In multiple posts you mentioned how you expected people on fediverse to be “more principled” and how they can only support the smaller option or just give up and accept everything corps throw at them which is why you’re surprised some play gacha games.
Does that expectation also extend to “normal” F2P games like Apex, Fortnite etc? Does it include people playing full-price AAA games? Titles like GTA, Diablo, Halo, majority of MMOs and more - games that not only are paid but also include season passes and micro transactions.
Should people also avoid those?
Just so we’re clear, it’s a genuine question. I have no skin in the game as I don’t really play HSR, AAA games or really care what people expect from me but I’m curious about your perspective on things.
Tim partially retreads the stuff that was already mentioned by various people in the industry (including Gabe Newell) but it’s by no means a bad thing - especially since he adds some personal stuff as well.
If anyone is interested in game design and history of the industry Tim’s channel is a great watch in general. There’s lots of cool stories and tips for aspiring devs.
Thanks for the links, that’s exactly why I wasn’t sure where things stand currently. While I am familiar with EFF, I wasn’t aware of that article so it was an interesting read.
The one I kind of remembered (even though only partially) was the Reuters article, which contains this quote I was referring to:
The office reiterated Wednesday that copyright protection depends on the amount of human creativity involved, and that the most popular AI systems likely do not create copyrightable work.
It’s obviously a bit more complicated than how I mentioned it initially so I’m glad I could read it again.
The original ban was always meant to be temporary as far as I understand, Valve simply wanted some time to decide rather than make a rash decision (it’s easier to open the floodgates than it is to clean up after the fact). I’m sure things will change in the future as AI tools become more and more common anyway.
I’d like to mention that I’m not exactly up to date with AI related legislation so treat what I’m about to write as a genuine attempt to understand their worries rather than trying to be smart.
I remember there being a lot of uncertainty about the legality of what and how can('t) be used in training models (especially when used for commercial purposes) - has that been settled in any way? I think there was also a case of not being able to copyright AI generated content due to lack of human authorship (I’d have to look for an article on this one as it’s been a while) - this obviously won’t be a problem if generated assets are used as a base to be worked upon.
As for illegal content - Valve mentioned it in regards to live-generated stuff. I assume they’re worried about possibility of plagiarism and things going against their ToS, which is why they ask about guardrails used in such systems. On a more general note, there were also cases of AI articles coming up with fake stories with accusations of criminal behavior involving real people - this probably won’t be a problem with AI usage in games (I hope anyway) but it’s another sensitive topic devs using such tools have to keep in mind.
Again, I’m nowhere near knowledgeable enough to write this stuff from a position of confidence so feel free to correct me if any of this has been dealt with.
AI generated content has a lot of unanswered legal questions around it which can lead to a lot of headache with moderation and possibility of illegal content showing up (remember that not only “well meaning” devs will use these tools). It’s seems reasonable for a company to try minimize the risk.
As for disclaimer, it will allow people make an informed decision - not sure what’s wrong with that.
I wish all you guys had the same access to modding as PC crowd but I’m afraid anything like script extender would be too much of a risk for any console manufacturer. Still, they do experiment with console mods so who knows, maybe one day?
The few glimpses at technology (future bike for example) and ads gives me hope for a neat spin on the classic elements of the setting. That’s all we can do for now, I guess.
Of course, I hope my comment didn’t imply otherwise. Unfortunately even a different title and completely original assets (AM2R?) won’t help much with some companies.
Good enough project will catch their eye sooner or later anyway.
I’m pretty sure devs are fully aware of what’s going to happen which is why they avoided putting their names on the project and included the source code.
Hammer was always going to come down since they included game assets in the build - news articles won’t really change much on this matter,
Didn’t have time to check it out myself yet but considering there’s still no public release date it’s most likely case of “things change too much to focus on teaching” or simply forgetting (spending days on a project can blur the line between what is and isn’t obvious). Not trying to dismiss your complaint obviously - one should expect people to need some guidance.
It might be worth letting the devs know - the more people mention it the more likely they’ll realize it’s a problem.