If AI made a great game...

[ZedClampet]

Would you like it less because there was no human involvement? I actually think that I would, in fact, like it less. As I become more used to AI and the novelty wears off, it's just this cold thing that generates stuff. A joke is funnier if I know a person thought it up. AI can generate a great picture, and it means almost nothing to me. Give me that same picture made by a human artist, and I'll take a closer look instead of just giving it a quick scan.

As for games, I believe I would feel like an AI game was pointless. There was no developer trying to trick me. No developer balanced the boss. No developer wrote the story. Would you read a novel written by AI? I surely wouldn't bother. Books examine the human experience, something ChatGPT can only prattle on randomly about. And games are the same way. Games mean something to the developers, and this meaning is carried on to me. A game would mean nothing to an AI, and this nothingness would be transferred to me. There would be no human wondering how I would handle a particular situation. No human who couldn't wait to see my reaction to the story twist. The whole thing would be lifeless and empty.

Thoughts?

 

[Colif]

if AI made a great game I would play it. Why not... doesn't make that much difference really. It might be a unique idea no one would think of.

Soon AI will be used to speed up the process, so why not go one step further and create AI that can make games. Games take too long to make now and graphics only going to keep getting more demanding so why not use tools to speed up process. If you don't, someone else will.

 

[Brian Boru]

Your post contradicts your title

I would absolutely love a great game, whoever or whatever made it. I would be so impressed by all the AI devs who had developed and fine-tuned their creation to the point where it put out a great end product.

I've used things like Intellisense and Auto-correct for decades, grateful for their help and tipping the hat to the devs who put them together to improve the product.

But I get you—you're all about the process rather than the end product, whereas I'm the opposite. To each their own

 

[SWard]

Tricky Q because a lot of games use AI anyway, just not the topical AI that's become so prevalent. So many bosses, NPC, enemy fighters and other bits in pieces in games have been using AI for decades, for example the enemy fighter pilots in EVE: Valkyrie all had their own algorithms and fight styles to give them personality, but all the decisions to shoot or follow a target are made by AI. I think where the line gets blurry is around the artistic integrity or the "Is it art if no one made it?" question.

For example, AI creates an amazing fantasy world for me to live in in my game, but I know that the images it's learned off are from artists. Let's say the artist is on the team and used it to randomise some tree skins - not a problem. But then lets say a game studio steals an artists samples to feed a game to make AI - plagiarism at best. Would I enjoy the game as much? No.

We've also been playing with procedurally generated levels/landscapes in games for a good few years now, and weirdly there's been a lot less said about work being taken from game devs about it, because it makes their life's easier. I'd argue creating a level is as much art as designing a character but it's just seen so differently.

As someone that's worked in studio, do I worry that jobs will be taken by AI? - yeah for sure. I have a lot of friends who are concept artists and its a worrying time for contractors especially. I think AI can also be harnessed to make amazing things and channel the power and imagination of artists and designers to make their games even greater... I guess we just have to ask at what cost...

I feel like this should have probably been explored on an episode of STTNG - feels Picardy.

 

[Colif]

Stevie has a point, games without AI wouldn't be very fun. Shooting games wouldn't have any bots or enemies... do you like shooting targets as that is all that is left.

 

[Pifanjr]

It depends on the game. I want any narrative to be written by a human, because a narrative is supposed to communicate some kind of point and a randomly generated narrative doesn't have any purpose behind it. Unless a human directed the AI on what point to make of course.

However, purely abstract games do not need to be designed by humans to be enjoyable.

Which means that AI can be used for all of the abstract parts of a game, like balancing the game, while a human should be creating the narrative and world-building.

 

[Brian Boru]

"Is it art if no one made it?"

Oh absolutely, of course! Go look at a mountain, lake, forest, flower, rock…

lets say a game studio steals an artists samples to feed a game to make AI - plagiarism at best.

But how is this okay when humans do it, eg the new Pokémon-like game?

procedurally generated

Good example.

there's been a lot less said about work being taken from game devs about it, because it makes their life's easier

It's not that it makes their lives easier. Like most new tech, it makes things possible which weren't possible before—Firaxis aren't going to keep a dev on tap for me when I want to launch my next highly customized Civ game.

do I worry that jobs will be taken by AI? - yeah for sure

But so many more will be created, if the history of tech is any guide. AI, when combined with the other major new advances taking place—Machine Learning, big data, robotics, automation, genetics etc—has the potential to be as significant a change as the Industrial Revolution or the Information Age, which like similar more distant seminal changes caused an explosion in human endeavor and ability.

 

[Brian Boru]

a human should be creating the narrative and world-building

I want to see AI at least used for what human devs can't do in practice in the narrative field, which is to provide massive branching in response to player choices.

A similar advance would be to expand hugely on the number and impact of NPCs in games, no longer constrained by human resources.

For world building, AI will be able to deal with the permutations and combinations which expand exponentially once there are a few variables in play.

 

[ZedClampet]

The one thing about AI games that actually excites me would be games on demand. You enter a bunch of info and a description and AI generates a game for you.

