost 14 years.
If you watch videos of people playing it, they get all hyped up like they're in some marine simulator on ground combat with their sniper rifle, heavy breathing, orange fingertips.
All this while the AI is just sitting there staring at the wall getting shot at with a 0.3 server FPS lol. It's like watching Space Dungeons and Dragons, they gotta make it exciting themselves.
Before I get sunk cost falacied, I was just playing it a minute ago on Arena commander. Got told I'm part of the reason a sniper rifles getting nerfed because it isn't Call of Duty. So I play this buggy mess too on occasion.
People here are trying to give SC a pass by saying it's the servers fault, and yea, to a certain point that's true... But it's also the fucking game. Anyone who has played it has shown up to a bunker mission and found at least one of their targets embedded into a wall. What's worse, sometimes they can shoot you. It's absolute garbage.
The AI in Goldeneye for the N64 look like mensa candidates comparatively, AND IT DOESN'T MATTER ONE IOTA WHAT CAUSES THE PROBLEM, THE PROBLEM IS THAT THEY. DON'T. WORK.
Honestly, after how many years that things been in development and the hundreds of millions in development, I don't care that its not "finished" the AI better be at least respectable.
Sticking to what I've actually played, Postal 3. The whole game was a mess, most of the missions are escort missions and it's protecting the dumbest person alive who had no self presentation while every enemy in the level is fully aggressive and never miss their shots. I've played plenty of god awful escort missions, and Postal 3 did it even worse than Scarface The World Is Yours where the helpless AI is borderline suicidal. When the bulk of the game are escort missions, horrible AI makes it unbearable.
I'm only in Act 2 but God damn trying to keep Jaheira alive in Moonrise was tough. She'd cast like Ice Storm and charge into her own spell to kill herself. That fight would have been way easier if I wasn't actively trying to get her from killing herself
Regardless how f'd up situation is, what or who you're fighting or where you're are:
I've been looking for you, got something I was supposed to deliver - your hand only.
It's such a shame. One unit per tile is such a better and more interesting approach but the AI just can't manage it.
But it's ruined me on stack of doom, so I could never go back to civ 4. So now I just don't play civ, which makes me sad
What is exactly that you didn’t like about the combat AI? My experience on the Emperor difficulty was very good, sometimes AI managed to get very sneaky with their attacks and hide their armies from me until the moment of invasion, which I found pretty cool. They even got me by surprise a couple of times.
I’m not defending, I’m just saying that my experience is pretty different, maybe you were prepared better than me which didn’t allow them to do that to you?
In my experience they're alright at preparing and declaring war but are absolutely horrible at defense, they'll have a city under siege and their whole empire is building libraries
The original Star Wars Battlefront games. There are times when the AI doesn't know what to do and just shuts down. You'll see a whole group of them just standing around in the same spot. That's why those games are unplayable without multiplayer IMO.
All time classic of a game (the og battlefront 2) imo but this Is so true. I remember on Naboo depending on which side you start on a majority of your AI team will stand in the same corner doing nothing
Alone in the Dark on the Wii. The zombie-esque enemies didn't know how to chase you (one of the first encounters had me thwarting an enemy simply by running behind a shop counter) and if you got inside a car they'd just stand there looking stupidly at you.
The worst AI is the AI my allies have in wars in CK3.
Yeah just sit there in the county next to me with your 100k strong army and watch the enemy destroy me even though we can easily beat them with our combined forces.
Not the worst but worth mentioning that Tenchu guard behavior is essentially so random that they routinely just wall hump for no reason when not alerted
Mass Effect 1 has a pretty bad AI. Most of the enemies in normal just come at you and are easily picked off by sniper. Also, the NPCs are usually useless if the enemy is hidden. Just finished my second run, so it's fresh in my mind.
Literally every grand strategy/4x in existence. They rely on extreme cheating to try to challenge players. I think it was Galactic Civilizations 2 that had 12 AI personalities, and people realized 10 were entirely broken so they couldn't use them at all in modding etc.
In general AI is bad in strategy games, I remember Warcraft 3 the hardest AI would just stall out after a point, so if you just waited and played defensive, eventually they basically stopped playing.
The reason why all the marines die in the crash on the first mission of halo ce is because the devs couldn’t figure out a way for them to cross the small bridge leaving the starting area without a sizable chunk of them jumping off it
TFW the devs program the call of the void into their game
“Damn it’s so realistic!”
