I like how their priority is not removing the significant restrictions of couriers, items and heroes, rather playing a team of professionals on a "custom game" based on dota heroes
You're 100% right and being down voted for it as I no doubt will. I am not impressed because I've played a ton of games and observed a ton of dynamics. You can tell in the first 10min what level and type of game play is occurring and it isn't of the intellectual variant. It's of the bot variant. Broader Dota was designed and constantly updated to combat such gameplay. When people settle on cheese strategies or exploits, they intentionally change the game balance to prevent it.
I'm more interested in how this is achieved than what it has been tuned to try to trick people into believing. Looking under the hood, I see the same thing when I look across all Weak AI solutions : Lots of hand coded steering functions with dynamic weights populated by incredible amounts of brute-force random searching (past a human lifetime of average gameplay).
While this may secure headlines and funding, this is miles away from the real direction you have to go towards Strong AI. It doesn't seem many well funded/popularized groups understand this thus will ultimately end up fooling themselves. Point out this truth and you get down votes. Essentially the broader community plugging their ears which is why a large number of these efforts are due for a significant failure.
As for your point, we’ll have to see what things look like as OpenAI continues to rapidly remove these restrictions! Or you could provide us some literature on the broad strokes you’re making.
My points stand on their own. I take downvotes w/ no sound rebuttals as a signal that I'm saying something that right and an inconvenient truth.
> Or you could provide us some literature on the broad strokes you’re making.
I began my work by not pretending that weak AI is something that other than what it is and prioritized the more challenging aspects of AI