What I foresee is the return of Fallout's and Morrwind's "ask anything box". You'll have a number of designer-made conversations, but you'll also be able to ask this NPC whatever you want and perhaps get additional information, or just RP a bit. There's already a precedent for this, so I expect it to happen soon.
I'd bet studios are 100% working whether it's viable. The main challenge is building an LLM specifically for each game, and then writing logic to ensure that each NPC you interact with knows only what they should know, is able to remember previous interaction, have a distinct style to themselves, as well as be updated on any new information they should know, since an LLM would obviously encompass all knowledge.
I can see why procedurally generated dungeons would be a boon to many smaller teams but after playing Daggerfall I much prefer the man made mapping of Might And Magic 6.
All for AI as long as it's trained from content they actually own or have compensated the artists for. I hadn't thought about the music suggestion AI, that's a great idea.
> trained from content they actually own or have compensated the artists for That boat is long gone. At least 1 major AI product on the market that has scraped from Reddit, Twitter, etc. You're basically defending IP, which I think is a dumb idea. IP is a terrible idea.
It's a good sentiment to mitigate the spread of theft, agreed, but, as already been said. Boat gone. If it hadn't already spread like some sorta psychic art sucking vampire across the net, it would become a monopoly, which would likely make more top companies move over to it in turn, because profit incentive is all these inhuman ghouls care about.
@@rabbitcreative Small and independent artists SHOULD have their content protected to some degree when their livelihood or ability to create depends on it. If you refuse to protect the artists having their work fed into these models without their compensation or at MINIMUM their consent, then they will cease to create art, and you will have no creative works to train the very models that were responsible for it.
Fully agree. It should be used as a tool, not a replacement. Unfortunately a lot of CEOs and others like looking for shortcuts to “cut costs” like we are seeing with Hollywood. :/ Hopefully it won’t make artists and writers a harder job field to find work in.
That said, writing and general quality has been torpedoing year over year, so a lot of the people that end up getting replaced, it only makes sense. For Hollywood in general, a this point ChatGPT probably could write better stories than them, as AIs aren't indoctrinated by a holier than though attitude. Hollywood can burn 100%.
@@SeasoningTheObese I don’t care how good or bad someone’s work is, the reason they’d be replaced by AI would be to save money. And the quality of AI without a human to refine the works would always be inferior to that of a real writer/editor
Hey Tim, I'm not sure if you've already done a video on it specifically but could you talk about good world building in games and how you make a world feel authentic and immersive and not 'gamified'. Thanks in advance
I hear a lot about how ads are targeted and amazon knows what you're about to do before you know it yourself. But you're absolutely right, youtube and streaming services are totally worthless at guessing what I'd like to see or hear next. At best they serve up channels/artists I already go to a lot, but they rarely find anything new that I like.
I agree with your perspective on this, but I can’t imagine studio heads look at AI and not use it to cut people. We think “we can do more with the same people” and they will go “we can do the same with fewer people” AI is dangerous in the hands of humans because it’ll be use to the detriment of others.
The future we were promised was that AI/robots would take over boring jobs and human beings would have more time to engage in creative endevours like art or writing. Look where we are now.
They will and are currently using AI as a threat towards the workforce. "We don't need artists, writers, and so on, so you better be happy for the scrapes we're offering you." Automation isn't egalitarian, it leads to less jobs and prices remaining the same.
@@pinko7429 >succeed >escape the poor masses that choose wrong daily >get blamed for not suffering their fate Communists are very weird. Never going for the big wigs, always dragging down the little guy that doesn't want to eat the bugs with you.
really appreciate your more calm and optimistic perspective on this, against all the very negative perspectives that dominate this subject, and it was really interesting and thought provoking too. thanks
also thanks in general for sharing your experiences and insights on this channel, I watch it on and off and learn a lot, even as someone not particularly big on fallout
I've had the same thought about music streaming services a thousand times. Their suggestions are often supposedly based on the same "genre," but that can yield really wide-ranging results. Or it recommends things based on what other listeners of the things that you like like. I wish the recommendations were based on some kind of analysis of how the music actually sounds. Years ago I found someone had made a tool that plots songs on a 2D chart according to various variables, like tempo, etc., but I don't know if that ever found its way into any recommendation engines.
I think this application of AI is a very smart, practice and human centered way of approaching it. I also think all the greedy and clueless executives in charge of the big game publishers only see it as a way to reduce headcount. The average Ubisoft game practically feels AI designed already.
I agree with everything you say. But the cynic in me fears AI will be used as an excuse to further make things worse, and for large companies to pay developers less, for example.
Yes, but here is a further path. Those underpaid devs, can unite to leave the company and simply make a similar game, since the AI offers you tools to make a AAA game with a few devs. The proof for this is the success latest pokemon clone. Stay positive.
Honestly, my current problem with AI is twofold: 1) obviously companies really will want to use it to cut corners, we've already seen examples of companies significantly reducing their headcount in terms of artists because AI artists suffice... this is bad! AI just regurgitates, it can never come up with an original interpretation of a theme. On top of that, this is obviously bad for labor. 2) There's a massive problem in terms of copyright infringement with the datasets at the moment! I have no problem with datasets created *by* the companies with the consent of the people whose work is added to it, but most chatbots and AI image generators simply scrape the internet for as much data as they can get. This is obviously... problematic. Not to mention the early jurisprudence in the States that argues that AI images aren't even protectable by copyright, which would put developers at a disadvantage if using that technology. I don't know, I hope the technology grows out of these early pains and gets used responsibly to help developers, but I'm not very optimistic at the moment. Thanks for the video anyway!
Your first point is really 2 different problems - The lack of original ideas due to AI just replicating what it knows (which execs like, 'cause it's safe), and the reduction in employees in an already insanely hard-to-enter field. Yeah, these suck. I don't entirely agree with your second point, because playing devil's advocate, I could make the point that humans get all of their skills from other humans, with or without consent, so why can't AI do the same?
@@jextra1313 There's a huge difference between humans subconsciously being inspired by each other in their endeavors, and people deliberately choosing to use someone's creative work to train a model they will then monetize. If you refuse to protect the works of creative people, they will cease to exist, and you will no longer have any new, creative works to feed these same models. It is not possible for them to create on their own; they will only iterate off of their datasets. Computers do ONLY what they are trained to do, and that's where people come in. Because of this, it benefits both artists AND AI enthusiasts to advocate for the protection of their work. Admittedly, this problem would also be MUCH less significant if not for capitalism itself, and how using peoples' art for these models to then profit off of hurts their own livelihood. The optimal solution is to use this technology to automate other processes globally throughout the workforce so people can spend less time working on menial tasks and more time contributing creatively and innovating for their communities and society (and at rest and play, which benefits the former), but our money-centric world isn't ready to make these changes. Tim puts it well - many, if not all, of the issues of AI are not problems with the technology itself, but humanity wielding it in a flawed manner.
Spotify's auto generated playlists for you have helped me find a couple indie bands that I otherwise would have never found. I think the playlists are generated based on a music "type" you like, and fills it with like 75% songs that are tried and true (you listen to them occasionally, you added them to your liked songs or whatever). The other 25% is either other stuff from those same bands you may not have listened to, or other related artists. It is relatively good at this, but not perfect. You cant really tell it you dont want to hear something, but it makes a couple of these playlists for different genres you like.
That AI use case you were describing - we worked with a bunch of people a few jobs back on a concept of attentive interface, something that would adjust your experience based on the context in which you are at the moment. You're working so DND is set automatically and calls are redirected to voice unless it's your SO or some other ICE contact (unless we know you historically canned that call in a similar context). It never got anywhere but I still like the idea of tech helping me focus on what's important instead of milking me for clicks.
With AI newcomer developers are expected to do all at once - 3D modelling, knowledge of rendering pipeline, scripting, texturing, physics, development patterns - you name it.
What the people need to keep a CLOSE EYE on is: Make sure the business people are using AI to enable higher quality, more polished games. Make sure they're NOT releasing low-quality games made by underbudget AI and still charge full price.