 

[Colif]

Perhaps you need to wait for actual AI. Right now, its baby steps. Possibly essential ones, but its early. AI is just in a hype bubble right now... the tools will get better so writing them off now is premature. Just have to lower expectations.

 

[Pifanjr]

I want to see AI at least used for what human devs can't do in practice in the narrative field, which is to provide massive branching in response to player choices.

But then it isn't really a narrative any more, it's more like a sandbox experience, akin to something like Rimworld.

 

[Hveðrungr]

On the plagiarism question it's important to note that this is an entirely modern, industrial capitalism concern. Ancient artists and writers and so on borrowed liberally from each other's work. That only became such a concern in modernity. That's not to say copyright shouldn't be enforced—we live in the world we live in—but as a criterion for what is “art”, for thousands of years this would have made no sense, and if it were true we would have to discard vast amounts of the pre-modern canon.

 

[Frindis]

AI will never be able to make a game on its own, AGI on the other hand might be able to. Perhaps with more research around electronics and human stem cells (biocomputing), we might accidentally create it while at the same time getting closer to understanding our consciousness. If we do get AGI I would be fine with it making a game on its own, I would even motivate it to do so, applauding its creativity.

I feel like this should have probably been explored on an episode of STTNG - feels Picardy.

I believe the Holodeck/Holoprograms (like the horrific one in the Frame of Mind episode) on TNG would be the closest or maybe that episode called The Royale where they are all captured inside the creative mind of a writer and they need to get out of the building before the novel ends.

​

 

[Colif]

maybe we need an earth sized super computer to work out the answer... oh wait, thats been done before. Shame mice never did get their answer.

 

[DXCHASE]

If it were true AI then the game would be worth playing imo and thats if its a game id play at all now if it were made by real people. What we have isnt really AI just algorithms that learn and generate as it goes or its only good to a small extent (within its abilities/tasks it can do), it isnt true AI but that wouldnt stop me either from playing a game that was built by "AI" today if its one that looks fun and interesting to me.

 

[Kaamos_Llama]

I asked Co Pilot: What is art? And it quoted Wikipedia at me.

The expression or application of human creative skill and imagination, typically in a visual form such as painting or sculpture, producing works to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or emotional power.

I asked it if it wrote me a story about a boy and a dog would it be art, considering Co Pilot is not a human.

It got in a strop and ended the conversation . (there were a couple more steps where it tried to convince me to let it make some 'art' for me before that)

Anyway if it gets to a stage where AI are able to make simple games in a second we wont have to wait long before every digital store is overwhelmed with low effort AI trash games, so Steam is going to have to have some sort of regulation on it or drown. Social media is already full of crappy copy paste AI 'articles' and pages posting them, I sure its only a matter of time.

So for me I'd say, if its a game shat out by someone giving an LLM or something similar more advanced a 50 word prompt, Im not interested. But if people are using AI to refine their methods and make things quicker, always checking on what its doing until it gets to a point where it matches their actual vision (including any happy accidents that work along the way) then I'm kind of OK with it being a tool from a players perspective. Though of course it does suck that people will lose their jobs over it, theres not much you can do about the path of least resistance to maximum profits as it stands in most places.

 

[neogunhero]

If the kind of AI that takes up all the headlines these days were to generate a game, I would have very mixed feelings. On one hand I’m a lot like Zed, knowing that there was very little human involvement creating a game would bother me greatly no doubt. However on the other hand, if the end product was a good and actually fun game, it would be hard to disparage it. “If AI is so bad, why can it make better games than human developers?” is an argument I can see being said without an ounce of irony.

To me, the fine line that must be threaded is this: human creativity boosted with the help of AI. If AI makes the process easier, but ultimately the design, inspiration and ideas come from humans, that would be the best case scenario IMO. Instead of training AI to steal the work of humans, spit it out and call it its own, let’s use AI to help make game development faster. It shouldn’t be used in certain areas like making dialogue or creating the world and story, but use it to help program things, iron out bugs, basically use it to help with a lot of the busywork. I think that would be the best use for AI in game development.

 

[Frindis]

Oh absolutely, of course! Go look at a mountain, lake, forest, flower, rock…

Jupp, even Co-pilot agress. You made it into art with your imagination.

I asked Co Pilot: What is art? "The expression or application of human creative skill and imagination, typically in a visual form such as painting or sculpture, producing works to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or emotional power.

 

[Brian Boru]

hype bubble

then it isn't really a narrative any more, it's more like a sandbox

True, but… you knew there'd be a 'but', right?

If I read you right, you're talking about one narrative set by some arbitrary person. I'm talking about many multiple narratives drawn from the previous creations of history's best writers and story tellers.

Call it sandbox sure, but it's so much more creative and appealing than just one little corridor story

Co Pilot: What is art? And it quoted Wikipedia

In fairness, it quoted OED, one of the prime 'definition authorities' in English—just Wiki's report of it. Shame there's no universal definition—the concept as we know it only exists for 2-300 years, invented in Europe. But I think the Greek philosophers were onto something, regarding it as the creations of drunkenness or lunacy

Interesting that 'Artificial' is derived from 'Art', isn't it. Art used to mean sth like skill or aptitude—eg Horace's Ars Poetica, Ars Magna one of the Renaissance's great math books, or Ovid's Ars Amatoria. The concept of it as some nebulous superpower is a modern invention.

we wont have to wait long before every digital store is overwhelmed with low effort AI trash games, so Steam is going to have to have some sort of regulation on it or drown.