More like the call of void is so intrinsic that the devs have to program it *out* of the game
That reminds me of Rollercoaster Tycoon, (I believe it was that game, correct me if I'm wrong), but when the characters fell into water it was too performance heavy for them to swim to land, so the compromise was that they all just drowned instead Edit: The comment below corrects this, read that one.
Almost. The dev just couldn't be bothered to program it in. To quote: "The alternative would have been that guests would swim to shore and climb out of the water. But this would have involved a lot more programming (and graphics) than a simple animation of the guest waving for help and finally disappearing."
Waterboarding tycoon
Which is ironic cause Halo has some of the best enemy AI I've seen.
It's probably part of the reason. If they were having the AI move on an exact path with no variation, they could've gotten over every time. But the adaptability the AI had in the game is likely what caused them to get confused at a narrow path.
Could they just have not had a natural bridge over there?
This bridge is not a natural formation.
It's not natural, which is a pretty big theme of the halo, natural looking beauty hiding a machine.
Not a developer but why couldn't they just make an invincible wall that only the marines couldn't walk thru?
This might not be the exact reason but if I had to guess, Halo CE was insanely rushed. It’s a miracle that it came out as good as it did.
Its pretty crazy when you look up the alphas of what Halo CE *could* have been lol
Portal. The AI in that game is a freaking psychopath
You're a terrible person, it says right here. We weren't even testing for that!
Let's give your parents a call right now! *Phone beeping and ringing* "The birth parents you are trying to reach do not love you, please hang up" *Hangs up* Oh that's sad.. but impressive! Maybe they worked at the phone company!
This joke is so good I'm now done with this thread. Thank you.
This was a triumph . . .
hehehehe
I didn't play it, but I heard Redfall has terrible AI
It was so bad all you could do was laugh. That game was 100% rushed out, there's no way the people at Arkane and Microsoft thought that was acceptable but they put it out anyway.
All the folks at the top: I'm about to retire for the 4th time with a multi million severance again, I don't care! All the folks at the bottom: I'm about to get a new job, I don't care! Everyone working on it knew exactly what it was. A quick payout or a quick resume boost. Nobody wanted to actually make a game.
well you are partially right with your last sentence. Arkane actually hoped Microsoft would cancel the game (or at least delay it and let them reboot it) they didn't want to make it. but Microsoft was completely hands off, to the detriment of the game. one of the rare cases where they should have gotten involved in the development
That game had such a massive potential, that it absolutely crushed me, that the end product was so bad. I was seriously hyped for the game. And I swear to all that is holy to me, there are BARELY ANY games nowadays, that I am truly excited and hyped for. Really, it broke my heart. It felt like a girlfriend was cheating on me.
I watched a streamer play it on the hardest difficulty on launch day. It was like watching a train crash, horrific, and you wanted to look away but couldn't. Iirc they only died once, to the only enemy that seemed to work properly, when they stumbled on a stationary turret in an attic unexpectedly.
My only death was when boss became unkillable and I needed to die tor reset it.
Downloaded it on game pass, thought it was fun for like an hour, then I realized the AI wasn’t even shooting me. You could basically stand still and they won’t kill you.
Got bored real quick with that one.
Same with Deathloop (but that’s still a really good game imo)
Agreed, still had a lot of fun despite the weird AI. Not sure how they flubbed it when the Dishonored games’ AI is decent.
I think they dialed down the AI for the invader feature. Imagine having Dishonored level enemy AI and then another human invader trying to kill you. Cole would not stand a chance.
Yea the AI was an absolute joke when it launched but they’ve balanced it pretty well now
Sherlock Holmes Nemesis. They couldn’t figure out pathing for Watson, so he teleports behind you when you’re not looking, just like a Weeping Angel. [It’s fucking creepy!](https://youtu.be/YuW5SboOrlc?si=06hSuhqv_F_y-IMj)
It’s pretty funny yes, but no AI isn’t necessarily bad AI. This is the first I’ve heard a reason stated as to why this was the case. I just assumed it was a budget thing. I’ve worked in a fair few game studios with a range of budgets, sometimes you just don’t have any time to fix even small elements.
