Improved Belgian AI Algorithm for Dynamic Management in Action Role-Playing Games

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

To overcome BAI's weak adaptability, the authors presented an Improved Belgian Artificial Intelligence algorithm with Dynamic Difficulty Adjustment (DDA) established and implemented two systems in Unreal Engine 4 independently based on BAI and IBAI. Here are some of my thoughts:

1- To support your findings in the abstract section, utilize absolute terms ( numbers) rather than relative phrases.

2-Add more phrases on AI and deep learning, as well as their applications, to illustrate the importance of AI in the introduction section. These critical references were encouraged by the authors.

https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/12/11/5540

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2210670722004061

https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/app12168232

https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/12/6/2795

3-If you use formulas from other publications, you must appropriately reference them.

4-Do not skip forward to the next part without an appropriate explanation. For instance, from 3.2 to 3.2.1.

5-The authors should elaborate on their methodology and findings. This version is insufficient.

6-The work's implication is absent from the conclusion section.

7-The work's limitations and shortcomings must be addressed in the conclusion section.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

The work concerns an improved combat algorithm for RPGs. These types of algorithms, on the one hand, must be efficient enough to provide real-time action, and on the other hand, guarantee a sense of realism and immersion for players. The scientific literature on the subject is small, hence any new solutions are valuable. The description of the algorithm is very clear. The authors pointed out the differences from known solutions and possible advantages. They also performed convincing tests on players, where the performance of the improved algorithm was compared with the initial algorithm based on players' experiences and impressions.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

The paper presents an improved Belgian AI Algorithm aimed at improving combat management in action RPG video games. The author present a series of test to evaluate the effectiveness of the proposed method.

The topic is interesting and coherent with the goal of the journal.

The method is adequately described, and the results seem to confirm the hypothesis. The paper is in general well organized.

However, the paper needs an accurate check of English writing. There are several sentences which must be deeply revised in order to better explain the authors ideas.

I will put a list of problematic sentences, plus some additional commment:

- lines 29-31: it is not clear what the authors mean with "not the property of the game"

- lines 31-34: sentence must be revised

- line 44: a bibliographic reference to Kung-Fu Circle is needed

- line 59: MRBP acronym is used without a previous explanation. This happens also for other acronyms in the paper.

- line 73: divides --> divide

- line 123: In case of the enemy --> In case the enemy

- line 153: sentence must be revised

- line 173: sentence must be revised

- line 185: it is not clear what the authors mean with "if GP of the enemies are consistent"

- lines 301-305: sentence must be revised, and, again, it is not clear what the authors mean with "consistent"

- lines 332-333: sentence must be revised

- line 336: I will revise the title of the list point

- line 338: sentence must be revised

- line 344: I will revise the title of the list point

- lines 352-353: sentence must be revised

- lines 361-362: sentence must be revised

- lines 420-424: sentences must be revised

- line 429: sentence must be revised

- lines 430-431: sentences must be revised

- lines 439-440: sentence must be revised

- line 447: wait --> waits

- Table 7, BAI column, 5th element: gird --> grid

- lines 495-496: the sentences are written in the present tense (players accept, game experience lasts), but the reported events are in the past

- lines 497-498: sentence must be revised

- lines 506-507: sentence must be revised

- lines 511-512: it is not clear what the authors mean with "the players’ thoughts go faster with BAI". Some more comments about BAI more prone to induce a calm feeling in players are needed

- lines 534-535: the future works section must be improved

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

It can be accepted now.