This already exists with books, and Amazon is still afloat and book sales are still going well as far as I know. Only difference is it's been humans writing the low-effort trash content—as you say, only a matter of time before AI learns from us.

If the kind of AI that takes up all the headlines these days were to generate a game

Oh yeah, of course AI isn't there today—see hype cycle above. Zed said 'great game'—that's likely to be 40s or 50s, but some interesting stuff likely in 30s. This decade is the Wild West, everyone on a mad land grab… or should that be grand lab

 

[Zloth]

My first thought was no, it wouldn't be as fun, because playing single player games is much like playing a game with the devs. It's a little like playing tabletop Dungeons & Dragons except there are many dungeon masters and each player gets their own, private play time. Not only do I have fun with the game itself, but I also have fun trying to figure out why the game is made like it is, or checking to see if the developers accounted for some idea I came up with.

I could do the same thing with an AI, though, so maybe it would work out OK. Especially if I got something sweet in return, like being able to change the game to my liking.

 

[Kaamos_Llama]

Jupp, even Co-pilot agress. You made it into art with your imagination.

Not everything a human creates is art but when it is, its a conversation between the creator and the interpreter to convey a feeling or message. If Im staring at a wall tripping balls it doesnt make me an artist.

 

[Kaamos_Llama]

In fairness, it quoted OED,

When I copy pasted the answer to search the first hit was to Wikipedia, I didnt dig any further.

Interesting that 'Artificial' is derived from 'Art', isn't it. Art used to mean sth like skill or aptitude—eg Horace's Ars Poetica, Ars Magna one of the Renaissance's great math books, or Ovid's Ars Amatoria. The concept of it as some nebulous superpower is a modern invention.

Its not a superpower or something for the elite, although some do try to make out it is. Anyone can try and say something and anyone can enjoy things on any level if it speaks to them. But debating the nature of art is kind of pointless, I agree.

This already exists with books, and Amazon is still afloat and book sales are still going well as far as I know. Only difference is it's been humans writing the low-effort trash content—as you say, only a matter of time before AI learns from us.

I think we have to seperate people genuinely trying from people in the digital equivalent of sweat shops farting out a bajillion casual games, articles, whatever for a quick buck. Im sure it does already happen but this will light a rocket underneath it everywhere.

Writing a novel is not low effort for a human being, no matter how bad the literati might deem it to be.

Edited for formatting.

 

[Pifanjr]

True, but… you knew there'd be a 'but', right?

If I read you right, you're talking about one narrative set by some arbitrary person. I'm talking about many multiple narratives drawn from the previous creations of history's best writers and story tellers.

Call it sandbox sure, but it's so much more creative and appealing than just one little corridor story

My point is that I don't think you can tell a narrative to a player while also supporting massive branching based on their decisions. At that point the player is just creating their own story.

I do think AI will one day be able to create a good sandbox game.

 

[Brian Boru]

superpower or something for the elite

Oh maybe a bad hurried word choice, elitism certainly not part of it. More like topics we don't discuss here, where people can attribute …let's say 'larger than life', does that work?… characteristics to anything they choose.

anyone can enjoy things on any level if it speaks to them

The fridges of the world are on your side

Writing a novel is not low effort for a human being

From the archives:
Fastest Written: Days Title—Author
03 The Boy in the Striped Pajamas—John Boyne
03 The Strange Case Of Dr Jekyll And Mr Hyde—Robert Louis Stevenson
09 I, the Jury—Mickey Spillane
20 A Clockwork Orange—Anthony Burgess
20 A Study in Scarlet—Arthur Conan Doyle
20 The Tortoise and the Hare—Elizabeth Jenkins
25 The Remains of the Day—Kazuo Ishiguro
26 The Gambler—Fyodor Dostoyevsky
28 On The Road—Jack Kerouac
28 The Prime of Miss Jean Brodie—Muriel Spark
40 A Christmas Carol—Charles Dickens
40 As I Lay Dying—William Faulkner
40 King Solomon’ Mines—Rider Haggard
40 Most Bond novels—Ian Fleming
40 The Confidential Agent—Graham Greene

A friend is an author who in her prime put out one a month, say 10 a year. Sold in their thousands, so clearly spoke to many.

seperate people genuinely trying

I agree, we must acknowledge the prodigious effort put in by those heroes who tailor AI to be able to produce such works of inestimable art—which at a minimum will speak to all other AIs!

I don't think you can tell a narrative to a player while also supporting massive branching

Sure you can—the human's very limited one narrative can be the default choice which the player experiences by not making any branching decisions.

The package tour to 'do Europe' has its place—these days, that's Instagram—but I look forward to AI enabling me to spend an extra day here and an extra week there and branch off to the historical north and and and…

 

[Zimbaly]

If AI made a great game..... everyone in the game industry would be laid off the next day and the CEO's could take home 500,000,000 dollar bonuses every year.