"Crypto/NFT disclosures make no sense, because all games will become "Play to Earn" and have NFT objects where you can transfer your Mario hat to COD 2028."
I am being glib, Sweeney probably has a point, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't take a critical look at his intentions.
I like AI, and see no issue with disclosing how it is applied. People who are pro-AI would like to further hone their craft, by understanding what workflows and issues are involved. Anti-AI folk can simply avoid what they dislike. Either way, it is win-win.
These guys live in a bubble, huffing each others’ farts
Epic CEO [Tim Sweeney] is an idiot
It is useful to know what games i want to avoid and boycott.
I mean he's not wrong, it's like saying we're going to have a flag for whether the game uses stock/bought assets or like saying whether an animated movie uses cgi.
The real issue is that many are using AI poorly, but as developers become more familiar with the tools and work them more seamlessly into their workflow, it can be beneficial.
I guess I won't be buying nearly all games.
It being ubiquitous does not mean it makes no sense. They can still say how and to what extent gen AI was used.
nahh men. This is why you (Epic) are giving away games every week for free. Nobody likes you
Even giving out great games for free doesn't make Epic more likeable. That is a next level failure.
If anything, other companies need to do the same as Valve does to gain respect and popularity. But, here we are.
Super effective slop filter you say? Sign me the fuck up!
Never thought I'd agree with Tim Sweeney on anything.
John Carmack has a good take on AI in game dev too.
No, it fucking won't, Tim Sweeney. Go jump off the OG Fortnite BR map so I can default dance on you while you get sent back to the lobby.
I think it should be more descriptive.
using gpt as a stack overflow replacement should be fine or autocomplete for a simple for-loop
using generative npcs, dialog, voice is another thing entirely
Plenty of folks add what ai was used for in the description of their game. Works well enough.
Personally I just avoid the games outright if ai was used at all, but yeah
As a CEO you can decide whether to piss off on what your potential consumers demand and don't. Obviously, there's a reason why the EGS is in the shitty place it is and Steam isn't. EGS focuses on developers and publishers even when it means pissing on consumers. Steam might have spearled modern DRM "subscription"-based marketplaces, but they've also continued to cater to consumer demands even when it opposed their interests and they could have chosen to ignore them anyway.
I'd argue that it was always in their interest to listen to their customers
Yes but we all know that Tim is a bit of an idiot.
We've all seen AI made games, they are awful. Terrible optimisation (often not optimised at all), programming mistakes that first year junior wouldn't make, glitchy looking art and basic gameplay because AI cannot be original.
Yeah I'm sure they're really going to take off.
Yeah we are on the losing side of history. The future will be total ai slop. People love it. We will be the grumpy old folks yelling that the tv ruined the world.
I think I agree. At some point it won't make any difference because it will just be another tool. We can have our knee jerk reactions for now, though. Especially for people like lemmy users.
For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki
Rules: