61
Almost a third of developers think generative AI is a negative for the games industry, says new survey
(www.rockpapershotgun.com)
this post was submitted on 22 Jan 2025
61 points (96.9% liked)
Gaming
2653 readers
119 users here now
The Lemmy.zip Gaming Community
For news, discussions and memes!
Community Rules
This community follows the Lemmy.zip Instance rules, with the inclusion of the following rule:
- No NSFW content
You can see Lemmy.zip's rules by going to our Code of Conduct.
What to Expect in Our Code of Conduct:
- Respectful Communication: We strive for positive, constructive dialogue and encourage all members to engage with one another in a courteous and understanding manner.
- Inclusivity: Embracing diversity is at the core of our community. We welcome members from all walks of life and expect interactions to be conducted without discrimination.
- Privacy: Your privacy is paramount. Please respect the privacy of others just as you expect yours to be treated. Personal information should never be shared without consent.
- Integrity: We believe in the integrity of speech and action. As such, honesty is expected, and deceptive practices are strictly prohibited.
- Collaboration: Whether you're here to learn, teach, or simply engage in discussion, collaboration is key. Support your fellow members and contribute positively to shared learning and growth.
If you enjoy reading legal stuff, you can check it all out at legal.lemmy.zip.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Negative for some yes but what i see is a net positive.
To the untrained Ai appears like a super cheap shortcut to make something that looks good at a glance. You know the same glance a shareholder may take at the tripple A game in development.
Its not hard to see where that is going. Tripple A is already full off enshitification, add ai slop and the result will be one stink of an overpriced mess after the other.
Actually non ironically wonderful, i hope they choke on their own fucking budget.
In the mean time actually passionate artists will also be using these tools, not as a cheap shortcut but as a way to get closer to their inherent perfectionism. To deliver what they could never afford to create before.
The video game industry is dead, long live the video game industry.
For me, ironically, the best use is useless NPCs. Use Generative-AI to make the crowd look huge and unique and not copy-pasted. But don’t use it for anything else.
I think there's also potential for more organic and dynamic NPC interactions. Perhaps even an AI GM type thing, which would allow players to use information they shouldn't yet know without just ruining the game because if the main mystery is solved in act 1, the GM could just make a new plot.
Not that I think we're anywhere close to an AI that could do that well, but it's just a matter of time (assuming things don't collapse entirely before that, which is unfortunately looking more likely than reaching the tech singularity... Or fortunately, since I'm not sure how humanity will continue after tech makes all of the work we can do redundant, as sweet as it could be for entertainment).
How about open world forests? Any landscape? Big cities? Textures? Sky? Space?
Ai is amazing for all of that and more. Saying it's a negative is soooo dumb. Everything can be done so much easier, quicker and because of it better.
I don't understand why anyone would be against using it in games. I kind of understand with copyright material and we all have ai slop, but for videogames it's brilliant!
But if you put someone with no experience in game design in charge of making this, it will just be another boring generic city or forest. I don’t want the city to look like something I’ve seen before - I want a cool experience. Minecraft and games like these only work because they are sandbox games in the first place and open world in the second. And they also don’t use AI but rather an algorithm and a seed to calculate the worlds.
Xenoblade, Zelda, the Witcher, GTA - they all have handcrafted worlds. Every tree is placed with meaning, every hill used to keep you wondering what you’ll find next, every quest fleshing out to the game‘s world and its characters.
But I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt if you show me a single game where AI made something better, heck, it only has to be somewhat acceptable, than a simple seed based algorithm could have done it.
Placing each tree by hand is stupid and a colosal waste of time. It doesn't make any sense. Of course you get people to design certain details after, but doing everything from scratch, no one is doing that anymore.
I don't need benefit of the doubt from you. I don't know where they used ai and where they didn't. Asking me to show you that makes no sense.
Games and movies have already used algorithms for background crowds and hair movement, AI would just be a continuation of that kind of thing. One reason to be against it for that purpose is because of the concern of how it will be implemented, since those old algorithms were seen as a tool for professionals to use instead of something to replace those same professionals.
The main concern with generative AI is the 'replace your workforce' mentality that is associated with it. The copyright one is secondary.
That is surely the case. Iin gaming, ai will save time and hopefully that will only unburden the developers and designers to create even better games. Better graphics, better physics, better computer characters,