Hey Tim, I think developers will always be the creative force behind games. AI is super useful for speeding up workflows. Like, it can handle repetitive tasks and help with early stages of game design, like grey box prototyping. That way, devs can get inspired about what might work best for their games. Sure, there'll be a bunch of copycat games out there, but developers who really know how to use AI as a tool to boost their own creativity are the ones who'll succeed in the industry. I'd love for AI to help shorten the time it takes to develop a game. Older games used to get made way faster, and it'd be cool to see that happen again. Of course, there are pros and cons to quicker development cycles, but still, it's something to think about.
I love your perspective, Tim. You have me thinking about smaller aspects I had never considered before. Thank you for essentially helping to educate me.
My biggest problem with ai generated content is people use it as a cure-all black box that you stick a prompt into and it gives you some derivative trash that ultimately becomes the spam email of its respective genre, that for example, art contests having to wade through and verify to determine the legitimacy of, to award a prize. AI should be used to enhance the workflow of creatives not replace the creativity all together, like giving artists tools, without actually drawing for them, I can imagine a virtual pen and paper, without having to shell out money for a wacom tablet, but simply writing a single line or paragraph and letting the magic box shit out a drawing for you and claiming it as your work is horrid.
The fear is in how you train these datasets. Is it trained off of your own work or trained off of millions of artists or voice actors without their permission. I think there is potential as a useful tool for artists or developers but there is something icky about using an ai tool generating results based on the work of people who are not attached to the project.
the main problem with ProcGen dungeons is the lack of environmental storytelling, if you did put that in, what happens when that dungeon generates in a location that feels inconsistent? It can work but it will always be in a surface level of complexity compared to dungeons purposely made with the general location in mind.
The sad thing about music streaming services is that they are ruled by copyright holders and not necessarily good ideas. What you want to hear isn't relevant; they play what THEY want you to hear... they could easily make it better, but they don't want to. That's the sad part. I don't know why that makes them insist on having horrible UI's though...
It's pretty cool to hear a more positive take on the use of AI in gaming/art. So many people see it as a negative, but it really just opens up the potential for more creativity if used properly. I've always wanted to see NPCs run by AI, so they can be conversed with freely outside of the preset dialogue options.
"if used properly" and that is exactly the issue and why so many people see it as negative. How much improper usage it has right now, most likely way more than proper
Ive been playing Arcanum for weeks (months?) now and i keep being blown away by how large it is compared to Fallout 1. That you did this with 14 people.... it is very impressive. You people must have been on fire
Pandora was pretty good at finding new music I loved but that was already way back in mid 2000's I think. It was actually catalogued by humans I believed.
I'd really like to believe the Gma got Run Over by a Reindeer thing was a prank, because that's *hilarious* and i need to do it to my parents next time I have the opportunity.
Hey Tim, in this video about AI you haven't touched the subject of copyright and the problems associated with using ai-generated content for AIs that were trained on content without the consent of the creators, or with coerced consent like for actors who have their appearance scanned to be used in films as a condition for work. I know it's a touchy subject but I'd be interested in your opinion on this matter.
the problem i see in radiant quests genertared by AI(especially with dialogue) is people take these as canon so if they the AI does or says something that breaks it you may have to educate players to maybe take the content of those quest with a grain of salt as a radiant quest could produce a task or dialogue which could fundamentally change the players understanding of the universe or main story
What can one do to compete in this industry as a dev without the proper education? Some background, I grew up lower middle class, had no money for college, wasn't smart enough to be given a scholarship (which turned out to be an ADHD diagnosis in my 40s), and had to work for low wages up until my late 20s. Despite all that, through dedication and tenacity, I worked my way from retail to being a frontend developer with a 20-year background in UX/UI and design. Unfortunately, I was just laid off and am worried about the prospects of finding a new position. Every time I hear dev stories I usually feel alienated when the topic of college comes up.
I have worked with many game devs who have no formal education past high school. If you have experience or can show relevant work to an interviewer (including demos), that should suffice. And every company I have worked with for the past 20 years has complained about the dearth of UX applicants.
Got this new ai to generate dialog for NPCs, they keep talking about how much they love coca cola and lays chips. And apparently there's a new coca cola flavor that I haven't tried yet, or so it tells me... (Just kidding) But imagine
AI synthesis for voices is the best application by far, either as text to speech or speech to speech. Completely original voices and an incredible level of emotion at times. There's a Skyrim follower mod named Lyssia, and there's a video showcasing it on RUclips. Entirely AI generated original voice, and it's better in terms of both audio quality and delivery than most existing voiced mods.
I've been thinking of a AI that adds onto the custom character creation we see in a lot of games. Having avid character creators creating 2 characters perhaps male and female and having the AI analyze and create a composition of variations. In this way I can create a male and female character and the AI will create a formula or something of variations between those two characters. In a game where npc appearance depends on the original input of character creation I could see completely different characters just because the AI changed a few things. It would be kinda like creating a 'race' of sorts unique to your own world.
What I don't hear talked about enough, actually I haven't found any video that addresses this directly, is actually how not to be replaced as an employee or freelancer considering the companies/clients perspective, not the artists. Yes AI doesn't have taste, someone has to make a selection which outputs actually look good and AI can't be fully original etc. But a lot of companies just don't care about these things. Games, music or any entertainment media already has so much unoriginal and generic content, so why wouldn't many of these companies use AI to make more crap much faster and without having to pay a human? If our last resort is "authentic human art" and only "artisan studios" will employ humans, what happens to the people whose workplace stopped caring and replaced their employees? Same with freelancers, who are you selling your art to if most of your clients chose to use AI instead? Actually thinking about these questions from the companies/clients perspective, I don't have a good answer why not to pick AI.
Even if AI won't replace the workforce, if it makes their job a lot easier, then those jobs are going to become much less competitive, presumably resulting in a lower pay across the industry, which will eventually lower a quality of the output. Traditional art > Digital art > Photobashing > Ai imagery. Easier equals less money.
Not necessarily, engines like Unreal & Unity have made making games much easier across a range of disciplines, yet there's still well paid jobs available. However, you can argue that If pay goes down overall (as a median) it'll be because the games market becomes so saturated with games due to these new tools that it becomes difficult to get noticed and turn substantial profit (which we already see in the indie scene). But I do think there'll be jobs that become more lucrative if anything
Making it easier will make it more competitive, not less. The barrier to entry will be lower, meaning more people can apply, and less people will be needed to do the same work.
@@mortiz20101 I hear what you're saying. From my perspective as an artist, the further from the highest skill requirement you are, the less lucrative it gets. Some people think AI will just make it easier for super highly talented people, but I think it just makes them more sloppy and beginners just get lazier. There's something to be said about the positive effects of limitation and hardship. About the saturation - totally. Although, I would argue that competition is largely meaningless as long as you can do something no one else can. Heart and authenticity are key.
@@mcashed because 'making videogames' is more interesting and has more social prestige than working in fast food. That'll still be something people want to do when there's ai involved and pay goes down to minimum wage, because it already is. Testers get paid minimum wage where I am and still it's flooded with applicants.
The kind of job Tim has will be the longest to survive. High-level design and management is something that we will always need, but at the same time the least likely to be somehow completely automated.
The original creators of Fallout 76 did a great job exploring the idea that the only "class" that will be employed eventually will be the "executive" class due to automation. Too bad that's buried under all the other rot.
I agree with the idea of using AI tools to aim at overall bigger games in scope, quality and creativity and reducing development time in the industry. Btw what about documentation (art,design,programming, copyright, IP, HR, marketing, project management, simple emails etc. docs)?
My former professor actually graduated with a PhD (If I remember correctly) from UCI around the same time you got your Master's, specializing in Asian language translation. I wonder if you guys knew each other? Also she said her supervisor at the time who was like a big head of the AI research department there bailed or got arrested or something...
Don't worry, that thing's probably learned your tastes pretty well😁 But it also should promote something that needs promoting, something folks are supposed to listen to.
AI or llm won't bring anything good in games in terms of making it better then people,if you can implement it so it does some extra work that is tedious in game development cool more power to you,but i really don't need 1000 side quests or infinite created on the fly by llm,i still get PTSD just when i remember Preston from fallout 4,and somehow i think bethesda didn't learn jack shit(radiant quests) not that is connected to AI/llm but worth to mention,i think il play less and less how time goes on,il rather pick something hand crafted and unique,and that it actually makes sense then play copy paste fetch quest,just because,if that's gaming in 2023 and onward s and im sure it is,it will be,then im ok with not consuming future games.
