Everybody knows that implementing an FSM is much easier than a neural network
Well "everyone" who knows that is wrong. I would argue that for any FSM that has "n" number of states and an NN with "n" nodes, there is a (surprisingly small, certainly smaller than the average Chess NN) number "n" for which the FSM becomes an order of magnitude more complex (in terms of writing the damned thing) than the NN. My question was simple and clear
Does it worthwhile using neural network ?
That's neither simple nor clear, as it depends on lots of different factors:Does it worthwhile using neural network ?
a) How much processing power are you willing to sacrifice (NN's take more)?
b) How much memory (NN's take more)?
c) Is it going to be a "hive mind" (like Chess/Stratego) or are you going to need a different NN for each "unit" (like a Flight Simulator), and is the unit going to live long enough that it can learn effectively (or have recurrent memories)?
d) Is it necessary (Chess - Yes, Pacman - Not so much).
Generally speaking, I'd say no. Unless you have a strategic element as a focus of your game, there is no reason to use a NN for AI. Unless learning to play the game better, is a feature you really want (rather than just tweak magic numbers in your FSM) to increase difficulty as you play.