[elliottcarlson]

You are comparing a system that learned to play a game (which indeed was very impressive), to a system that learned to make the game by observing the behavior from video. None of your points actually relate to the system described.

[AstralStorm]

By "make" you meant "match some sort of a simple function approximation after hardcoding lots of knowledge about the system and the general function" right? Which is essentially what the neural networks and all the other optimization algorithms were made for?

(The algorithm as described will require a huge database for a game that is even slightly more complicated than Infinite Mario. And we don't even have the sources to try that.)

Even the object motion tracker part will choke in 3D environment. (It is a greedy matcher as they described it.)

Speaking of impressed, Google DeepMind paper is way more actually feasible to improve upon and rich in detail: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1606.01868v1.pdf Compare the two papers in straight quality. I understand why you'd publish any worthless junk in the current academic culture and do not agree we should actually do it.