I wish I could remember how they phrased it, but I remember someone once paraphrasing the issue wonderfully as "If an NPC never stops talking how will I know to stop interacting with them." Preston is one of the most hated characters in Fallout 4, and honestly his personal quests and overall character are great, but people don't remember that, they remember him sending you on a literally never ending string of boring busywork. Eventually maybe the technology could be refined to the point of being more engaging than "Go to [LOCATION], kill [ENEMY TYPE]/retrieve [ITEM], return" but even if they can make a LLM so good it can compete with the actual writing in the game, making a fountain of infinite content would get exhausting no matter the quality.
Agree with streaming services and suggestions in general. It is surprisingly bad everywhere. I always thought that maybe they are pushing some agenda or advertising, but it is still very bad.
There seems to be two distinct groups of ways this could pan out, probably simultaneously. Smaller teams can use AI to make bigger games and bigger teams being cut so that they need less people to make games. I can't see a way that this doesn't result in lots of people losing their jobs unfortunately.
I had to stop using Google music because it turned into RUclips music which sucks really bad. now I just load up as much of my library as I can fit onto the phone's SD card and play through it with the VLC app
Imagine how much horse armor they can create out of nothing and charge players for using AI? 😂 Jokes aside, glad to see you talk on AI. It's already being utilized in games I believe to some extent, so it's here. We'll see where it goes from here and where the pushback will be (if jobs are lost and little to no jobs created).
Lol. Yeah, they'll totally not cut their staff. ROFL. Question: There's a lot of talk lately about the location of the next Fallout game (which probably won't come out for 8-10 years). Some people want it in another country. Fallout is inherently designed around US products and 50's aesthetics. Do you have thoughts on a Fallout game outside of the US? (Yes, I know it's Bethesda's baby now and you're not affiliated atm.) I feel like it doesn't work. If they jam another country full of Vault-Tec, Nuka Cola, etc. it's just more of the same. If they remove all that, is it really still Fallout, or just like... Metro or something? As someone who is totally ignorant of the current level of AI, I think it needs to be directed towards bug fixing.
relegating "side content" to ai seems bad and depressing, its like its only seen as busywork when its a look into how devs write with smaller stakes or their humor or random things they find interesting. its as valuable as "main content" to me and many others. not sure if you know about the yakuza games but side content is a big reason theyre even popular
Thank you for a sober take on AI! The comment section is a trained unfound doomerism as expected, so I hope your perspective will help at least some people appreciate AI as a tool for the next decades.
Hey Tim. Whilst you have hopes that the AI that will come will help out in game dev or in these other areas like music streaming services, I have a much more pessimistic outlook on this. You've worked with people in management, worked with publishers and whoever, what is going to stop these people from, for example, just not hiring a concept artist? Some middle manager could get the bright idea to just generate concept art through one of these AI services and use them for the game. Whilst there will be an outcry, eventually this could become the norm. And as these things progress, eventually even other areas could follow suite (programmers, voice acting, you name it). I already know of an indie dev who has recently started posting concept on his discord, that he says was AI generated. He has no concept artist, he just fed an AI (don't know which one) a prompt and out came a piece of concept art. Is this a good thing? I do not think so. For him, it's good, he saves on time and money, but the concept artist? Not so much. So does his game deserve to be measured in the same way other games were made? I think not. Would love to hear from you more on this.
What should keep them from letting AI take over roles like concept artists is what Tim said at the start. You're going to want someone who understands all the nuances of what you're trying to do with your game. AI is great but it can't (at least not yet) match the kind of spontaneous creativity humans have. AI isn't going to come up with some random idea nobody ever would have thought of because all it has to work from are the models it's been presented with. AI just isn't very original in that regard. Will publishers still go with AI as the cheap option? Sure but they were always going to go with the least creative and cheapest choice anyway. In the long run, an all-AI or mostly AI-made game might be interesting but it's not going to be as good or as successful as something that involved mostly or all humans.
@@ZiddersRooFurry Well you say this, but even you mention "at least not yet". If we're not going to regulate it now, it's going to be much more difficult to regulate when the quality improves. You need 1 guy to come up with an idea, and then you can just throw AI at the problem, many many times until you get something good. As you said, AI is not creative at the moment, but if you let the thing run hundreds of times, thousands of times, tweaking parameters or prompts here and there, something decent will come out of it. And it's way faster and cheaper to get an AI to brute force this and just iterate until something "good" pops out. I think people are failing to grasp that AI is improving rapidly, and now with additional investment from these big companies because they want it to be their next big cash cow, its even more rapid. People think "well its not creative enough" and then bam, its going to be "creative enough" to create something that is, well, creative at least on the surface level. (Of course, this depends on the prompt, the selection process, the culling of undesired features, etc).
@@hpbecraft I fear it will eventually affect jobs that are not entry level. It's only a matter of time before senior positions will get affected as well.
A game being able to extrapolate new content for you essentially endlessly does sound really appealing. I would worry that one of the most fun things to talk about in games are the weird little side stories or little areas you've come across with others, or going out to find the little stories others have told you about. If those stories are dependent on what the AI can cobble together, then any slight change to the back end of the AI (an update to its training set or what have you) could result in that little story disappearing forever, you wouldn't even be able to return to it again in your own save.
When it comes to modding, using AI voices to replicate an actor's voice should not be controversial if one is not making money out of it. AI voices can restore cut content or fix lore breaks in dialogue. If a modder reuses cut-up dialogue or AI thr voice actor was never going to get paid anyway.
@@robertbcardoza I know what you mean, I can imagine it someone uses your voice for a dodgey mod it would be creepy. But if someone uses a voice actor 's AI voice in a game that they were not in then I can sort of understand.
What do you think about game developers sucking up to Hollywood all the time? I think the only reason celebrities get voiceover roles in games is so the developers can hang out with them, and otherwise it's a complete waste of money. I think you can always find talent who will do a great job without the celebrity tax, and, most importantly, someone who actually needs that job.
advertising is not a human problem, it's a capitalism problem. an entire industry devoted to making people buy more and more of that they dont even need... just so line can keep going up.
True to a point. If it were a human problem ad blockers wouldn't be so popular. People are sick of marketing intruding into every aspect of their lives or, at least, I am. At the same time, the advent of Internet publishing has made it so that there are few ways to recoup the cost formerly invested in creating content aside from subscription models and the like. It's a catch 22 of the system itself. The underlying logic has become deficient if it were ever actually effective in any other than an inequitable way.
@@lrinfi "At the same time, the advent of Internet publishing has made it so that there are few ways to recoup the cost formerly invested in creating content aside from subscription models and the like." so, in other words, a capitalism problem
@@Tychoxi I'd like to be able simply to blame capitalism like everyone else, but - no - it's not strictly a capitalism problem. The "global economy" is but one facet of a much more comprehensive picture. When I say the underlying logic has become deficient, I'm referring to the entire foundation of the modern era, which is undergoing a painfully slow and arduous transformation as we speak. Whether it will be "aborted" or not, in Jean Gebser's terms, is an open question.
Yeah Thats about what I imagined too, Rather than being an apocalyptic Doomsday scenario that will drive artists to extinction, [[[If used efficiently]]] it will significantly enhance the ability and output of each individual artist. However, in this early age of AI I think there will be a few projects or companies that won’t understand that and will get diminishing returns with their implementation of AI.
That's my position on AI: for the best results, the person needs a fundamental, ideally more than a fundamental, understanding of the skills being applied. You want an artist to generate the art assets. You want a writer to generate the text assets. You want a programmer to generate the programming assets. Those people are the ones with the ability to critically assess what is generated and the skills to tell the AI specifically what should be changed. If you don't know anything about images, you will look at a picture and say "that looks good" or you won't know how to fix it when it doesn't. As a content creator, generative AI allows me to make things that I couldn't dream about 10 years ago. There is art that exists today that wouldn't exist without generative AI. Should you replace your X with an AI? No, but maybe you should replace your 6th artist with an AI.
10:58 Too late. Tony Robbins and his ilk are pushing that hype train off a cliff. Even my 70-year-old mom is using AI to generate content for her website, newsletters, etc.