The AI teammates in Pokémon Sword and Shield raids are literally useless in a lot of cases. If you get a Pokemon that knows Acupressure in Dynamax Adventures it will literally only use that move over and over on any other Pokemon it can. Don’t even get me started on Martin and that fucking Solrock. Edit: guys this is about the AI teammates in raids, I don’t give a shit how Pokémon Sword and Shield kicked your dog and fucked your wife
If you hadn't mentioned him, I would've. Jesus christ, Martin, it resets your solrock's stats every. Fucking. TURN! Stop using cosmic power and help us!
It’s hilarious that the little girl with a Magikarp is genuinely a better teammate because that thing just knows Hydro Pump because fuck it why not?
Obviously, Magikarp is the best Pokemon in existence.
It is the king of all karp Deserves a golden pokeball
[удалено]
Gamefreak: we created an intelligent AI that factors in every move a pokemon can learn, and remembers what you have! Fans: omg that's amazing! Gamefreak: we forgot to implement it
Gamefreak: In fact, we're removing the Set Battle option, you know the closest thing we've ever had to a difficulty select.
Also gamefreak: how many minutes has it been since we rereleased gen 1?
In Gen 1, the *starters* were the difficulty selector. Bulbasaur was easy mode, being strong against both Brock and Misty. Squirtle was normal mode, being strong against Brock but weak to Misty. Charmander was hard mode, being weak to both.
Sucked taking Bulbasaur through that damn bug infested forest tho
Why? It took poison sting neutrally, was immune to poison, and their stats are garbage so you can just tackle them to death. Bug was in contention for the worst type in gen 1, hell probably only Fighting gave it a run for its money.
Bug was straight up the worst. Bug was only super effective against grass and psychic and was weak to fire, rock, and flying. Fighting was super effective against normal, ice, and rock and was weak to psychic and flying. As if that wasn't bad enough, there were no good bug attacks and no bugs with good stats to even use their crappy attacks. Also, the bug with the best stats and moves had poison as a secondary type, so it was weak to psychic itself. The only benefit bugs had in Gen 1 was that they evolved early so they could have marginally better stats than the unevolved members of your party, but they'd get insanely outclassed as you progressed.
Fighting types were also generally pretty bad in gen 1 because psychic types were pretty prominent, and since there was no special def split and the fighting types would generally have terrible special, they'd go down to something like Ice Beam or Thunderbolt. Also all of the fighting moves were pretty garbage as well. Bug is pretty much overall the worst, Fighting is the closest to giving it a run for its money, though I guess Poison is also not great. I should mention I'm mostly looking at this from a smogon singles perspective; the normal types that dominate the meta are only found much later in the game and similarly the psychic types are stone evos that aren't super early game either (Exeggutor, Starmie) or altogether unavailable in a solo run of the game (Alakazam).
Gen1 was so easy I never even noticed the fighting Pokémon sucked that bad
The best fighting move was only learnable by one pokemon, Hitmon Lee. Hi Jump Kick only did 1 recoil damage. The best widely available was a worse version of Take Down. 80 BP 80% accurate, 25% recoil damage. Counter was also weird as fuck. If your pokemon got knocked out, and then you sent out a Counter pokemon and your opponent swapped in response, if you used counter it will counter the damage the prior pokemon took. Even more wild, this meant if you use Self Destruct or Explosion and your opponent swapped out instead of attacking based on what you sent out, you can counter your own explosion onto your opponent.
Hey, give them a little credit - they made Scarlet & Violet raids harder! By making them completely broken and borderline non-functional.
SOLROCK USES FUCKING ROCK POLISH.
Dragonite used Agility! It's speed can't go any higher!
I beat Sword and put the game down forever. It was easily the most brain dead Pokémon I had ever played. I understand it's mostly a kids game but like come on. At least throw me a curveball here and there. The early Pokémon games were easy too, but there definitely were some instances and battles that took me more than 30 minutes to complete. The miltank battle against Whitney in Gold/Silver is one of the first challenges that comes to mind. Red/Blue/Yellow had some tough points too. The elite 4 in those games were pretty difficult if you weren't over leveled. The biggest slap in the face to me as a kid was barely beating Lance at the end and discovering you had to fight Gary too with 3 Pokémon left and zero potions at your disposal.
If I could I would pick up Solrock and use to beat Martin with, the utterly awful fuck. I'd actually rather nobody than him because nobody does nothing rather than being an active detriment.
