Yeah.
The ‘dreamer’ part of me pictures this as enabling solo devs with masterpieces in their heads to finally make the game they want. Or small studios to undermine AAAs even more.
…But grifters gonna grift.
And apparently people buying slop can’t help themselves, whether the slop is AI or not.
It was already pretty badly ruined because of asset packs.
I worry that if I shot myself in the leg on purpose, I might bleed out
Whoever uses AI to crank out shit games is already cranking out shit games anyway. Only way to fight back now or in the future is to stop paying for shit games.
I mean, most AAA titles don’t even run on launch nowadays, so I’m not really sure how the quality can get much worse than “unplayable.”
And the bar was already very low.
Just remember what call of duty calls original content
That’s not even the worst of what Call of Duty used.
…don’t use it and the problem solves itself, no?
I’m sure that’s what they’d like to do but then some executive gets some bright ideas about how it could make the game better despite having never ever played a game before in their life.
Wait, if devs are worried about it, and players are worried about it, who the fuck is doing it?? If it’s a widespread fear, they should band together and set up an AI-weary union, and gamers would support the shit outta them for it. Make it like a privacy policy, a binding agreement that AI will be used sparingly if at all.
Wait, if devs are worried about it, and players are worried about it, who the fuck is doing it??
The CEOs and upper management goons that don’t care about anything but a single number getting higher.
Why are players worried about it? It has the potential to take video games to another level entirely.
Yeah… But “below rock bottom” isn’t the level we want.
That’s a ridiculous take. It could add a level of variability and replayability that far exceeds games today, even those using procedural generation. There’s no reason to think it would lower the quality to “below rock bottom”, at all.
You’re assuming AI will be used in a sensible way for the aspects it is good at, and not by forcing developers to use it for code generation uncritically with the hope they can eventually dump most of their workforce.
If they used the generative AI to actually generate dialogue on the spot it could be pretty dope assuming it is trained properly so its consistent with the lore of the game and you could actually have a productive conversation with the NPCs without being constantly gaslit.
But that’s not how any major dev has planned to use it. They use it to cheap out on art assets and writing the pre-scripted shit.
As it stands, even the few independent games doing the thing mentioned in my first paragraph are pretty garbage because they can’t even remain consistent enough in their own logic to make the games actually playable.
The problem is hallucinations are part of the solution to conversations with LLMs, but they’re destructive in a game environment. An NPC tells you something false and the player will assume they just couldn’t find the secret or that the game is bugged rather than an AI that just made some shit up.
No amount of training removes hallucinating because that’s part of the generation process. All it does is take your question and reverse engineer what an answer to that looks like based on what words it knows and it’s data set. It doesn’t have any “knowledge”, not to mention that the training data would have to be different for each npc to represent different knowledge sets, backgrounds, upbringing, ideology, experience and culture. And then there’s the issue of having to provide it broad background knowledge of the setting without it adding new stuff or revealing hidden lore.
That said, I wouldn’t be surprised if we see this attempted, but I expect it to go horribly wrong.
Just don’t buy shitty games.