There's obviously HUGE pitfalls with AI, but we've all heard the doom and gloom a million times. As a musician, I'm so unbelievably excited for the scope of things I will be able to do with AI, as making music for me is all about discovery, the direction being partially curated by myself. Even without AI, I embrace a haphazard approach just as much as a deliberate one, it changes from moment to moment, and the haphazard informs the deliberate that follows. I tweak a few things and see how my synth sounds, I try certain patterns I'm not sure what they'll sound like yet etc. etc., AI is going to be perfect for me.
The problem with AI is that it's output is because it doesn't actually understand what it's doing so it's output is very samey and boring so why would you ever want to do anything remotely artistic with it when you're going to have to have the same amount or more people editing the output of AI? And as a player, why the hell would you ever want to do narrative content written by an AI? There's no use case for AI in gamedev other than firing people to hire them for less money because now they're not a programmer or artist or writer, now they're an 'AI editor.' The thing with 'AI generation' is that it's a buzzword for tools that have already existed. You used to have a foliage brush, now you have an 'AI power foliage brush' that is either the same thing or works worse randomly and is impossible to troubleshoot. The only reason it can output a picture is that it's trained on wild amounts of art it can procedural plagiarize and the only reason it can do anything with that is millions of man-hours somewhere in an impoverished country was put in writing alt text about what the pictures are. AI is only useful for filing the serial number off of the work of other people because there is no actual learning or intelligence involved that's not human powered, so unless you want your assets to be a smear of whatever stolen data the devs of it could get their hands on, you're gunna just have to use the same amount of people, which you would have to do anyway. Check out some stuff about it by Adam Conover or acollierastro's video on it. *AI just inst as useful as they're saying it is and the only reason they're saying it is is so they can inflate their portfolio because all it is is the next tech bubble.* You're not gunna hear about it much longer as the investment begins to slow and everyone pulls out of the industry all at the same time, plummeting the SNP 500 with it Edit: also it can't even code anymore lol. It broke and they don't know why
I think calling AI a "force multiplier" is spot on. It could be used to expand output at every stage, even with a finished game. Example: complete fallout 5 and have AI generate Skyrim 2 from it, going back to tweek it by hand. Education: there will be more game developers as GPT can hold the person's hand as they learn. Because large corporations are bad at creativity, they're use of AI to replace workers might backfire, while indie teams can leverage AI to exponentially increase their creative output. I am optimistic too.
I hate ai art and I don't know why that is controversial. Art is about communication and messages and meanings between people - the artist and audience. There is no communication on the "artist's" end with ai "art". Plus, ai art draws from a database of real artists, all uncredited. AI art is bereft of any meaning and feels hollow to even look at.
To you it has no meaning and that's fine. As far as it copying artists so do human artists. There's no difference between ai looking at tons of art and replicating styles and a human doing the same except for the fact AI can look at a lot more.
I'm sure you can appreciate things not made by humans in other areas, it gains meaning in your mind as the beholder, I don't see why this has to be different. It won't be the same at all, but nobody said it would be a true replacement in every way. (Well... Nobody sensible) Also keep in mind the process of tons of artists out there isn't as romantic as non-artists think, a lot of it just kinda happens and the artist decides they want to work with it, AI can be curated like that too.
@@noahm638 You can't comprehend how an algorithm stealing art and regurgitating it is different than a human actually engaging in the artistic process. Stop consuming art.
The problem isn't and never really was AI. The problem is captialism and mega corporations taking all the art in the world putting it into their machines and selling the results of that machine for a profit. And the artists whose work was used without their knowledge/consent will have to compete with those models. The models will produce worse results than an artists. But corporations won't care as long as it's cheaper. AI as a tech is cool, but the economic model that surrounds it sucks. And those that will be hurt the most are the ones that made in possible in the first place.
I just find it ethically questionable, to say the least. They are trained with art and texts made by humans, most of the time without their consent or compensation, just to then take away work from those very people.
It's no different than a person viewing a bunch of art and text and then making a derivative work. AI just industrialises that by packaging it into neat software that people can run.
There is zero difference between AI looking at a ton of human-made art and you looking at a bunch of human-made art and learning from it aside from the scale. AI just happens to look at a ton more. Every artist has elements of their work that was influenced by other artists.
@@SnoutBaron I think the key distinction is that labor is fundamentally human. When a tool is introduced, it it augmenting the labor of the person that wields it. Tools do not labor.
@@SnoutBaron I'm just sad for the fact that the SKILL of an artist could be outsourced to a soulless machine. And the irony that we have automated one of the few things that we genuinely enjoy doing ourselves.
@@BuzzKirill3D Well like me, for example, I've been using stable diffusion to make concept designs for weapons and monsters so that I can use it as reference to model them for my little game. I was never going to pay someone to do it, but now I'm able to do it myself.
AI - are BORING They cant give us more art/text Oh NO NO CONCEPT ART! And Art is averaging all over the Internet - the most average, the most boring and literal embodiment of the theme
Content generation is not the problem, suspension of disbelief is. A human mind will detect it’s being fed a procgen content with ease. Unless all content including the main quest is procgen none of the procgen content matters.
Yeah, Neural Networks are from like the 50s-60s. And you're right, the main thing that's changed is the data capacity. Someday, we will reach true AI, but it absolutely won't be with machine learning. These tools, much like their ancestor decades ago, are very limited, and insanely overhyped. Especially for game production. I'm an artist btw, and the art being generated is utterly useless, even for concepts. They might work if you have no passion for the project, and just want a lazy glob of slop to slap on a table. Even for simple background props, they stick out like a sore thumb. EVERYONE noticed the AI paintings in High On Life, for example. I've also seen the current tools that create variants, and add details. Again, it's still complete garbage. This is even before we get to the real nasty issues with it, such as copyright, ethics, the inherent bias in datasets leading to discriminatory outputs, the Steam ban, etc. Honestly, the current crop still has a long way to go to be useful, and from what I've heard, they're already reaching new hardware limitations. Maybe in another 60 years.
"Someday, we will reach true AI" -- Honestly, I don't think that's a possibility. "Artificial Intelligence" is actually a contradiction in terms. There's nothing artificial about intelligence; there is something aritificial about computers spitting out precisely what's been programmed into them and nothing more. Human beings have tendency to anthropomorphize absolutely everything. "AI" is no different, imo.
I love love love your videos! I love hearing an experienced developers perspective about such unique topics. Thank you for taking the time to make these :)
What I foresee is the return of Fallout's and Morrwind's "ask anything box". You'll have a number of designer-made conversations, but you'll also be able to ask this NPC whatever you want and perhaps get additional information, or just RP a bit. There's already a precedent for this, so I expect it to happen soon.
I'd bet studios are 100% working whether it's viable. The main challenge is building an LLM specifically for each game, and then writing logic to ensure that each NPC you interact with knows only what they should know, is able to remember previous interaction, have a distinct style to themselves, as well as be updated on any new information they should know, since an LLM would obviously encompass all knowledge.
I played morrowind and I don't even remember that, are you sure ama is in it?
@@damirkosmit’s not, idk what they’re talking about
@@andreaholcock8992spreading misinformation online
@@damirkosm I must have misremembered a mod, Morrowind's dialogue is also based on keywords, but you cannot input keywords by yourself.
"What do you wanna buy?"
"WHAT ARE YOU DOING IN MY HOUSE?"
"What're ya sellin?"
"...and when are ya gonna leave?"
I can see why procedurally generated dungeons would be a boon to many smaller teams but after playing Daggerfall I much prefer the man made mapping of Might And Magic 6.
All for AI as long as it's trained from content they actually own or have compensated the artists for. I hadn't thought about the music suggestion AI, that's a great idea.
> trained from content they actually own or have compensated the artists for
That boat is long gone. At least 1 major AI product on the market that has scraped from Reddit, Twitter, etc. You're basically defending IP, which I think is a dumb idea. IP is a terrible idea.
It's a good sentiment to mitigate the spread of theft, agreed, but, as already been said. Boat gone. If it hadn't already spread like some sorta psychic art sucking vampire across the net, it would become a monopoly, which would likely make more top companies move over to it in turn, because profit incentive is all these inhuman ghouls care about.
