That’s a product of every AAA game having to be an open world sandbox now. AI generated NPCs is not how real game designers think. Each NPC should serve a purpose to drive or guide the player. If you’re ready to give an LLM the wheel on that, you should ask yourself whether that NPC is even necessary in the first place or if you could save the money and scrap them entirely.
So long as we’re distinguishing between NPCs and mobs.
I dont give much of a fuck about the pedestrians i mow down in GTA, obviously to a certain extent. I don’t expect tophats and monocles in the poor part of town, and I dont expect guys with 3ft long necks and purple glowing eyes, but generally.
Mobs only need to be thematically accurate. “Proper NPCs” however youre right.
Except that deliberately written voice lines for the randos are still appreciated. When I see a big, well-designed world that clearly took effort it’s a nice feeling to know that it was made with care. Someone saying “this isn’t important” just tells me that it’s not worth looking at it and it sours the experience.
Ai has no place in art. It’s very existence is antithesis to art.
I’d disagree that it’s antithesis to art, it just has to be used artistically. Our current AI systems intrinsically don’t possess the pieces needed to make Art independently, so it’s ultimately all derived from human intention.
It’s similar to how random chance can be used for artistic ends: the specific outcomes are outside of human control, but the context, parameters, and nature of the random are deliberate choices.
The way AI is invariably used right now is cost saving, not intentional.
Any tool can be used for art, but it has to be used for art, not as a way to skimp on voice actors or whatever. Pollocks random painting was guided by intention: it was intentional, not coincidental. The sink he washed his brushes in, while also caked in chaotic paint, was coincidental.
Most people are producing, at best, low effort slop. Businesses are looking to cut costs. Somewhere out there someone is hooking an LLM to a text to speech engine, mangling its training set until it emits a constant stream of wookie noises, beat boxing, and hallucinations of IP law out of a speaker installed in a toilet.
I would immediately accept one of these as art.
Except that Ai, and support for Ai, has the end goal of stealing from and attacking artists. No artist worth paying any attention to should or would support Ai through its use. The only time I would ever consider it art is in using it to shit on itself, as a specifically anti-Ai piece, but that’s not really the same thing. Kinda like the guy on Instagram who shows it being completely unable to understand or follow basic instructions.
No excuses for Ai. I don’t like to take the absolute stance on too many things but in its current form, with its current goals, “Ai” is poison that shouldn’t be anywhere near anything, espcially not art. Fuck that garbage.
I’m not sure I would agree with your first statement. People want to rip off artists and treat them like shit. AI tools are just a current tool for doing so.
Anything that exists right now or in the foreseeable future isn’t sentient. It has no goal.
May as well say that the goal of audio streaming is to rip off musicians.
Audio streaming doesn’t have a goal. Spotify has a goal that shafts most musicians.
Openai and anthropic have goals. The AI is a pile of numbers hooked to a function that some people figured out that’s good at fixing errors.
Can a videogame be art? It’s almost entirely the product of a vastly complicated machine that’s responsible for synthesizing novel images, sounds and experience from a limited set of curated inputs. Sometimes they not even curated, as is the case with procedural animation, most clouds, and a lot of the lighting and texturing: parameters were defined to ensure the desired effect, but they were created by algorithmic randomness.
I think rigid rules, and a rejection of the possibility to explore expression is far more antithetical to art than any tool ever could be.
I don’t think most AI output is art because I don’t think many, if any, people are trying to create it.
If you’re one of those “separate art from artist people” this entire conversation is done, man. Ai is a malicious tool right now, and supporting it is a bad fucking idea. Well-planned algorithmic randomness and Ai are not the same things.
There is a fundamental ethics issue here(several, even) and I just cannot spend my time teaching you how to be a good person.
Well-planned algorithmic randomness and Ai are not the same things.
I would really love to know how they’re different.
I don’t particularly subscribe to separation of art and artist, except for things like “authorial intent doesn’t matter for discussion of a message or meaning you took from the work”, but that’s not what you meant.
I will, however, separate the artist from their tool. I do not condemn paintbrushes for being used to paint offensive words, nor do I think they’re unethical just because Hitler used them. The art is an extension of the artist, not their tool.
