Re: OT: 2005 Games
 

Sounds like Sims Online.

Re: OT: 2005 Games
 

Sounds like it, but isn't really it. For one thing the graphics are hardly stunning, its not 3D, you don't seem to have the freedom to create truly huge complexes.

Brian

Re: OT: 2005 Games
 

The kind of compiler I'm thinking of would be able to search the internet/HD, find examples of what you're talking about, and extrapolate from what it finds - A VI (Virtual Intelligence), in other words. What you're talking about is one of the things that would come before that.

Right now, what I'm talking about would probably require a team of the best programmers and scientists from all sorts of fields and a supercomputer. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif It would have to be built up too, over years.

Re: OT: 2005 Games
 

I don't know Narf, After all what is a search engine? Take Google, but a GUI on it, throw in the IVRs what we navigate every day calling companies (Individual Voice Response), and you pretty much have the basics of what you are talking about. The devil/demon/dark enity is in making it work together, but where I work we already have a system that does a query based on your IVR response. Oh, and yes IVRs can understand speech, it doesn't have to be "press 1 to inhale, press 2 to exhale" type thing. It can take direction based on your vocal inputs. The only additional componet is a render program which others here would know about better then me. I think would might have to set a ratio 50 pixels = 1 foot type thing or work in straight pixels but again nothing new. Just a new way of making it work together... and voice driven!.

Rasorow

Re: OT: 2005 Games
 

If you're a fan of the old SPI games, you might want to check this place out:

www.hexwar.com

Has put many of the old SPI games into a PBW format, much like SE4, so you play against other humans. If you liked SPI, it's a real godsend.

Alarik

Re: OT: 2005 Games
 

Has anybody played Crusaders for XBox? It is RTS, but supposedly quite good.

*** And of course KOTOR II

Re: OT: 2005 Games
 

My ISP has a voice-responce system. I don't find it very usefull or intelligent; I generally ask for a human. Again, what you are talking about is one of the steps to what I am talking about. Just think about all the things that would be needed to do what the ST:NG holodeck does, programming-wise. (I don't think we could manage that level of real-3d interactivity any time soon. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif )

A learning neural-net would be essential. Among other things, the compiler would have to learn how to program what you want.

I think, five 'brains'. I got the idea (And mutated it slightly, out of a book called 'saucer'. Light reading, only read the Last half). One Speculator brain. This would be the most sophisticated; it would come up with whole theories out of 'what if?'. One Connecter brain (I had a better word but I have a slight headache and I forgot), this would take two theories and see if it can make a third. One Randomizer (Again, I had a better word) brain, this would simply jump off in some direction and see if whatever it hit tied in somewhere. Essentially like the speculator, but with no logic. The fourth brain...I forgot what it does. The fifth would be the 'Speaker'. It would take what the human typed, check the syntax, context, meaning and how the previous Queries were worded, and look in this huge pile of data for relevant info.

Such a system could be turned to pretty much anything, not just programming.

Re: OT: 2005 Games
 

Oh, man.
Those voice response things are even worse than the dial-#-for-X things.

At least in the dial things I know it will understand which option I want.
And I don't have to repeat out loud whatever silly things they're calling the options that sound like they may be vaguely related to what I want.

Dialling zero into it usually gets an operator thankfully.
Five seconds to state my reason for calling, and getting forwarded right to the extension I need is so much better than doing depth-first searches through an annoying automated system http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/laugh.gif

I wonder what horrible monstrosity they will come up with next...
"Think 'Happy' for sales. Think 'Sad' for accounts recievable... *beep* I'm sorry but 'murderous rage' is an invalid selection"

Re: OT: 2005 Games
 

This might be appropriate, and how provident it is the one I am up to.

http://www.penny-arcade.com/view.php...1-28&res=h http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...es/biggrin.gif