@@rabbitcreative Small and independent artists SHOULD have their content protected to some degree when their livelihood or ability to create depends on it. If you refuse to protect the artists having their work fed into these models without their compensation or at MINIMUM their consent, then they will cease to create art, and you will have no creative works to train the very models that were responsible for it.
Fully agree. It should be used as a tool, not a replacement. Unfortunately a lot of CEOs and others like looking for shortcuts to “cut costs” like we are seeing with Hollywood. :/
Hopefully it won’t make artists and writers a harder job field to find work in.
That said, writing and general quality has been torpedoing year over year, so a lot of the people that end up getting replaced, it only makes sense. For Hollywood in general, a this point ChatGPT probably could write better stories than them, as AIs aren't indoctrinated by a holier than though attitude. Hollywood can burn 100%.
@@SeasoningTheObese I don’t care how good or bad someone’s work is, the reason they’d be replaced by AI would be to save money. And the quality of AI without a human to refine the works would always be inferior to that of a real writer/editor
@@s7robin105 Twerking She Hulk says hello.
@@SeasoningTheObese Yes. those writers still deserve a fair wage when their work gives money to massive companies. Get over it.
@@s7robin105 if you had a choice to hire a better writer for less money you would do it too
Hey Tim, I'm not sure if you've already done a video on it specifically but could you talk about good world building in games and how you make a world feel authentic and immersive and not 'gamified'. Thanks in advance
I hear a lot about how ads are targeted and amazon knows what you're about to do before you know it yourself. But you're absolutely right, youtube and streaming services are totally worthless at guessing what I'd like to see or hear next. At best they serve up channels/artists I already go to a lot, but they rarely find anything new that I like.
i like all these tim talk, whether it be talk about stuff with game design or work experiance, these vids are always a treat to listen in to!
I agree with your perspective on this, but I can’t imagine studio heads look at AI and not use it to cut people. We think “we can do more with the same people” and they will go “we can do the same with fewer people”
AI is dangerous in the hands of humans because it’ll be use to the detriment of others.
Capitalists/the rich aren't human
@@pinko7429
based
The future we were promised was that AI/robots would take over boring jobs and human beings would have more time to engage in creative endevours like art or writing.
Look where we are now.
They will and are currently using AI as a threat towards the workforce. "We don't need artists, writers, and so on, so you better be happy for the scrapes we're offering you."
Automation isn't egalitarian, it leads to less jobs and prices remaining the same.
@@pinko7429 >succeed
>escape the poor masses that choose wrong daily
>get blamed for not suffering their fate
Communists are very weird. Never going for the big wigs, always dragging down the little guy that doesn't want to eat the bugs with you.
really appreciate your more calm and optimistic perspective on this, against all the very negative perspectives that dominate this subject, and it was really interesting and thought provoking too. thanks
also thanks in general for sharing your experiences and insights on this channel, I watch it on and off and learn a lot, even as someone not particularly big on fallout
I'm glad this was talked about, I Was thinking about this topic and how it relates to game development quite extensively.
I've had the same thought about music streaming services a thousand times. Their suggestions are often supposedly based on the same "genre," but that can yield really wide-ranging results. Or it recommends things based on what other listeners of the things that you like like. I wish the recommendations were based on some kind of analysis of how the music actually sounds. Years ago I found someone had made a tool that plots songs on a 2D chart according to various variables, like tempo, etc., but I don't know if that ever found its way into any recommendation engines.
I think this application of AI is a very smart, practice and human centered way of approaching it. I also think all the greedy and clueless executives in charge of the big game publishers only see it as a way to reduce headcount. The average Ubisoft game practically feels AI designed already.
I agree with everything you say. But the cynic in me fears AI will be used as an excuse to further make things worse, and for large companies to pay developers less, for example.
Yes, but here is a further path. Those underpaid devs, can unite to leave the company and simply make a similar game, since the AI offers you tools to make a AAA game with a few devs. The proof for this is the success latest pokemon clone. Stay positive.
Honestly, my current problem with AI is twofold: 1) obviously companies really will want to use it to cut corners, we've already seen examples of companies significantly reducing their headcount in terms of artists because AI artists suffice... this is bad! AI just regurgitates, it can never come up with an original interpretation of a theme. On top of that, this is obviously bad for labor. 2) There's a massive problem in terms of copyright infringement with the datasets at the moment! I have no problem with datasets created *by* the companies with the consent of the people whose work is added to it, but most chatbots and AI image generators simply scrape the internet for as much data as they can get. This is obviously... problematic. Not to mention the early jurisprudence in the States that argues that AI images aren't even protectable by copyright, which would put developers at a disadvantage if using that technology.
I don't know, I hope the technology grows out of these early pains and gets used responsibly to help developers, but I'm not very optimistic at the moment. Thanks for the video anyway!
Your first point is really 2 different problems - The lack of original ideas due to AI just replicating what it knows (which execs like, 'cause it's safe), and the reduction in employees in an already insanely hard-to-enter field. Yeah, these suck.
I don't entirely agree with your second point, because playing devil's advocate, I could make the point that humans get all of their skills from other humans, with or without consent, so why can't AI do the same?
@@jextra1313 There's a huge difference between humans subconsciously being inspired by each other in their endeavors, and people deliberately choosing to use someone's creative work to train a model they will then monetize. If you refuse to protect the works of creative people, they will cease to exist, and you will no longer have any new, creative works to feed these same models. It is not possible for them to create on their own; they will only iterate off of their datasets. Computers do ONLY what they are trained to do, and that's where people come in. Because of this, it benefits both artists AND AI enthusiasts to advocate for the protection of their work.
Admittedly, this problem would also be MUCH less significant if not for capitalism itself, and how using peoples' art for these models to then profit off of hurts their own livelihood. The optimal solution is to use this technology to automate other processes globally throughout the workforce so people can spend less time working on menial tasks and more time contributing creatively and innovating for their communities and society (and at rest and play, which benefits the former), but our money-centric world isn't ready to make these changes.
Tim puts it well - many, if not all, of the issues of AI are not problems with the technology itself, but humanity wielding it in a flawed manner.
I cannot wait until they make game creating boxes that I just tell what I want to play and it makes it right there. That is going to be fantastic.
Spotify's auto generated playlists for you have helped me find a couple indie bands that I otherwise would have never found. I think the playlists are generated based on a music "type" you like, and fills it with like 75% songs that are tried and true (you listen to them occasionally, you added them to your liked songs or whatever). The other 25% is either other stuff from those same bands you may not have listened to, or other related artists. It is relatively good at this, but not perfect. You cant really tell it you dont want to hear something, but it makes a couple of these playlists for different genres you like.
That AI use case you were describing - we worked with a bunch of people a few jobs back on a concept of attentive interface, something that would adjust your experience based on the context in which you are at the moment. You're working so DND is set automatically and calls are redirected to voice unless it's your SO or some other ICE contact (unless we know you historically canned that call in a similar context). It never got anywhere but I still like the idea of tech helping me focus on what's important instead of milking me for clicks.
With AI newcomer developers are expected to do all at once - 3D modelling, knowledge of rendering pipeline, scripting, texturing, physics, development patterns - you name it.
What the people need to keep a CLOSE EYE on is:
Make sure the business people are using AI to enable higher quality, more polished games.
Make sure they're NOT releasing low-quality games made by underbudget AI and still charge full price.
Hey Tim, I think developers will always be the creative force behind games. AI is super useful for speeding up workflows. Like, it can handle repetitive tasks and help with early stages of game design, like grey box prototyping. That way, devs can get inspired about what might work best for their games. Sure, there'll be a bunch of copycat games out there, but developers who really know how to use AI as a tool to boost their own creativity are the ones who'll succeed in the industry.
I'd love for AI to help shorten the time it takes to develop a game. Older games used to get made way faster, and it'd be cool to see that happen again. Of course, there are pros and cons to quicker development cycles, but still, it's something to think about.
I love your perspective, Tim. You have me thinking about smaller aspects I had never considered before. Thank you for essentially helping to educate me.
With AI's augmentation of human intelligence, you don't diminish originality; instead, you amplify and enhance it.
My biggest problem with ai generated content is people use it as a cure-all black box that you stick a prompt into and it gives you some derivative trash that ultimately becomes the spam email of its respective genre, that for example, art contests having to wade through and verify to determine the legitimacy of, to award a prize.