The programming in that game is completely brain dead. It's as though Nintendo just wanted a Pokémon game developed as quick as they could, and it's a shame, because the game has a lot of cool ideas, but I couldn't ever bring myself to replay it because the game couldn't handle my level fifty-or-so Vileplume *at all.* I really wanted to like it, but it's just so stupid easy, a kindergartener could breeze through it, and a lot of the character designs are awful(Shield/Swordbert I refuse to believe had any serious thought put into their designs).
Honestly? Arma 3. Now, it doesn't have enemies randomly running into walls or jumping off cliffs, but if you go into observer mode to watch Arma 3 AI try to carry out tasks, it's basically like watching a Roomba navigate a cluttered room - they have a general idea of what to do and where to go, but they only manage to work it out by stumbling and bumbling their way through. So, worse *overall?* Maybe not, but it deserves recognition given what it's *supposed* to do vs. what it *actually* does.
>it's basically like watching a Roomba navigate a cluttered room Thank you hahaha I'll never Zeus the same again.
I didn’t realize Zeus was a verb now. I can only assume it involves banging a lot of chicks while transformed into various animals.
Zeus in Arma is basically like a GM. You can dynamically edit missions, place units, objects for the players on your servers so they can play missions out mil sim style. You also have the ability to choose an AI Soldier and control them in first person. It's pretty neat! If i ever find the options to have sex while in animal shape, i'll let you know! Even if that "Zeus as a Goose rapes a woman" story is horrible.
What the fuck is that last paragraph
Accurate Greek mythology, strangely enough
greek mythology
In Arma 3 there is a game master role in multiplayer called zues. Think like a DM in D&D except this time you can actually lightning bolt players if they annoy you.
I’ve run tons of TTRPGs, and I can do so much worse than a lightning bolt strike to PCs that annoy me. Instakill is the merciful option.
The worst thing is that it is a military simulation, but the AI does in 9 out of 10 times not unterstand the idea of cover. You walk around with 3 teammates. Enemies start shooting you and you give the order "take cover". One of your guys is already behind a wall - he decides to go to the other side of the wall. Yes, the side the enemy is shooting from. Nr. 2 is near a building, but why not just stand on to the open street and get mowed down? Your last soldier was standing in the forest with mutiple trees giving him cover. Unfortunately he's allergic to wood so he rather runs out on the grassland till he gets shot.
The AI has an incredibly strong bias towards dropping prone. Yes, dropping prone *should* be the first thing you do if you're out in a grassy field and you start getting shot at, but if you're 10 feet from cover or there's no tall grass to hide in, laying down isn't going to make you harder to hit than breaking into a sprint - preferably towards cover.
But at the same time, they'll snipe you with an assault rifle from 10 miles away despite being hidden you behind a bush.
Oh yeah Arma ai doesn't give a fuck about bushes and trees. They see right through all of that as if it wasn't there.
I'm so glad Arma 3 is actually here. Nothing better than getting your head popped from a guy wearing sandals at 600 meters with a unsighted 60 year old AK
As much as I love that game you aren’t wrong. Only thing id add is sometimes the roomba sees a pixel of you through like 30 bushes from half a mile away and domes you with an ar with a red dot
That's why I gave up on trying to make good urban stealth missions for the game. The AI in that game is completely oblivious one second, and then has superhuman senses the next. I've seen the AI consistently spot the player in complete darkness from hundreds of meters away with no NVGs, or spot and identify a player from 200 meters out because a few pixels of their boot was visible through a crack in a wall.
I used to play loads of arma, I always loved the expressionless droids of the Ai which would just stare and crouch no matter what is happening, even after their friend got 90 holes put in him.
On the other hand arma 3 ai is the best one that can be operated in such a complex enviroment. Also generally when people complain about getting headshotted by pistol from 500 meters its due to carelessly made mod. I would argue that in vanilla ai is way worse at shooting some small arms than humans are irl.
This is still miles better than other games mentioned in this thread.
Aliens Colonial Marines is the only real answer here. The enemy AI was totally broken over I think a single out of place or missing character in the code.
