Games are often designed to shape player behavior in a desired way; however, it can be unclear how design decisions affect the space of behaviors in a game. Designers usually explore this space through human playtesting, which can be time-consuming and of limited effectiveness in exhausting the space of possible behaviors. In this paper, we propose the use of automated planning agents to simulate humans of varying skill levels to generate game playthroughs. Metrics can then be gathered from these playthroughs to evaluate the current game design and identify its potential flaws. We demonstrate this technique in two games: the popular word game Scrabble and a collectible card game of our own design named Cardonomicon. Using these case studies, we show how using simulated agents to model humans of varying skill levels allows us to extract metrics to describe game balance (in the case of Scrabble) and highlight potential design flaws (in the case of Cardonomicon).
Automated game generation researchers have simulated player behavior using search to reach goal states @cite_34 @cite_30 @cite_47 (possibly subject to constraints on the states visited in the reachability check @cite_22 ) and hand-coded heuristics for learnability @cite_5 or design aesthetics such as balance @cite_42 @cite_23 . By contrast, games user research and game analytics @cite_4 emphasizes aggregate properties of sets of player behaviors in a game, such as qualitative patterns in player solution strategies @cite_46 , metrics on game length or diversity of options @cite_35 , or clusters of types of players @cite_9 @cite_7 . Ideally, automated design analysis tools should facilitate reasoning on aggregate properties of player behavior in a game without requiring exhaustive user testing. As many game state spaces cannot be exhaustively sampled, there is a need for methods to sample potential player behaviors in a game @cite_27 .
@cite_30 @cite_35 @cite_4 @cite_22 @cite_7 @cite_46 @cite_9 @cite_42 @cite_27 @cite_23 @cite_5 @cite_47 @cite_34
2011974988 2152729775 2038193812 2337798556
Estimating affective and cognitive states in conditions of rich human-computer interaction, such as in games, is a field of growing academic and commercial interest. Entertainment and serious games can benefit from recent advances in the field as, having access to predictors of the current state of the player (or learner) can provide useful information for feeding adaptation mechanisms that aim to maximize engagement or learning effects. In this paper, we introduce a large data corpus derived from 58 participants that play the popular Super Mario Bros platform game and attempt to create accurate models of player experience for this game genre. Within the view of the current research, features extracted both from player gameplay behavior and game levels, and player visual characteristics have been used as potential indicators of reported affect expressed as pairwise preferences between different game sessions. Using neuroevolutionary preference learning and automatic feature selection, highly accurate models of reported engagement, frustration, and challenge are constructed (model accuracies reach 91 , 92 , and 88 for engagement, frustration, and challenge, respectively). As a step further, the derived player experience models can be used to personalize the game level to desired levels of engagement, frustration, and challenge as game content is mapped to player experience through the behavioral and expressivity patterns of each player. Developing computer-controlled groups to engage in combat, control the use of limited resources, and create units and buildings in real-time strategy (RTS) games is a novel application in game AI. However, tightly controlled online commercial game pose challenges to researchers interested in observing player activities, constructing player strategy models, and developing practical AI technology in them. Instead of setting up new programming environments or building a large amount of agentpsilas decision rules by playerpsilas experience for conducting real-time AI research, the authors use replays of the commercial RTS game StarCraft to evaluate human player behaviors and to construct an intelligent system to learn human-like decisions and behaviors. A case-based reasoning approach was applied for the purpose of training our system to learn and predict player strategies. Our analysis indicates that the proposed system is capable of learning and predicting individual player strategies, and that players provide evidence of their personal characteristics through their building construction order. We consider two-player games played over finite state spaces for an infinite number of rounds. At each state, the players simultaneously choose moves; the moves determine a successor state. It is often advantageous for players to choose probability distributions over moves, rather than single moves. Given a goal, for example, reach a target state, the question of winning is thus a probabilistic one: what is the maximal probability of winning from a given state? On these game structures, two fundamental notions are those of equivalences and metrics. Given a set of winning conditions, two states are equivalent if the players can win the same games with the same probability from both states. Metrics provide a bound on the difference in the probabilities of winning across states, capturing a quantitative notion of state similarity. We introduce equivalences and metrics for two-player game structures, and we show that they characterize the difference in probability of winning games whose goals are expressed in the quantitative mu-calculus. The quantitative mu-calculus can express a large set of goals, including reachability, safety, and omega-regular properties. Thus, we claim that our relations and metrics provide the canonical extensions to games, of the classical notion of bisimulation for transition systems. We develop our results both for equivalences and metrics, which generalize bisimulation, and for asymmetrical versions, which generalize simulation. We propose a hybrid model for automatically acquiring a policy for a complex game, which combines online learning with mining knowledge from a corpus of human game play. Our hypothesis is that a player that learns its policies by combining (online) exploration with biases towards human behaviour that's attested in a corpus of humans playing the game will outperform any agent that uses only one of the knowledge sources. During game play, the agent extracts similar moves made by players in the corpus in similar situations, and approximates their utility alongside other possible options by performing simulations from its current state. We implement and assess our model in an agent playing the complex win-lose board game Settlers of Catan, which lacks an implementation that would challenge a human expert. The results from the preliminary set of experiments illustrate the potential of such a joint model.