AI should be used to enhance the workflow of creatives not replace the creativity all together, like giving artists tools, without actually drawing for them, I can imagine a virtual pen and paper, without having to shell out money for a wacom tablet, but simply writing a single line or paragraph and letting the magic box shit out a drawing for you and claiming it as your work is horrid.
Now I have Grandma Got Ran Over by a Reindeer stuck in my head...
Can we get a Tim's Ambient music list, video?
Apple Music lets you stream uploaded music anywhere on any device you can access Apple Music
The fear is in how you train these datasets. Is it trained off of your own work or trained off of millions of artists or voice actors without their permission. I think there is potential as a useful tool for artists or developers but there is something icky about using an ai tool generating results based on the work of people who are not attached to the project.
the main problem with ProcGen dungeons is the lack of environmental storytelling, if you did put that in, what happens when that dungeon generates in a location that feels inconsistent? It can work but it will always be in a surface level of complexity compared to dungeons purposely made with the general location in mind.
The sad thing about music streaming services is that they are ruled by copyright holders and not necessarily good ideas. What you want to hear isn't relevant; they play what THEY want you to hear... they could easily make it better, but they don't want to. That's the sad part. I don't know why that makes them insist on having horrible UI's though...
It's pretty cool to hear a more positive take on the use of AI in gaming/art. So many people see it as a negative, but it really just opens up the potential for more creativity if used properly.
I've always wanted to see NPCs run by AI, so they can be conversed with freely outside of the preset dialogue options.
"if used properly" and that is exactly the issue and why so many people see it as negative. How much improper usage it has right now, most likely way more than proper
Ive been playing Arcanum for weeks (months?) now and i keep being blown away by how large it is compared to Fallout 1. That you did this with 14 people.... it is very impressive. You people must have been on fire
Hey Tim! What are your favourite ambient artists and/or albums?
Pandora was pretty good at finding new music I loved but that was already way back in mid 2000's I think. It was actually catalogued by humans I believed.
I'd really like to believe the Gma got Run Over by a Reindeer thing was a prank, because that's *hilarious* and i need to do it to my parents next time I have the opportunity.
Hey Tim, in this video about AI you haven't touched the subject of copyright and the problems associated with using ai-generated content for AIs that were trained on content without the consent of the creators, or with coerced consent like for actors who have their appearance scanned to be used in films as a condition for work. I know it's a touchy subject but I'd be interested in your opinion on this matter.
the problem i see in radiant quests genertared by AI(especially with dialogue) is people take these as canon so if they the AI does or says something that breaks it
you may have to educate players to maybe take the content of those quest with a grain of salt as a radiant quest could produce a task or dialogue which could fundamentally change the players understanding of the universe or main story
What can one do to compete in this industry as a dev without the proper education? Some background, I grew up lower middle class, had no money for college, wasn't smart enough to be given a scholarship (which turned out to be an ADHD diagnosis in my 40s), and had to work for low wages up until my late 20s. Despite all that, through dedication and tenacity, I worked my way from retail to being a frontend developer with a 20-year background in UX/UI and design. Unfortunately, I was just laid off and am worried about the prospects of finding a new position. Every time I hear dev stories I usually feel alienated when the topic of college comes up.
I have worked with many game devs who have no formal education past high school. If you have experience or can show relevant work to an interviewer (including demos), that should suffice. And every company I have worked with for the past 20 years has complained about the dearth of UX applicants.
AI hasn't changed since Minsky (cough cough, AI winters, cough cough), or when the first man Theorized the Mind the next one...
Got this new ai to generate dialog for NPCs,
they keep talking about how much they love coca cola and lays chips.
And apparently there's a new coca cola flavor that I haven't tried yet, or so it tells me...
(Just kidding)
But imagine
I guarantee there are some salesman in a meeting salivating over that very prospect as we speak
that's funny and sad. Very possible.
AI synthesis for voices is the best application by far, either as text to speech or speech to speech. Completely original voices and an incredible level of emotion at times. There's a Skyrim follower mod named Lyssia, and there's a video showcasing it on RUclips. Entirely AI generated original voice, and it's better in terms of both audio quality and delivery than most existing voiced mods.
I've been thinking of a AI that adds onto the custom character creation we see in a lot of games. Having avid character creators creating 2 characters perhaps male and female and having the AI analyze and create a composition of variations. In this way I can create a male and female character and the AI will create a formula or something of variations between those two characters. In a game where npc appearance depends on the original input of character creation I could see completely different characters just because the AI changed a few things. It would be kinda like creating a 'race' of sorts unique to your own world.
What I don't hear talked about enough, actually I haven't found any video that addresses this directly, is actually how not to be replaced as an employee or freelancer considering the companies/clients perspective, not the artists.
Yes AI doesn't have taste, someone has to make a selection which outputs actually look good and AI can't be fully original etc.
But a lot of companies just don't care about these things. Games, music or any entertainment media already has so much unoriginal and generic content, so why wouldn't many of these companies use AI to make more crap much faster and without having to pay a human?
If our last resort is "authentic human art" and only "artisan studios" will employ humans, what happens to the people whose workplace stopped caring and replaced their employees?
Same with freelancers, who are you selling your art to if most of your clients chose to use AI instead?
Actually thinking about these questions from the companies/clients perspective, I don't have a good answer why not to pick AI.
Need Tim to end one of these with "And that's allz I have to say about that..." Although the AI would probably flag you for copyright infringement. :P
Even if AI won't replace the workforce, if it makes their job a lot easier, then those jobs are going to become much less competitive, presumably resulting in a lower pay across the industry, which will eventually lower a quality of the output. Traditional art > Digital art > Photobashing > Ai imagery. Easier equals less money.
Not necessarily, engines like Unreal & Unity have made making games much easier across a range of disciplines, yet there's still well paid jobs available.
However, you can argue that If pay goes down overall (as a median) it'll be because the games market becomes so saturated with games due to these new tools that it becomes difficult to get noticed and turn substantial profit (which we already see in the indie scene).
But I do think there'll be jobs that become more lucrative if anything
Making it easier will make it more competitive, not less. The barrier to entry will be lower, meaning more people can apply, and less people will be needed to do the same work.
@@jextra1313 Nearly anyone can make burgers at McDonnald's, yet there's no competitive chef culture attached. Or salary. Or prestige. Weird:)
@@mortiz20101 I hear what you're saying. From my perspective as an artist, the further from the highest skill requirement you are, the less lucrative it gets. Some people think AI will just make it easier for super highly talented people, but I think it just makes them more sloppy and beginners just get lazier. There's something to be said about the positive effects of limitation and hardship.
About the saturation - totally. Although, I would argue that competition is largely meaningless as long as you can do something no one else can. Heart and authenticity are key.
@@mcashed because 'making videogames' is more interesting and has more social prestige than working in fast food. That'll still be something people want to do when there's ai involved and pay goes down to minimum wage, because it already is. Testers get paid minimum wage where I am and still it's flooded with applicants.
The kind of job Tim has will be the longest to survive. High-level design and management is something that we will always need, but at the same time the least likely to be somehow completely automated.
The original creators of Fallout 76 did a great job exploring the idea that the only "class" that will be employed eventually will be the "executive" class due to automation. Too bad that's buried under all the other rot.
I agree...but for all theses ai systems, the original authors have to be required to OPT-IN, not opt out, to new AI specific licenses.
lmao cope
I agree with the idea of using AI tools to aim at overall bigger games in scope, quality and creativity and reducing development time in the industry.
Btw what about documentation (art,design,programming, copyright, IP, HR, marketing, project management, simple emails etc. docs)?
Have you tried Plex for uploading your personal library?
My former professor actually graduated with a PhD (If I remember correctly) from UCI around the same time you got your Master's, specializing in Asian language translation. I wonder if you guys knew each other? Also she said her supervisor at the time who was like a big head of the AI research department there bailed or got arrested or something...
AI can do great things. But, can AI generate a new Tim?
Don't worry, that thing's probably learned your tastes pretty well😁
But it also should promote something that needs promoting, something folks are supposed to listen to.