You do not give money to people who are using hammers to kill puppies. The only problem with owning a hammer is the people who think that by doing so you must support the puppy killers.
A tool cannot be malicious. It is a thing and has no volition.
A tool that’s doing harm can and should be regulated, and the harm and potential for harm mitigated, but it cannot be malicious anymore than a lawn dart or a kinder egg.
“There’s a very good reason why you’re wrong, several even, but I simply don’t have the space to explain them” is so eye rolling that I’m actually physically trying to find where they landed.
Given you won’t explain your thoughts, other than to say that AI is different from algorithmic randomness (which it isn’t: it’s literally a machine for shaping randomness according to learned weights and biases), I’m just going to assume you don’t really know what you’re talking about.
Charitably, you’re angry at how models were trained without consultation by the people involved, and how it’s now being used to threaten the livelihoods of the same people.
That’s totally correct in my book. Openai, anthropic and the whole lot of them can burn as far as I’m concerned.
The tool in no way requires its inputs to be hostile.
You don’t “support” a tool. I’m not in the pro-nailgun camp, or team anti-hydraulic jack.
I am pro-“how can you fathom the cognitive dissonance to argue that you support art and artists while simultaneously having the gall to declare yourself an authority on what can or cannot be real art. Shut up and make something. You still won’t be able to justify the opinion but then at least you’ll have contributed something worthwhile instead of flailing about how other people are damaging something you’ve been passively enjoying as is”.
Sorry. Didn’t mean to match your tone. That was rude of me.
You are so desperate to side-step the entire fact that Ai, as it stands, is being implemented irresponsibly and its use and support is directly tied to the further degradation of our freedoms. I don’t give a shit if it’s good or bad when used with pure intentions, I care that its very existence right now is unnecssary, inefficient, and a direct attack on the working class. I care that for all the productivity claims, no one is getting a shorter work week except the people who are being fired and going down to 0 hours. I care that data centres are a disaster wherever they’re built, be it to the environment or the quality of life of those who live nearby.
You cannot support the working class and use Ai. It is the same as how you cannot support trans people and still get down with Harry Potter. Companies like OpenAi LOVE when you say “I don’t support ____ but when I use it, it’s different” because they know that at that point they still have your money and that you’ll let them do whatever they want as long as you can still pretend that you’re better.
So, for a generic character that is supposed to fade into the background, a necessity in sandbox games that are set in any semi-populated area, you’d rather hear the same 5 voice lines repeatedly for 200 hours?
Don’t get me wrong I love the creativity poured into those repeated lines when they are done well, but no matter how much they are lovingly crafted, after an hour or two they break the immersion. I don’t think any game company that is able to survive capitalism could be trusted to keep AI to only situations like these though.
Just like every other AI “problem” it has its place, it can benefit us all, the problem is really a structure of perverse incentives that doesn’t serve humanity at all, not that AI is useless or bad.
Yea, that’s fine with me. It hasn’t bothered me before and it doesn’t bother me now. Besides, AI voice lines would bother me so much more. Bad art is still art, but nothing AI makes is even good enough to wipe your ass with.
Make it four lines. Make it THREE. Make it the same fucking line every time I walk by the character; if it’s real I won’t give a shit. That happens all the time in The Ascent and I do not care. And if you told me that actually they used AI to build the world I would a) look up those claims and, if true, b) uninstall it and never touch it again because I’m not fucking bitch-ass coward who would sell out other people just so he could have a videogame.
You got a lot of aggression there. I hope you’ve got it properly aimed at the system of oppression that has kept us down for way longer than AI has been here.
Cool, so you’re still not getting that quality isn’t actually the problem or what we’re talking about. Did you read anything I wrote? Is reading something you’re even actually capable of doing at any reasonably adult level?
I’ll go uninstall the game right now. “I hope you’ve got it properly—“ I hope you’ve got your foot aimed squarely up your ass. Your confidence is based on your ignorance and is worthless.
Good job changing everything to fit your new argument that you didn’t outline so it couldn’t be challenged. I bet you saved face with all the anonymous people reading our exchange. Good job. You are very strong and smart and we all love you and think you’re great. Good job.
