Page 2 of 2 First First 12

Thread: Robots in Deus Ex 3

Robots in Deus Ex 3

  1. #26
    Originally Posted by K^2
    Take a look at Big Dog.
    Dude good call on that one! This thing kicks a$$! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1czBcnX1Ww

    Edit: Took to long staring at videos and MaxxQ1 beat me to posting the link. Still, I stand by my earlier statement gentlemen.

  2. #27
    Originally Posted by singularity
    ... eh... not too sure about that. If Moore's Law keeps holding true for beyond 2015
    Robotics and computer hardware are not the same thing. Moore's law has absolutely no relevance to whether or not we can build affordable, well-functioning security bots in any stretch of time.
    signature image

  3. #28
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    1,970
    Oh, and as for the comment about how long a 'bot can go on a charge, who cares when you have rechargeable batteries that have a fast recharge time?

    http://www.gizmag.com/go/5228/

    Standardize the power receptacle and you're good to go.

    I can't see a security 'bot ever being too far from an outlet to plug into once in a while. Military 'bots, on the other hand, may need a portable charger (remotely-driven, of course), maybe run by a gas or diesel engine, or perhaps solar power (need to improve the efficiency of solar cells though), but that's really no different than the current military having fuel bowsers following behind advancing tanks in a warzone.
    For when you're too lazy to repost your side of an argument/discussion: http://forums.eidosgames.com/showthread.php?t=115406

  4. #29
    Originally Posted by Pinky_Powers
    Robotics and computer hardware are not the same thing. Moore's law has absolutely no relevance to whether or not we can build affordable, will functioning security bots in any stretch of time.
    Because there isn't any computer hardware on robots? It does make a huge difference not only on the manufacture of the bot but the R&D side too.

    At the risk of upsetting K^2 again here we go:

    The current Asimo's hardware is valued at about $1 million, much higher than the price Honda aims for in the future of about $50,000 to $60,000.
    http://www.statehornet.com/2.4409/as...ction-1.571197

    Imagine a bot with a facial recognition program. The difference between a 20 gigabytes database taking up a square foot and a terabyte taking up a square inch makes a big difference. The time this took was roughly 12 years. The cost is the same. Look at the computers on cars. Look at DARPA's Urban Challenge...

    It makes a HUGE difference.
    Your effort to remain what you are is what limits you.

  5. #30
    Originally Posted by ArcR
    Because there isn't any computer hardware on robots? It does make a huge difference not only on the manufacture of the bot but the R&D side too.

    At the risk of upsetting K^2 again here we go:


    http://www.statehornet.com/2.4409/as...ction-1.571197

    Imagine a bot with a facial recognition program. The difference between a 20 gigabytes database taking up a square foot and a terabyte taking up a square inch makes a big difference. The time this took was roughly 12 years. The cost is the same. Look at the computers on cars. Look at DARPA's Urban Challenge...

    It makes a HUGE difference.
    The computer portion of Asimo is not nearly as problematic as the robotic side. And that's to say nothing of the programming nightmare... which is not nearly as influenced by Moore's law as you might think.

    Also, it took over twenty years to get Asimo as advanced as he is - which is quite advanced - but he is not nearly capable enough to work as a Security Robot.

    ...maybe in another twenty years.
    signature image

  6. #31
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    1,554
    Originally Posted by K^2
    Yes, really. Modern batteries are already nearly as good as gasoline in energy/weight, so running for a better part of the day is not a problem. Problem is the cost of these batteries. Walking upright is also covered. As I said, Asimo is a terrible design. Don't look at it as an example. There are systems that allow for smooth, fast motion. Take a look at Big Dog. Yes, I know, it's not a biped, but the motion is smooth, and that things is FAST (try to find a video where it runs). Biped would be more complex and more expensive, hence not a lot of bipedal prototypes with such mobility. As for AI, we already have facial recognition, and motion tracking has been around for a while. So a targeting system with IFF of some sort is extremely straightforward. Put it all together, and you have your security bots from DX. Give me a budget and I'll build you one, no problem.
    The automatic friend/foe recognition is not the problem. But in fact when I said we can't yet build robots like the ones in DX I was actually thinking of this Big Dog robot. It's just not nearly as sophisticated as the DX robots. In a few years there might be some, but they will still be way too expensive.
    Apparently there are people who think the best way to make
    a prequel is to contradict the thing to which it is a prequel.

  7. #32
    Robots and DE3 should be also availble as small portable items - sth similar to spy drone from oryginal game. It could be an expensive single use manual control robot, that would be able to unlock doors, turn off alarms/cameras and blow up himself unleashing emp. Imo spy drone aug was far more to powerful.
    Augmented Edition of Human Revolution

  8. #33
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    4,084
    Originally Posted by gamer0004
    The automatic friend/foe recognition is not the problem. But in fact when I said we can't yet build robots like the ones in DX I was actually thinking of this Big Dog robot. It's just not nearly as sophisticated as the DX robots. In a few years there might be some, but they will still be way too expensive.
    This isn't the task of the Big Dog project. The task is building a reliable, low cost, fully autonomous mule for the military. I only use it as an example of how fluid and quick the movements can be when the right approach is used.

    I am absolutely serious. If you provide me with funding, I'll building you either of the 3 security/military bots from DX. The little one I can build myself for a few grand. Ironically, the most expensive part of that one would be custom-ordered steel plating for the armor. The larger ones, I'd need some funds to develop some key components, and I'd need to hire at least two engineers to do so. The large military bot would be Jet-A powered, and the medium one would be electric. Both would use mix of hydraulics and cables for actuation of the limbs, as well as sophisticated software that guides the motion, allowing them to move at much higher speeds than anything we see in DX.