AI or llm won't bring anything good in games in terms of making it better then people,if you can implement it so it does some extra work that is tedious in game development cool more power to you,but i really don't need 1000 side quests or infinite created on the fly by llm,i still get PTSD just when i remember Preston from fallout 4,and somehow i think bethesda didn't learn jack shit(radiant quests) not that is connected to AI/llm but worth to mention,i think il play less and less how time goes on,il rather pick something hand crafted and unique,and that it actually makes sense then play copy paste fetch quest,just because,if that's gaming in 2023 and onward s and im sure it is,it will be,then im ok with not consuming future games.
I wish I could remember how they phrased it, but I remember someone once paraphrasing the issue wonderfully as "If an NPC never stops talking how will I know to stop interacting with them." Preston is one of the most hated characters in Fallout 4, and honestly his personal quests and overall character are great, but people don't remember that, they remember him sending you on a literally never ending string of boring busywork. Eventually maybe the technology could be refined to the point of being more engaging than "Go to [LOCATION], kill [ENEMY TYPE]/retrieve [ITEM], return" but even if they can make a LLM so good it can compete with the actual writing in the game, making a fountain of infinite content would get exhausting no matter the quality.
I like how this take lacks the fear most people take in this topic
Agree with streaming services and suggestions in general. It is surprisingly bad everywhere. I always thought that maybe they are pushing some agenda or advertising, but it is still very bad.
Curse words in songs? It is confirmed, Tim listens rap!
There seems to be two distinct groups of ways this could pan out, probably simultaneously. Smaller teams can use AI to make bigger games and bigger teams being cut so that they need less people to make games. I can't see a way that this doesn't result in lots of people losing their jobs unfortunately.
If AI starts working better with context, you can literally just set the setting and characters, and let the AI generate the NPC dialog
I had to stop using Google music because it turned into RUclips music which sucks really bad.
now I just load up as much of my library as I can fit onto the phone's SD card and play through it with the VLC app
Good God yes the advertising will be awful.
Jealous every day of the places in the world that have banned billboards.
Imagine how much horse armor they can create out of nothing and charge players for using AI? 😂
Jokes aside, glad to see you talk on AI. It's already being utilized in games I believe to some extent, so it's here. We'll see where it goes from here and where the pushback will be (if jobs are lost and little to no jobs created).
P.S. - I love escort missions :D
Thanks
Lol. Yeah, they'll totally not cut their staff. ROFL.
Question: There's a lot of talk lately about the location of the next Fallout game (which probably won't come out for 8-10 years). Some people want it in another country. Fallout is inherently designed around US products and 50's aesthetics.
Do you have thoughts on a Fallout game outside of the US? (Yes, I know it's Bethesda's baby now and you're not affiliated atm.)
I feel like it doesn't work. If they jam another country full of Vault-Tec, Nuka Cola, etc. it's just more of the same. If they remove all that, is it really still Fallout, or just like... Metro or something?
As someone who is totally ignorant of the current level of AI, I think it needs to be directed towards bug fixing.
Alexa! Play "Grandma Got Run Over by a Reindeer!"
Yo, Tim listens to Witchhouse!
relegating "side content" to ai seems bad and depressing, its like its only seen as busywork when its a look into how devs write with smaller stakes or their humor or random things they find interesting. its as valuable as "main content" to me and many others. not sure if you know about the yakuza games but side content is a big reason theyre even popular
Thank you for a sober take on AI! The comment section is a trained unfound doomerism as expected, so I hope your perspective will help at least some people appreciate AI as a tool for the next decades.
The movie came out over 20 years ago and it wasn't Spielberg's best, but people gotta just move on.
Hey Tim. Whilst you have hopes that the AI that will come will help out in game dev or in these other areas like music streaming services, I have a much more pessimistic outlook on this. You've worked with people in management, worked with publishers and whoever, what is going to stop these people from, for example, just not hiring a concept artist? Some middle manager could get the bright idea to just generate concept art through one of these AI services and use them for the game. Whilst there will be an outcry, eventually this could become the norm. And as these things progress, eventually even other areas could follow suite (programmers, voice acting, you name it). I already know of an indie dev who has recently started posting concept on his discord, that he says was AI generated. He has no concept artist, he just fed an AI (don't know which one) a prompt and out came a piece of concept art. Is this a good thing? I do not think so. For him, it's good, he saves on time and money, but the concept artist? Not so much. So does his game deserve to be measured in the same way other games were made? I think not. Would love to hear from you more on this.
What should keep them from letting AI take over roles like concept artists is what Tim said at the start. You're going to want someone who understands all the nuances of what you're trying to do with your game. AI is great but it can't (at least not yet) match the kind of spontaneous creativity humans have. AI isn't going to come up with some random idea nobody ever would have thought of because all it has to work from are the models it's been presented with. AI just isn't very original in that regard. Will publishers still go with AI as the cheap option? Sure but they were always going to go with the least creative and cheapest choice anyway. In the long run, an all-AI or mostly AI-made game might be interesting but it's not going to be as good or as successful as something that involved mostly or all humans.
No doubt it will reduce jobs in the field. There will be less entry jobs for sure.
@@ZiddersRooFurry Well you say this, but even you mention "at least not yet". If we're not going to regulate it now, it's going to be much more difficult to regulate when the quality improves. You need 1 guy to come up with an idea, and then you can just throw AI at the problem, many many times until you get something good. As you said, AI is not creative at the moment, but if you let the thing run hundreds of times, thousands of times, tweaking parameters or prompts here and there, something decent will come out of it. And it's way faster and cheaper to get an AI to brute force this and just iterate until something "good" pops out. I think people are failing to grasp that AI is improving rapidly, and now with additional investment from these big companies because they want it to be their next big cash cow, its even more rapid. People think "well its not creative enough" and then bam, its going to be "creative enough" to create something that is, well, creative at least on the surface level. (Of course, this depends on the prompt, the selection process, the culling of undesired features, etc).
@@hpbecraft I fear it will eventually affect jobs that are not entry level. It's only a matter of time before senior positions will get affected as well.
A game being able to extrapolate new content for you essentially endlessly does sound really appealing. I would worry that one of the most fun things to talk about in games are the weird little side stories or little areas you've come across with others, or going out to find the little stories others have told you about. If those stories are dependent on what the AI can cobble together, then any slight change to the back end of the AI (an update to its training set or what have you) could result in that little story disappearing forever, you wouldn't even be able to return to it again in your own save.
When it comes to modding, using AI voices to replicate an actor's voice should not be controversial if one is not making money out of it. AI voices can restore cut content or fix lore breaks in dialogue. If a modder reuses cut-up dialogue or AI thr voice actor was never going to get paid anyway.
This is a slippery slope. I’m not saying you are wrong, but the idea of people using your likeness without your permission is *creepy*.
@@robertbcardoza I know what you mean, I can imagine it someone uses your voice for a dodgey mod it would be creepy. But if someone uses a voice actor 's AI voice in a game that they were not in then I can sort of understand.
GRANDMA GOT RAN OVER BY A REINDEER!!!! SOMETHING SOMETHING CHRISTMAS EVE!!!
What do you think about game developers sucking up to Hollywood all the time? I think the only reason celebrities get voiceover roles in games is so the developers can hang out with them, and otherwise it's a complete waste of money. I think you can always find talent who will do a great job without the celebrity tax, and, most importantly, someone who actually needs that job.
advertising is not a human problem, it's a capitalism problem. an entire industry devoted to making people buy more and more of that they dont even need... just so line can keep going up.
True to a point. If it were a human problem ad blockers wouldn't be so popular. People are sick of marketing intruding into every aspect of their lives or, at least, I am. At the same time, the advent of Internet publishing has made it so that there are few ways to recoup the cost formerly invested in creating content aside from subscription models and the like. It's a catch 22 of the system itself. The underlying logic has become deficient if it were ever actually effective in any other than an inequitable way.
@@lrinfi "At the same time, the advent of Internet publishing has made it so that there are few ways to recoup the cost formerly invested in creating content aside from subscription models and the like."
so, in other words, a capitalism problem
@@Tychoxi I'd like to be able simply to blame capitalism like everyone else, but - no - it's not strictly a capitalism problem. The "global economy" is but one facet of a much more comprehensive picture. When I say the underlying logic has become deficient, I'm referring to the entire foundation of the modern era, which is undergoing a painfully slow and arduous transformation as we speak. Whether it will be "aborted" or not, in Jean Gebser's terms, is an open question.