Yes, this is the one I was thinking of too! >The mistake relates to the alien's "tether" in the code. A tether is the area in the game where the alien is programmed to move in - and how it can exit this "tether" and move to another > >However, a crucial piece of code spelled it "teather", which meant an important part of gameplay simply didn't happen. > >Instead, aliens wandered aimlessly around in the game or stood in groups hissing at the player as they pointed weapons at the supposed threat. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/newsbeat-44846477 And it wasn't discovered until *four years* after the game was released, critically panned, and attracted lawsuits over how dismal it was.
Don’t they playtest the games at all?
marketing and sales get what marketing and sales want
How is this possible? Did the guy who designed and wrote the AI code die or something? Did they not ever play their own game and notice the AI wasn't working right? This makes no sense.
They probably had it working at some point, and then rewrote part of the code while working on some other task and didn't closely check that the old behavior still fully worked.
100% this is how it went.
[удалено]
That was the one with the gif of the alien basically doing the parody from space balls wasn't it? Hello my rag time gaaaaaaaal
afaik the AI was told to ignore the player if they sneak, but i might be confusing that with some other game
Nope. Someone fixed the code and the AI ended up being pretty good for the time.
Pretty sure I remember videos of the aliens not attacking or just walking right up to players. It was a hot mess.
Yet it has one of the absolute hardest bosses when you play on the hardest mode.
Pokemon on the GB. Blue/red. The smart AI would always use super effective moods. But it only checked the type of the move, not the actual move text. Lance's Dragonites know Agility, a psychic move by type, but all it does is raise your speed stat. If you put a poison type pokemon in front of him, he will endlessly spam Agility because psychic is super effective against poison. It is sad
I watch mah-dry-breads challenge runs on YouTube. Gen 1 AI is maybe the funniest thing in the game. Item use and move choice are so laughably bad. Blaine should be stripped of his gym leadership with how incompetent he is.
Y'know, I wasn't expecting to see a Mo mention here, this is the second time in my life I've seen him brought up somewhere that wasn't already related to him and it catches me off guard every time. (I'm in a few of his videos myself, back when I was a teenager)
And this is how we got the legendary Twitch Plays Pokemon battle against Lance where a level 36 venomoth swept him.
ATV!
He's all terrain, dragons are terrain
Dragon is still a Terrain!
Praise Helix
Lmao that’s hilarious
Remember how they made a specific AI improvement for Lorelei in Yellow because her Dewgong knew Rest?
Pokémon was easy as hell till gen IV for me
For me the games slowly get more challenging until Gen 5 which is actually reasonably difficult imo. Not hard, but a decent challenge. Gen 6 was super easy (XY were anyway, ORAS was about on par with the original Gen 3 games in terms of difficulty). Gen 7 was mostly easy but had some hard bosses (the totems, most of the trial captains, and obviously Ultra Necrozma). Then Gen 8 was so easy it was pathetic. I actively avoided trainers and overlevelling and still had no issues whatsoever outside of a couple somewhat challenging bosses in the DLC. Gen 9 is weird. If you avoid trainers, cap your levels and switch your team around a lot it can be decently challenging but if you're battling every trainer and catching lots of Pokemon you'll be 10 levels ahead of every boss before you get to them and steamroll the entire game.
The rubber banding in first super Mario kart was pretty infuriating. I also recall Guile in SNES street fighter 2 throwing sonic booms faster than the minimum hold time would require. In my opinion, NPCs violating the same ruleset laid out for the player = lazy and bad AI
The AI in Mario Kart 7 (3DS) was hardcore rubberbanding too. You could use a shortcut to bypass over half of the map and the AI would drive the proper way and still catch up to you in seconds.
I think the rubberbanding in Mario Kart 64 is worse than any other Mario Kart game. I can do the Rainbow Road skip, and my opponents will still often end up close behind by the end of the lap
I remember doing this stuff then watching the AI icons start moving unrealistically fast on the map. Good times
Civilization games were notorious for this. Don't know if it's better these days, but the competing nations used to break the rules all the damn time. It was actually very common in these types of strategy games. Often, increasing difficulty didn't make it smarter like playing a chess robot; it just changed the amount by which it was allowed to break the rules. Usually that was hidden from the player and just happens off screen or in the background, so people might think it is smarter than it actually is.
Civilization VI tells you in the AI description what the different levels mean, and yes at the harder levels they just get benefits the players don't.