That’s a product of every AAA game having to be an open world sandbox now. AI generated NPCs is not how real game designers think. Each NPC should serve a purpose to drive or guide the player. If you’re ready to give an LLM the wheel on that, you should ask yourself whether that NPC is even necessary in the first place or if you could save the money and scrap them entirely.
So long as we’re distinguishing between NPCs and mobs.
I dont give much of a fuck about the pedestrians i mow down in GTA, obviously to a certain extent. I don’t expect tophats and monocles in the poor part of town, and I dont expect guys with 3ft long necks and purple glowing eyes, but generally.
Mobs only need to be thematically accurate. “Proper NPCs” however youre right.
Except that deliberately written voice lines for the randos are still appreciated. When I see a big, well-designed world that clearly took effort it’s a nice feeling to know that it was made with care. Someone saying “this isn’t important” just tells me that it’s not worth looking at it and it sours the experience.
Ai has no place in art. It’s very existence is antithesis to art.
I’d disagree that it’s antithesis to art, it just has to be used artistically. Our current AI systems intrinsically don’t possess the pieces needed to make Art independently, so it’s ultimately all derived from human intention.
It’s similar to how random chance can be used for artistic ends: the specific outcomes are outside of human control, but the context, parameters, and nature of the random are deliberate choices.
The way AI is invariably used right now is cost saving, not intentional.
Any tool can be used for art, but it has to be used for art, not as a way to skimp on voice actors or whatever. Pollocks random painting was guided by intention: it was intentional, not coincidental. The sink he washed his brushes in, while also caked in chaotic paint, was coincidental.
Most people are producing, at best, low effort slop. Businesses are looking to cut costs. Somewhere out there someone is hooking an LLM to a text to speech engine, mangling its training set until it emits a constant stream of wookie noises, beat boxing, and hallucinations of IP law out of a speaker installed in a toilet.
I would immediately accept one of these as art.
Except that Ai, and support for Ai, has the end goal of stealing from and attacking artists. No artist worth paying any attention to should or would support Ai through its use. The only time I would ever consider it art is in using it to shit on itself, as a specifically anti-Ai piece, but that’s not really the same thing. Kinda like the guy on Instagram who shows it being completely unable to understand or follow basic instructions.
No excuses for Ai. I don’t like to take the absolute stance on too many things but in its current form, with its current goals, “Ai” is poison that shouldn’t be anywhere near anything, espcially not art. Fuck that garbage.
I’m not sure I would agree with your first statement.
People want to rip off artists and treat them like shit. AI tools are just a current tool for doing so.
Anything that exists right now or in the foreseeable future isn’t sentient. It has no goal.
May as well say that the goal of audio streaming is to rip off musicians.
Audio streaming doesn’t have a goal. Spotify has a goal that shafts most musicians.
Openai and anthropic have goals. The AI is a pile of numbers hooked to a function that some people figured out that’s good at fixing errors.
Can a videogame be art? It’s almost entirely the product of a vastly complicated machine that’s responsible for synthesizing novel images, sounds and experience from a limited set of curated inputs. Sometimes they not even curated, as is the case with procedural animation, most clouds, and a lot of the lighting and texturing: parameters were defined to ensure the desired effect, but they were created by algorithmic randomness.
I think rigid rules, and a rejection of the possibility to explore expression is far more antithetical to art than any tool ever could be.
I don’t think most AI output is art because I don’t think many, if any, people are trying to create it.
If you’re one of those “separate art from artist people” this entire conversation is done, man. Ai is a malicious tool right now, and supporting it is a bad fucking idea. Well-planned algorithmic randomness and Ai are not the same things.
There is a fundamental ethics issue here(several, even) and I just cannot spend my time teaching you how to be a good person.
I would really love to know how they’re different.
I don’t particularly subscribe to separation of art and artist, except for things like “authorial intent doesn’t matter for discussion of a message or meaning you took from the work”, but that’s not what you meant.
I will, however, separate the artist from their tool. I do not condemn paintbrushes for being used to paint offensive words, nor do I think they’re unethical just because Hitler used them. The art is an extension of the artist, not their tool.
You do not give money to people who are using hammers to kill puppies. The only problem with owning a hammer is the people who think that by doing so you must support the puppy killers.
A tool cannot be malicious. It is a thing and has no volition.
