Fuck AI

Yeah its permeated way more than AAA.

But trying to convince game devs to not use AI is about as likely to succeed as convincing them to stop using their IDEs.

What will actually happen is everyone is going to just stop announcing they are using it, and every month that goes by it'll get harder and harder to tell.

I agree, people tend to use it very poorly.

That largely stems from it still being a fairly new tool and, to be honest, quite unintuitive how to use it well.

Theres a lot of fundamentally bad ways to use AI that feel natural due to the way an LLM creates the illusion of thinking.

For example, one of the first things you learn in prompt engineering is dont correct the mistakes of an llm, this is unintuitive but it inherently reinforces the llm to make more mistakes.

Instead you have to go backwards in the history and edit your prior statement to "pre" correct it before it made the mistake, and regenerate.

Its a subtle thing but makes a huge difference in it producing stupid useless garbage vs actually not half bad output.

Pretty much every "trick" to it is unintuitive like this, so thats why so much of what you see AI producing from people in the industry is garbage, Id estimate like 95%+ of people just straight up are using it very wrong, becoming frustrated, and producing sloppy tier output.

Which is a big waste of resources atm. More work has to go into education on how to use this stuff efficiently so its not wasting resources and slop levels go down.

While people may be opposed even in theory to more tame things like a little code completion, there's plenty of room to very obviously notice GenAI slop.

I mean there's the regular "can you really sell code you don't own" kind of thing going for it. The companies have stolen all sorts of data; voices, music, raster, vector, video, books, film. It'd be shocking if they also haven't scraped all the code that's out there on the web.

Some of that is perfectly fine to alter, and sell. A lot of it isn't. There are plenty of FOSS licenses that are restrictive in the sense that you're free to use it and change it, but you can't alter the license of it, and in many cases not sell it.

So when an LLM produces code based on that, what applies?

--

Then there's obviously broader problems with ex-developers turned vibe coders coming out of the woodworks talking about how they can't code anymore. I've people at my company joking about this, and the notion scares me. The idea that they've outsourced their thinking and problem solving skills to the point that they're incapable of doing now it is terrifying.

I don't know why anyone would willingly do that.

Imagine if townsfolk could have realistic conversations and interactions like bartering over goods, etc. Nothing major or plot-dependent, obviously. Just something more natural than a handful of repeated, scripted and prerecorded phrases.

There's already a in-development Skyrim mod for that. Many sandbox games have mods for exactly this.

I haven't tried the Skyrim one though; haven't been in the Skyrim scene for awhile. And TBH, some of the mods use pretty sad or sloppy LLMs by default.

Think the critical thing would be to identify "background content" so that you don't spend forever trying to tease out actionable info from a background character.

That's the biggest thing is that while LLM can do 'flavor text', it's not very good at making sure that characters convey specific relevant detail reliably to a player.

I don't know about 'more realistic' though, LLM game demos can often go pretty out of character. Like a medieval setting NPC discussing coding. Or in one the character talked about how they had just came in from an outside walk, but they were chained in a dungeon cell. Another character talking about how the developer wrote them this way. Keeping an LLM "on the rails" of a scenario can break down.