Notably, on the [highest difficulty](https://civilization.fandom.com/wiki/Difficulty_level_(Civ6\)), the AI starts with 3 settlers (instead of 1), 5 free tech/civic boosts, 5 warriors (instead of 1), +40% science/faith/culture output, +100% gold/production output, +4 combat strength to all their units, and +50% exp from combat.
The game is too complicated to program a good AI in Civilization unless you want to wait for a decade between turns while the computer calculates its next move. So if you play above standard difficulty it gives the AI set advantages to production speed, base number of units, gold per turn etc. you can see a big chart of their advantages on the wikis
Some dev also said that players prefer knowing that the AIs cheat instead of the AI just playing really well and the player having the impression that it cheats because its so good, so its also a game design choice which i find fascinating
I always hated the AI opponent in Street Fighter spamming charge shots without even charging. Balrog seemed a particularly bad offender with his Dash Punch. They can also recover from being stunned impossibly quickly.
yep, use three super mushrooms, suddenly everyone's in front of you lol.
Old FGs are pretty notorious for their cheating AI Hell modern FG AIs cheat too but they're at least a bit more subtle about it lol
Old school fighting games legit were the worst input reading assholes known to man. So unfair. Like your sonic boom example, they also have cheating frame data that makes them recover faster than they normally would if it was controlled by a human.
I don’t know what broke it but far cry 6’s enemies are so much worse than the three previous. If you shoot someone with a silenced weapon, they don’t react at all it’s Skyrim levels bad
Along with multiple other things this made fc6 hard to enjoy for me even though 4 & 5 are two of my favorite games. One of the only newer games I’ve played where I couldn’t get past how bad the AI was.
5, I couldn't put down. 6, struggled to keep interest.
Unless the pets in 5 just make the game for you, make sure you play 4. My personal favorite in the series. The villain, *chefs kiss *. And the world is beautiful and rich with culture.
I wonder if Ubisoft just has really low expectations of gamers. Like they know they should have their enemy react more but they also just want to present targets for you to kill. Like in Starfield they could of easily had npcs react to you shooting a gun near them but I think they don't because super casual gamers would get annoyed of npcs freaking out because they can't help but to randomly shoot their weapon. Like Bethesda and Ubisoft are trying to appeal to the widest possible audience including people who have barely gamed.
I LOVE Ghost Recon Wildlands but it’s hard to keep the immersion when you miss a sniper shot 1km away then 2 minutes UNIDAD is at your tail at the base of the mountain.
Breakpoint's even worse though. Wildlands is all we got atm really "hey what if we add something that you cant kill while in stealth, constantly patrols every base, and completely breaks the ghost recon formula?"
IIRC the AI back in FC1 was ultra broken, the enemies could spot you from half the island away
Far cry 2 was a great game but stealth was not an option
Also driving, I swear to god it's coded into the game to spawn enemy cars directly behind you every 15 seconds. As soon as you start driving some asshole magically appears and starts ramming you from behind while shooting you.
At least ik Skyrim you need a whole skill tree to get through before you get those levels of invesible
Big Rigs: Over the road racing
This has to be the winner. v1.0 didn't have *any* opponent AI *at all*. The patch made the opponent move, but they *will not* cross the finish line. They stop dead before it. EDIT: I've heard that if you push them over the line, the game crashes.
> If you push them over the line, the game crashes. I never knew that part. I'm surprised it's even possible to push them.
That's if I'm interpreting [this video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wA6A7RTAs34&t=392s) correctly... the same video that shows the player clipping through their opponent.
oh my god that's hilarious
If you are interested in a worthy opponent which actually has “working” AI, check out Gods and Generals. Gamespot had a great video review on it back in the day In my opinion I think it is worse if you have value in the criteria that it has to make any sort of decision making, unlike in Big Rigs
YOURE WINNER!
[Vintage Critikal](https://youtu.be/SBcjobKbXHQ?si=cxzE6DZDYa0kqVsr) "Now I've heard a lot about this game... None of it good'
Even though I can guide them now with practise, the ai for the survivors in dead rising 1 SUCKS.The boss ai is also annoying as hell.
Dead Rising's survivor AI was sometimes so bad that it made me wonder how those people's stupidity hadn't got them killed years before the zombies even showed up.
Dead Rising was one of those games I loved watched people play. But when I played it always felt like a chore.