A tool that’s doing harm can and should be regulated, and the harm and potential for harm mitigated, but it cannot be malicious anymore than a lawn dart or a kinder egg.
“There’s a very good reason why you’re wrong, several even, but I simply don’t have the space to explain them” is so eye rolling that I’m actually physically trying to find where they landed.
Given you won’t explain your thoughts, other than to say that AI is different from algorithmic randomness (which it isn’t: it’s literally a machine for shaping randomness according to learned weights and biases), I’m just going to assume you don’t really know what you’re talking about.
Charitably, you’re angry at how models were trained without consultation by the people involved, and how it’s now being used to threaten the livelihoods of the same people.
That’s totally correct in my book. Openai, anthropic and the whole lot of them can burn as far as I’m concerned.
The tool in no way requires its inputs to be hostile.
You don’t “support” a tool. I’m not in the pro-nailgun camp, or team anti-hydraulic jack.
I am pro-“how can you fathom the cognitive dissonance to argue that you support art and artists while simultaneously having the gall to declare yourself an authority on what can or cannot be real art. Shut up and make something. You still won’t be able to justify the opinion but then at least you’ll have contributed something worthwhile instead of flailing about how other people are damaging something you’ve been passively enjoying as is”.
Sorry. Didn’t mean to match your tone. That was rude of me.
You are so desperate to side-step the entire fact that Ai, as it stands, is being implemented irresponsibly and its use and support is directly tied to the further degradation of our freedoms. I don’t give a shit if it’s good or bad when used with pure intentions, I care that its very existence right now is unnecssary, inefficient, and a direct attack on the working class. I care that for all the productivity claims, no one is getting a shorter work week except the people who are being fired and going down to 0 hours. I care that data centres are a disaster wherever they’re built, be it to the environment or the quality of life of those who live nearby.
You cannot support the working class and use Ai. It is the same as how you cannot support trans people and still get down with Harry Potter. Companies like OpenAi LOVE when you say “I don’t support ____ but when I use it, it’s different” because they know that at that point they still have your money and that you’ll let them do whatever they want as long as you can still pretend that you’re better.
Fuck Ai.
So, for a generic character that is supposed to fade into the background, a necessity in sandbox games that are set in any semi-populated area, you’d rather hear the same 5 voice lines repeatedly for 200 hours?
Don’t get me wrong I love the creativity poured into those repeated lines when they are done well, but no matter how much they are lovingly crafted, after an hour or two they break the immersion. I don’t think any game company that is able to survive capitalism could be trusted to keep AI to only situations like these though.
Just like every other AI “problem” it has its place, it can benefit us all, the problem is really a structure of perverse incentives that doesn’t serve humanity at all, not that AI is useless or bad.
Yea, that’s fine with me. It hasn’t bothered me before and it doesn’t bother me now. Besides, AI voice lines would bother me so much more. Bad art is still art, but nothing AI makes is even good enough to wipe your ass with.
Make it four lines. Make it THREE. Make it the same fucking line every time I walk by the character; if it’s real I won’t give a shit. That happens all the time in The Ascent and I do not care. And if you told me that actually they used AI to build the world I would a) look up those claims and, if true, b) uninstall it and never touch it again because I’m not fucking bitch-ass coward who would sell out other people just so he could have a videogame.
Can’t even tell when things are AI🤔
https://www.altered.ai/blog/neon-giant-teams-up-with-altered-for-voice-in-action-rpg-game-the-ascent/
You got a lot of aggression there. I hope you’ve got it properly aimed at the system of oppression that has kept us down for way longer than AI has been here.
Cool, so you’re still not getting that quality isn’t actually the problem or what we’re talking about. Did you read anything I wrote? Is reading something you’re even actually capable of doing at any reasonably adult level?
I’ll go uninstall the game right now. “I hope you’ve got it properly—“ I hope you’ve got your foot aimed squarely up your ass. Your confidence is based on your ignorance and is worthless.
Good job changing everything to fit your new argument that you didn’t outline so it couldn’t be challenged. I bet you saved face with all the anonymous people reading our exchange. Good job. You are very strong and smart and we all love you and think you’re great. Good job.
I didn’t, you just can’t read. Your lack of understanding is not my responsibility.