  9. #34
    Originally Posted by Pinky_Powers
    The computer portion of Asimo is not nearly as problematic as the robotic side. And that's to say nothing of the programming nightmare... which is not nearly as influenced by Moore's law as you might think.

    Also, it took over twenty years to get Asimo as advanced as he is - which is quite advanced - but he is not nearly capable enough to work as a Security Robot.

    ...maybe in another twenty years.
    I was definitely thinking along the lines of computer storage technology in relation to building more advanced "machine intelligence" -- moving closer to "AI" (a term I really hate). The objective (and serious problem in regards to robots like Asimo) is not to build better robots. The objective is to build better machines that can build better robots. You are right - the issue with modern robotics is primarily the programing side, and mechanical issues themselves (and obviously the money behind it). What the processor business has long since learned is that if you can design machines that can design better processors (chips, motherboards, etc) you can build much better parts at much more affordable costs, in ways that would have taken humans a very long time to discover.

    If you can build a computer that can program a robot for you... or design the automotronics for you... or design power cells that are even more efficient... or... well... you ge the idea.
    True. We're not there yet -- but we will be there a lot sooner than 2 decades. I give it 5 years.
    It has become appallingly obvious that our technology has exceeded our humanity. ~Albert Einstein

  10. #35
    Laboring the point is a fool's errand.
    Your effort to remain what you are is what limits you.

  11. #36

  12. #37
    We could easily just say that the DX1 robots were not top of the line.
    Security systems on the whole in DX1 were ridicilously easy to subvert, so we might go for the explanation that they were done by the lowest bidder with cheapest specks and minimal cost, so why not robots as well.

    The robots in DX1 could easily be explained to be military surplus equipment bought when they've gone out of production, used as a cheap addition to more expensive augmented humans (the ones with rocket launchers for arms) and MIB's, added mainly to fulfill some obscure criteria on security rules to appease insurance comppanies and/or accountants.
    While they might have been old and unsophisticated, they would also be cheap, sturdy, and pack heavy weaponry to deter people from going where they're not supposed to.

    NSF was working on the cheap, so they'd have used cheapest possible bots, the missile silo was clearly all but forgotten by pentagon, so they might easily have decades old bots held together by duct tape and glue, area 51 seemed to be better protected but even there the bots might as well be an old leftover from time when it was not run by MJ12 and MJ12 just added their own MIB's and AUG's and regular personal (and they probably were not expecting anyone to attack them, as they seemed pretty arrogant all through the game), the place where we went for our own Universal Constructor had security bought fom military surplus i think.
    And Unatco went from old robots to augmented humans to Dentons, so their robots would be old as hell as well.

    Personally i'd love to see some advanced robots, both as guards and in out of combat uses, robot hounds as pets (with combat capabilities added for protection), automated cleaners (seen em in DX1, those might be old as well so could be seen in some places), robot vendors in markets (only in upscale neighborhoods though, think of a more advanced vending machine that accepts credit cards/paper money and gives back change), robot taxies (again, only in upscale places), etc...

  13. #38
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    4,084
    Originally Posted by xaduha
    I was writing something similar for auto-targeting in FPS games. It was using screen captures rather than camera feed, but the idea is the same. When you have the sentry fixed at one point, and only turn around to aim at targets, the task is pretty simple. When the sentry is mounted on a mobile base, it becomes far more complex. My program actually detected "flows" in images, allowing it to derive its own motion in space, and find things that move relative to the "world". That would probably be way overkill for the sentry turret like that, but would work rather well for a sentry bot. Or it would, if I ever got around to optimizing the FFT algorithm to have it run in real time. Worked great on recorded video, though. I should probably sit down and finish it one of these days. Maybe build a little robot that runs around and harasses people at the department.

  14. #39
    Having robots and fighting them in game sounds amazing. It is a neccessity! If DX1 had them, then is a must in DX3
    i7 920 9800GT 1Gb Corsair DDR3 4 Gb Triple Channel TX 750W Caviar Black 1TB P2450H 24'' Win7 Ult X64

  15. #40
    Yes I agree,I can't imagine DX3 without having to deal with robots of different natures.

  16. #41
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Oxford
    Posts
    7,374
    Originally Posted by K^2
    I was writing something similar for auto-targeting in FPS games. It was using screen captures rather than camera feed, but the idea is the same. When you have the sentry fixed at one point, and only turn around to aim at targets, the task is pretty simple. When the sentry is mounted on a mobile base, it becomes far more complex. My program actually detected "flows" in images, allowing it to derive its own motion in space, and find things that move relative to the "world". That would probably be way overkill for the sentry turret like that, but would work rather well for a sentry bot. Or it would, if I ever got around to optimizing the FFT algorithm to have it run in real time. Worked great on recorded video, though. I should probably sit down and finish it one of these days. Maybe build a little robot that runs around and harasses people at the department.
    DO IT.

    Build it out of Legos.
    Make a cup of tea. Enjoy a nice cheddar. Always bring a towel.

  17. #42
    Alright if we are going to do this here are my impressions.

    This one would be quick and could attack while moving, kind of like a drive by. Heres a pic- http://gargles.net/wp-content/upload...HINA-ROBOT.jpg

    On a more serious note, the robots from DX1 seemed scarier and more violent than the ones in IW. Also they would fit in more properly based on the time period. When they would walk around I would always feel uncomfortable, like I have to watch my back. Also the robot, like the one found on liberty island would be more plausible.
    Mech Aug of choice : HVZP (High velocity zyme projectile)

Page 2 of 2 First First 12