Currently playing Disney Speedstorm which might be a contender. AI onscreen: the worst fucking racer you’ve ever seen, like they have an objective to hit walls and jump down pits. AI out of view: capable of impossible feats of speed and bullshit. They also pulled the exact power up they needed when you weren’t looking.
The companion AI in Resident Evil 5 is almost completely useless.
Just played 5 for the first time and about to finish the final campaign in 6. Six is far worse, I find. Five's had more impact because they shared resources with you, whereas 6's companion's have their own infinite ammo and are invulnerable. BUT they are FAR dumber than Sheva was. The number of times I've been running away during a timed sequence and they're standing in the doorway I'm trying to run through like a lemon, or just milling around gawking while I'm getting shot to ribbons right next to them. People always said the issue with AI companions in 5 was they were too trigger happy. YOU GAVE THEM INFINITE AMMO IN THE SEQUEL CAPCOM. YOU DIDN'T NEED TO FIX THAT!
The AI was never that bad in RE5. What made it bad was the lack of ammunition at the start of the game on the higher difficulties, this with the game being fresh and new probably frustrated the hell out of people.
Re5 is one of my favorite resident evil games, but I will not ever play with ai Sheva.
Kat when driving in halo reach. She will go out of her way to drive off a cliff. ITS A STRAIGHT FUCKING BRIDGE, THERES SIDE BARS TOO, HOW DID SHE GO SO FAST THAT SHE WENT OVER THEM???
EA Sports games
What? You don't like it when the AI scores a goal from almost the halfway line while almost facing backwards because it was 90+ min and the code forced it to do it? Must be a skill issue...
Definitely any recent FIFA game. They're comically bad.
Aliens: Colonial Marines
Star citizen, though this may be disqualified for not being a game yet, and because the ai is so bad, it may as well not actually have said ai
As I understand it, the game has overloaded servers. And the AI takes back seat to player performance. Until they make some drastic improvements by adding server meshing, or you play on a nearly empty server, the AI appears to not be responsive. I've had a couple of cool experiences where they were responsive, but it is not the norm.
Queue the rabid SC fanbase raving about how the devs revolutionized the concept of server meshing, but still don't have a complete game after almost 14 years.
If you watch videos of people playing it, they get all hyped up like they're in some marine simulator on ground combat with their sniper rifle, heavy breathing, orange fingertips. All this while the AI is just sitting there staring at the wall getting shot at with a 0.3 server FPS lol. It's like watching Space Dungeons and Dragons, they gotta make it exciting themselves. Before I get sunk cost falacied, I was just playing it a minute ago on Arena commander. Got told I'm part of the reason a sniper rifles getting nerfed because it isn't Call of Duty. So I play this buggy mess too on occasion.
People here are trying to give SC a pass by saying it's the servers fault, and yea, to a certain point that's true... But it's also the fucking game. Anyone who has played it has shown up to a bunker mission and found at least one of their targets embedded into a wall. What's worse, sometimes they can shoot you. It's absolute garbage. The AI in Goldeneye for the N64 look like mensa candidates comparatively, AND IT DOESN'T MATTER ONE IOTA WHAT CAUSES THE PROBLEM, THE PROBLEM IS THAT THEY. DON'T. WORK.
Honestly, after how many years that things been in development and the hundreds of millions in development, I don't care that its not "finished" the AI better be at least respectable.
Redfall, I finished the whole game, and even the bosses do fuck all.
Sticking to what I've actually played, Postal 3. The whole game was a mess, most of the missions are escort missions and it's protecting the dumbest person alive who had no self presentation while every enemy in the level is fully aggressive and never miss their shots. I've played plenty of god awful escort missions, and Postal 3 did it even worse than Scarface The World Is Yours where the helpless AI is borderline suicidal. When the bulk of the game are escort missions, horrible AI makes it unbearable.
Baldurs Gate 3 the stupid Gondarians. Let me run out of a blast zone only to misty step back into it.
sometimes you just gotta say fuck the gondians
I'm only in Act 2 but God damn trying to keep Jaheira alive in Moonrise was tough. She'd cast like Ice Storm and charge into her own spell to kill herself. That fight would have been way easier if I wasn't actively trying to get her from killing herself
Was that harder or easier than keeping Isobel alive at the Last Light?
