I agree with your point, but I think that good/realistic AI is one of those things people think they want but end up hating in practice. Can't remember where now, but I know I've read about devs playtesting with what they think is awesome new AI and players hating that it was "too hard", "feels like the game is cheating", etc. People have certain expectations that are hard to break :-/
"Good AI" does not mean that the AI is a good simulation of real opponents or a perfect machine that the player will struggle to go up against.
It means that it's varied and fun to play against. That the same situation will play out differently every time.
I think with HL1 it's less that the AI is good and more that the level design is excellent and they leveraged it perfectly to anticipate what the player would do, giving the illusion that the AI was smart.
The illusion is all that matters.
F.E.A.R.'s AI was an "illusion" too, but that doesn't make it any less good.
It doesn't have to be a complex simulation:
https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2017/04/03/why-fears-ai-is-still-the-best-in-first-person-shooters/ said:
The cherry on top is communication. As the soldiers fight they provide a narrative for the chaos in the form of orders and updates barked down their radios. "He's flanking us", one will call out, as his squad reacts to my movement. "I've got nowhere to go!" another will call, aware that he's trapped but unable to identify another safe spot.
As Orkin explained, "Having A.I. speak to each other allows us to cue the player in to the fact that the coordination is intentional. Of course the reality is that it's all smoke and mirrors, and really all decisions about what to say are made after the fact, once the squad behaviour has decided what the AI are going to do." Smoke and mirrors it may be, but it really makes you feel like you're facing an intelligent force.
People say things like "the Jaguar cores are holding back AI" and "it will be better next-gen with Ryzen" but
F.E.A.R. ran on an Xbox 360.
Halo ran on the original Xbox. It's not a computational problem.
Also, it may not be a full-fledged action shooter, but does Alien: Isolation count?
From how it behaved in my playthrough, I would not call the xenomorph in
Alien: Isolation to be an example of good AI with the way it behaved, and seemingly teleported around at times.
It's also kind of hilarious and sad that people think AI has barely advanced in nearly twenty years, when games like Prey, Last of Us, Stalker, Far Cry 2, and games outside of shooters like Dwarf Fortress, Rimworld, Alien, and Crusader Kings have more complex dynamic AI than any of those three
Complexity does not mean that it's
good though. The execution is all that matters.
I loved
Prey, but I certainly wouldn't say the combat encounters are as varied and fun as a game like
F.E.A.R.
Yeah it's easier and more marketable to just focus on MP as well. SP is often a tutorial of sorts.
This hurts me to my core.
