As much as I don’t like it (I think art should be something hand crafted by humans) nothing Valve can do. It would take an insane amount of resources to vet all these AI games coming.
@PerogiBoi@jherazob it would be interesting but require a lot of development to make sure the NPCs either didn’t know about spoiler information which may break the plot or don’t just hallucinate answers, which may mislead the player.
“How do you get through the haunted forest?” “You need x item to get through the haunted forest” “are you sure?” “Yes thats how heros get through the forest” the item in question doesn’t even exist in the game or has no bearing on the quest.
You might be interested in inworld.ai/origins , a detective game where all the characters can be interviewed in natural language and respond with AI. They seem to be doing a pretty good job so far
@Ferk@jherazob@PerogiBoi good point, unreliable narrator is one thing, but could harm game enjoyment especially if it’s unintended or harmful. It’s one thing to retell the history of a region with a bias or mis-remembering events, or characters lying because it’s their nature to lie “evil character” but it would get annoying if every character could convincingly just make up unhelpful rubbish, or spoil a plot twist in the game.
@Ferk@jherazob@PerogiBoi I’m not arguing against LLM or conversational AI in games, it could really breathe life into a game if your choices really could have organic responses, but these tools have a lot of pitfalls that scripted responses don’t have, and the dev team will need to be aware of it to not have unintended consequences.
Such AI integration will be separated into categories of “pre-generated” content that is “created with the help of AI tools during development” (e.g., using DALL-E for in-game images) and “live-generated” content that is “created with the help of AI tools while the game is running” (e.g., using Nvidia’s AI-powered NPC technology).
Both are covered by the policies the article talks about, and both were arguably against the rules previously
It's not like they can really avoid it. AI assisted tools will become a standard in the future ("productivity has to go up" after all) and there's a good chance Valve already received some feedback from AAA publishers on that matter, since they'll be the main players utilizing such tech.
The good thing here is the exsitance of a disclaimer on store pages, as it will allow people to decide for themselves, and the ability to report content straight from in-game overlay.
I’ll add that a blanket ban isn’t necessarily a positive thing, either. AI could be a component of developing unique NPCs, evolving bosses, changing economies, missions/quests, or procedurally generated levels (for example).
Obviously, at least some of that content would still need to pass human play testing, so it’s not like humans would be completely removed, but imagine if players had gameplay experiences that were entirely unique to them or changed based on non-RNG factors.
I agree, though, that reporting the use of AI and how it’s utilized is important for people to make informed decisions about how they spend their money.
Personally I'd love to see a new take on Daggerfall using AI for features you mentioned (though it would have to be an "all in" affair as Bethesda's approach to randomly generated content these days is... not particularly impressive).
I wouldn’t be surprised if, in just a few years time, pre-AI-era content of all kinds, not just games, ends up becoming cherished by people, to the point that entire fandoms and subcultures develop around preserving and promoting it.
This is no different than anything else, we naturally appreciate the skill it takes to create something entirely by hand, even if mass production is available.
The games will still be designed by humans. Generative AI will only be used as a tool in the workflow for creating certain assets faster, or for creating certain kinds of interactivity on the fly. It’s not good enough to wholesale create large sets of matching assets, and despite what folks may think, it won’t be for a long time, if ever. Not to mention, people just don’t want that. People want art to have intentional meaning, not computer generated slop.
Plenty of games still rely on procedural generation to different degrees. It's a huge selling point in many cases, and in others, it's a pillar of their genre.
Moim zdaniem to ukazuje tragicznie niski poziom polskiego dziennikarstwa. Czasem w gazetach widzę wydrukowane tweety o artykuł o nich, często w radio słyszę odniesienia do tweetow itd.
Fuck me what a horrifying/exciting time to be a computer science student. I feel like I’m either going to be obsolete by the time I’m handed a degree or my job will basically be doodling and asking a robot butler to do everything for me.
So I went to college in the early nineties. I had a friend who was vacilating between a cs degree and math degree because cs did not look like it was going anywhere given how mature the mainframe systems were. Needless to say that changed by 1995.
feature complete just means they’ve truly entered a “beta” phase. They’ve made it through production, features have been completed and now the real work can begin on designers tweaking settings and balancing the game for the next year and a half.
arstechnica.com
Gorące