Reinforcement Learning is one of the many machine learning paradigms. With no labelled data, it is concerned with balancing the exploration and exploitation of an environment with one or more agents present in it. Recently, many breakthroughs have been made in the creation of these agents for video game machine learning development, especially in first-person shooters with platforms such as ViZDoom, DeepMind Lab, and Unity’s ML-Agents. In this paper, we review the state-of-the-art of creation of Reinforcement Learning agents for use in multiplayer deathmatch first-person shooters. We selected various platforms, frameworks, and training architectures from various papers and examined each of them, analysing their uses. We compared each platform and training architecture, and then concluded whether machine learning agents can now face off against humans and whether they make for better gameplay than traditional Artificial Intelligence. In the end, we thought about future research and what researchers should keep in mind when exploring and testing this area.

Artificial Intelligence bots are extensively used in multiplayer First-Person Shooter (FPS) games. By using Machine Learning techniques, we can improve their performance and bring them to human skill levels. In this work, we focused on comparing and combining two Reinforcement Learning training architectures, Curriculum Learning and Behaviour Cloning, applied to an FPS developed in the Unity Engine. We have created four teams of three agents each: one team for Curriculum Learning, one for Behaviour Cloning, and another two for two different methods of combining Curriculum Learning and Behaviour Cloning. After completing the training, each agent was matched to battle against another agent of a different team until each pairing had five wins or ten time-outs. In the end, results showed that the agents trained with Curriculum Learning achieved better performance than the ones trained with Behaviour Cloning by a matter of 23.67% more average victories in one case. In terms of the combination attempts, not only did the agents trained with both devised methods had problems during training, but they also achieved insufficient results in the battle, with an average of 0 wins.