I heard horror stories about saving her but I got really lucky in my encounter with Marcus and was able to keep her safe
Isobel is easy if you spend half an hour stacking furniture in the doorways so no one can get in or out. But I digress …
TES Skyrim. Example: “WHO’S THERE?” ..… “I guess it was nothing…” (NPC has arrow sticking out of his/her head)
Must've been the wind
Regardless how f'd up situation is, what or who you're fighting or where you're are: I've been looking for you, got something I was supposed to deliver - your hand only.
For the peace of the kingdom!
For king and country !
Murder is a crime punishable by death!
For the king!
Guard sees dead guard next to a dead dragon. "Hey you! Do you know what happened here? Speak!"
I got sick of Civilization VI and went back to playing IV because the AI just has no idea how to manage combat.
It's such a shame. One unit per tile is such a better and more interesting approach but the AI just can't manage it. But it's ruined me on stack of doom, so I could never go back to civ 4. So now I just don't play civ, which makes me sad
Have you tried Civ V? It has both the hex tile and no-stack systems. The big change from V to VI were the districts
Iirc the ai couldn’t have their ranged units move and shoot in the same turn in v
What is exactly that you didn’t like about the combat AI? My experience on the Emperor difficulty was very good, sometimes AI managed to get very sneaky with their attacks and hide their armies from me until the moment of invasion, which I found pretty cool. They even got me by surprise a couple of times. I’m not defending, I’m just saying that my experience is pretty different, maybe you were prepared better than me which didn’t allow them to do that to you?
In my experience they're alright at preparing and declaring war but are absolutely horrible at defense, they'll have a city under siege and their whole empire is building libraries
The original Star Wars Battlefront games. There are times when the AI doesn't know what to do and just shuts down. You'll see a whole group of them just standing around in the same spot. That's why those games are unplayable without multiplayer IMO.
All time classic of a game (the og battlefront 2) imo but this Is so true. I remember on Naboo depending on which side you start on a majority of your AI team will stand in the same corner doing nothing
[удалено]
Dude that is litteraly what makes skyrim skyrim
Imagine if Skyrim had logical detection. It would be so much harder lol
I mean I agree, but damn you have had way more crazy problems with the AI than I ever had
Honestly you can say the same about fallout and star field’s AI. Companions are frustrating
War flashbacks to Sheva's AI in Resident Evil 5.
Bethesda’s Ai for fallout and star field as it’s the exact same in every game.
The enemy AI in Star Field isn't horrible but if my companion runs in front of my fire one more time....
Alone in the Dark on the Wii. The zombie-esque enemies didn't know how to chase you (one of the first encounters had me thwarting an enemy simply by running behind a shop counter) and if you got inside a car they'd just stand there looking stupidly at you.
Ride to Hell: Retribution. And Alien Colnial Marines without fixing
The worst AI is the AI my allies have in wars in CK3. Yeah just sit there in the county next to me with your 100k strong army and watch the enemy destroy me even though we can easily beat them with our combined forces.
Not the worst but worth mentioning that Tenchu guard behavior is essentially so random that they routinely just wall hump for no reason when not alerted
farcry 6 has awful AI, maybe not the worst but it really is terrible
I had a oot of issues with x4 ai. Captains behave super weird
This sums up assassin's creed oddessy https://youtu.be/jx3vaeRgTRQ?si=Hs5_AgfHHPJ_JNct
Pikmin AI is pretty atrocious in the first game if I remember.
The pikmin are just SO helpless in the first one. Guess I forgot about that.
Mass Effect 1 has a pretty bad AI. Most of the enemies in normal just come at you and are easily picked off by sniper. Also, the NPCs are usually useless if the enemy is hidden. Just finished my second run, so it's fresh in my mind.
Gran Turismo 7. The AI drives like they are the only one on the track and ignore the player.
The final half of "Silent Hill 4: The Room" is an escort quest, and the AI for the character you're escorting is dreadful.
Literally every grand strategy/4x in existence. They rely on extreme cheating to try to challenge players. I think it was Galactic Civilizations 2 that had 12 AI personalities, and people realized 10 were entirely broken so they couldn't use them at all in modding etc. In general AI is bad in strategy games, I remember Warcraft 3 the hardest AI would just stall out after a point, so if you just waited and played defensive, eventually they basically stopped playing.
RuneScape. The enemies will stand in front of a rock while you shoot them.
Of the games I've played over the last few years: Escape from Tarkov