As a person that didn’t really enjoy the borderlands games, I had no idea this was happening and this is easily the oddest thing if read all week. Before I read the article I was confused but interested. Now I’m informed, confused, and interested. But hey, I’m glad they were able to do this with a game. I’m an average science enjoyer so I’m always glad to see good news.
As a bug fan of borderlands, I honestly wish they made a mobile spin off for the minigame that they’re using for this. I love playing the game they made for it, I love that it’s doing actual stuff, I just have a limited amount of time to sit down and play games at my pc and when I boot borderlands I wanna play borderlands.
“Fat trim” is the other one I recently heard, and it’s absolutely the worst one I’ve heard so far. Glad they consider humans working their best as “fat”…
i wonder how 5% of employees getting laid off will translate into executive bonuses. last year the top 2 guys made $72 million after laying off a bunch of people.
Maybe raise a stink with your attorney general and/or representative, too. The whole idea that a company can sell licenses for something and then arbitrarily decide they don’t want to do it anymore and revoke all the licenses doesn’t sound legal. And if it is, it doesn’t sound like it should be.
Not in this case, seeing that progress is stored online.
Who says that the game you care about tomorrow won’t do this next? Why be against an action/not care about something that can only benefit players now and in the long term?
The Crew was great in its time. It was basically the bridge between Test Drive Unlimited (superior open world gameplay) and early Forza Horizon (superior driving physics). Later Forza Horizon games simply took all the good gameplay features from both TLU and The Crew and is unmatched in quality now.
The Crew 2 was worse than both its predecessor and the competing Forza Horizon at that time, so if you were talking about that I’d half agree. But it’s still a problematic industry trend worth stopping.
A bunch of generative filler text won’t games more immersive. Maybe there is some scope in giving the model hidden details you need to coax out of it LA Noire style but currently everything seems a bit gimmicky.
Maybe it could be a benefit for asking questions to NPCs devs didn’t think you’d want to ask that. Like asking a city resident where the market is. Probably not today but perhaps one day.
If you give LLMs that much latitude you are going to have your NPCs spread conspiracy theories and fascist crap left and right in your game and a PR crisis on your hands.
I am unimpressed by the nonsense articles like these coming out about early tech.
You won’t convince me that AI can’t exceed “taking an arrow to a knee” quality dialogue repeated over and over, and that shit is still the best immersion we’ve got!
I think we’re going to see major NPCs get their dialog hand-written and background characters get AI dialog.
You could have random shopkeepers ramble on for hours about how their kids are doing in school or trouble they’re having with a delivery company or whatever topic. Nobody’s going to write that, but we could AI generate it.
People are expecting this to take people’a jobs so they’re picking apart the tech instead of paying attention.
Making an NPC be run by AI most likely will require more writing than it does now, but the end result will be worth it for games that strive for immersion.
It’s a shame, but people are asking for it when they buy, and therefore support, these kind of games. If people simply refused to buy always-online games, we wouldn’t be in this mess.
Well, there's the other route. If they are forced legally to comply, which is what Ross is trying to get done, and is the far better option alongside being more expensive and difficult, because a company's reaction to finances can be reversed as soon as it doesn't matter or the public forgets.
pcgamer.com
Aktywne