Still no decent AI for games. Everything is on dinosaur era scripts and every game is like Oblivion npc meme nowadays.
Yeah Thats about what I imagined too, Rather than being an apocalyptic Doomsday scenario that will drive artists to extinction, [[[If used efficiently]]] it will significantly enhance the ability and output of each individual artist.
However, in this early age of AI I think there will be a few projects or companies that won’t understand that and will get diminishing returns with their implementation of AI.
That's my position on AI: for the best results, the person needs a fundamental, ideally more than a fundamental, understanding of the skills being applied. You want an artist to generate the art assets. You want a writer to generate the text assets. You want a programmer to generate the programming assets. Those people are the ones with the ability to critically assess what is generated and the skills to tell the AI specifically what should be changed. If you don't know anything about images, you will look at a picture and say "that looks good" or you won't know how to fix it when it doesn't.
As a content creator, generative AI allows me to make things that I couldn't dream about 10 years ago. There is art that exists today that wouldn't exist without generative AI. Should you replace your X with an AI? No, but maybe you should replace your 6th artist with an AI.
10:58 Too late. Tony Robbins and his ilk are pushing that hype train off a cliff. Even my 70-year-old mom is using AI to generate content for her website, newsletters, etc.
I for one welcome our new robot overlords.
There's obviously HUGE pitfalls with AI, but we've all heard the doom and gloom a million times. As a musician, I'm so unbelievably excited for the scope of things I will be able to do with AI, as making music for me is all about discovery, the direction being partially curated by myself. Even without AI, I embrace a haphazard approach just as much as a deliberate one, it changes from moment to moment, and the haphazard informs the deliberate that follows. I tweak a few things and see how my synth sounds, I try certain patterns I'm not sure what they'll sound like yet etc. etc., AI is going to be perfect for me.
tim
The problem with AI is that it's output is because it doesn't actually understand what it's doing so it's output is very samey and boring so why would you ever want to do anything remotely artistic with it when you're going to have to have the same amount or more people editing the output of AI? And as a player, why the hell would you ever want to do narrative content written by an AI? There's no use case for AI in gamedev other than firing people to hire them for less money because now they're not a programmer or artist or writer, now they're an 'AI editor.'
The thing with 'AI generation' is that it's a buzzword for tools that have already existed. You used to have a foliage brush, now you have an 'AI power foliage brush' that is either the same thing or works worse randomly and is impossible to troubleshoot. The only reason it can output a picture is that it's trained on wild amounts of art it can procedural plagiarize and the only reason it can do anything with that is millions of man-hours somewhere in an impoverished country was put in writing alt text about what the pictures are.
AI is only useful for filing the serial number off of the work of other people because there is no actual learning or intelligence involved that's not human powered, so unless you want your assets to be a smear of whatever stolen data the devs of it could get their hands on, you're gunna just have to use the same amount of people, which you would have to do anyway.
Check out some stuff about it by Adam Conover or acollierastro's video on it. *AI just inst as useful as they're saying it is and the only reason they're saying it is is so they can inflate their portfolio because all it is is the next tech bubble.* You're not gunna hear about it much longer as the investment begins to slow and everyone pulls out of the industry all at the same time, plummeting the SNP 500 with it
Edit: also it can't even code anymore lol. It broke and they don't know why
I think calling AI a "force multiplier" is spot on. It could be used to expand output at every stage, even with a finished game. Example: complete fallout 5 and have AI generate Skyrim 2 from it, going back to tweek it by hand. Education: there will be more game developers as GPT can hold the person's hand as they learn. Because large corporations are bad at creativity, they're use of AI to replace workers might backfire, while indie teams can leverage AI to exponentially increase their creative output. I am optimistic too.
I hate ai art and I don't know why that is controversial. Art is about communication and messages and meanings between people - the artist and audience. There is no communication on the "artist's" end with ai "art". Plus, ai art draws from a database of real artists, all uncredited. AI art is bereft of any meaning and feels hollow to even look at.
To you it has no meaning and that's fine. As far as it copying artists so do human artists. There's no difference between ai looking at tons of art and replicating styles and a human doing the same except for the fact AI can look at a lot more.
I'm sure you can appreciate things not made by humans in other areas, it gains meaning in your mind as the beholder, I don't see why this has to be different. It won't be the same at all, but nobody said it would be a true replacement in every way. (Well... Nobody sensible)
Also keep in mind the process of tons of artists out there isn't as romantic as non-artists think, a lot of it just kinda happens and the artist decides they want to work with it, AI can be curated like that too.
@@ZiddersRooFurry So you acknowledge that ai art is theft, automated. If people see the same meaning in ai art, I'm afraid they are illiterate.
@@noahm638 Except the kids with guitars were actually human in that case. You have no taste.
@@noahm638 You can't comprehend how an algorithm stealing art and regurgitating it is different than a human actually engaging in the artistic process. Stop consuming art.
The problem isn't and never really was AI. The problem is captialism and mega corporations taking all the art in the world putting it into their machines and selling the results of that machine for a profit. And the artists whose work was used without their knowledge/consent will have to compete with those models. The models will produce worse results than an artists. But corporations won't care as long as it's cheaper.
AI as a tech is cool, but the economic model that surrounds it sucks. And those that will be hurt the most are the ones that made in possible in the first place.
I just find it ethically questionable, to say the least. They are trained with art and texts made by humans, most of the time without their consent or compensation, just to then take away work from those very people.
It's no different than a person viewing a bunch of art and text and then making a derivative work.
AI just industrialises that by packaging it into neat software that people can run.
There is zero difference between AI looking at a ton of human-made art and you looking at a bunch of human-made art and learning from it aside from the scale. AI just happens to look at a ton more. Every artist has elements of their work that was influenced by other artists.
@@SnoutBaron I think the key distinction is that labor is fundamentally human. When a tool is introduced, it it augmenting the labor of the person that wields it. Tools do not labor.
@@SnoutBaron I'm just sad for the fact that the SKILL of an artist could be outsourced to a soulless machine. And the irony that we have automated one of the few things that we genuinely enjoy doing ourselves.
@@BuzzKirill3D Well like me, for example, I've been using stable diffusion to make concept designs for weapons and monsters so that I can use it as reference to model them for my little game. I was never going to pay someone to do it, but now I'm able to do it myself.
2:20 So college graduates are AI these days;)?
AI - are BORING
They cant give us more art/text
Oh NO NO CONCEPT ART!
And Art is averaging all over the Internet - the most average, the most boring and literal embodiment of the theme
Content generation is not the problem, suspension of disbelief is. A human mind will detect it’s being fed a procgen content with ease. Unless all content including the main quest is procgen none of the procgen content matters.
Yeah, Neural Networks are from like the 50s-60s. And you're right, the main thing that's changed is the data capacity. Someday, we will reach true AI, but it absolutely won't be with machine learning. These tools, much like their ancestor decades ago, are very limited, and insanely overhyped. Especially for game production.
I'm an artist btw, and the art being generated is utterly useless, even for concepts. They might work if you have no passion for the project, and just want a lazy glob of slop to slap on a table. Even for simple background props, they stick out like a sore thumb. EVERYONE noticed the AI paintings in High On Life, for example. I've also seen the current tools that create variants, and add details. Again, it's still complete garbage.
This is even before we get to the real nasty issues with it, such as copyright, ethics, the inherent bias in datasets leading to discriminatory outputs, the Steam ban, etc.
Honestly, the current crop still has a long way to go to be useful, and from what I've heard, they're already reaching new hardware limitations. Maybe in another 60 years.
"Someday, we will reach true AI" -- Honestly, I don't think that's a possibility. "Artificial Intelligence" is actually a contradiction in terms. There's nothing artificial about intelligence; there is something aritificial about computers spitting out precisely what's been programmed into them and nothing more.
Human beings have tendency to anthropomorphize absolutely everything. "AI" is no different, imo.
I love love love your videos! I love hearing an experienced developers perspective about such unique topics. Thank you for taking the time to make these :)
AI is a fun and powerful tool. I agree that it's not the end all, be all universal solution to everything.
Tim, your neverending optimism and naivete is tiresome. But that makes you a good programmer. Noblesse oblige. Sapienti sat.