You have to hand it to the people in suits at the top, they all sure do love AI, and the latest to be bullish about it is Take-Two's CEO Strauss Zelnick. In an interview with GamesIndustry, Zelnick was asked a few general questions but AI bit was saved for last.
It's important to understand that Take-Two are a big name considering they own the likes of Rockstar Games, Zynga and 2K.
GamesIndustry asked: "Another hot topic at the moment, and you've mentioned it in the past, is AI's role in the industry. What role does it play in Take-Two's strategy going forward and are there any guardrails you think the industry needs to be considering in terms of AI?"
Zelnick replied: "Artificial intelligence is an oxymoron, there's no such thing. Machine learning, machines don't learn. Those are convenient ways to explain to human beings what looks like magic. The bottom line is that these are digital tools and we've used digital tools forever. I have no doubt that what is considered AI today will help make our business more efficient and help us do better work, but it won't reduce employment.
To the contrary, the history of digital technology is that technology increases employment, increases productivity, increases GDP and I think that's what's going to happen with AI. I think the video game business will probably be on the leading, if not bleeding, edge of using AI.
But in terms of the guardrails, if you mean, you know, not infringing on other people's intellectual property by, you know, poaching their LLMs, yeah, we're not going to do that. Moreover, if we did, we couldn't protect that, we wouldn't be able to protect our own IP. So of course, we're mindful of what technology we use to make sure that it respects others' intellectual property and allows us to protect our own. Apart from that, I really can't think of any new guardrails that need to be implemented."
Like it or not, this appears to be where the industry is going. So much so that since January 2024, Valve now require AI disclosures from developers on Steam. The GDC 2025 survey gives us some interesting insight though, noting that 52% of developers survey noted they're working for companies that have implemented generative AI
In economics, productivity is a measure of how much output is produced with a given set of inputs.
Soooo.... we're going to increase productivity.... while also employing more people?....
That's pretty much the definition of reduced productivity. Unless he thinks we're also going to somehow sell even more games and products. Sounds like the kind of nonsense you feed investors. "Yes we're going to hire more people, and we're going to make more games, faster, and sell more of them, and have even higher profit, and there's going to be a pony, and a rainbow, and everyone's pets are going to come back to life!" Sure Zelnick.
Press X to Doubt
Artificial intelligence is an oxymoron
No. It isn't. I don't know when it happened, but somewhere along the line, people started pronouncing "Artificial" to sound like "Actual" I guess and got confused. But the word Artificial does mean "fake". The whole concept of this term "ARTIFICIAL Intelligence" is that the intelligence isn't real. We use the word Artificial Intelligence in the same way we use the term "Fake Grass". Fake grass is not an oxymoron. It's grass that is fake! Artificial intelligence is not an oxymoron, it's intelligence that is fake!
"Artificial Hearts" are not hearts. "Artificial Lakes" are not lakes. "Artificial Flowers" are not flowers. This isn't an oxymoron.
You would think someone from the games industry, which has been using the term artificial intelligence going back to the 80s and 90s to describe game character behaviour, would realise that!
Last edited by gradyvuckovic on 7 Feb 2025 at 11:30 am UTC
the bullshit starts here... or a bit latter, but this part is already missleading
Soooo.... we're going to increase productivity.... while also employing more people?....
that is possible if by increasing productivity you sell more and as an result you can hire more, the issue is that you selling more means someone else is selling less, you are just moving the marketshare from one company to another.
so you lose thousands of jobs in one side and get a few new ones on the other...
but, with less competition you also have less reasons to hire a ton of people...
so , no.
More like an investor q&a than anything else. With some kind of reptile like person.
Because, of course, who needs puny humans when you can have an AI do the work for you for free?
![](https://www.gamingonlinux.com/templates/default/images/emoticons/angry.png)
![](https://www.gamingonlinux.com/templates/default/images/emoticons/angry.png)
Let's see.
But in terms of the guardrails, if you mean, you know, not infringing on other people's intellectual property byNot infringing on other people's intellectual property ?
, you know, poaching their LLMsNevermind.
Joke aside, I do actually agree that AI is just a digital tool albeit not very reliable nor efficient in its last iteration. It has its use.
Last edited by amatai on 7 Feb 2025 at 12:41 pm UTC
Last edited by devland on 7 Feb 2025 at 12:52 pm UTC
The first is inevitable. Railing against AI at this point is useless, because AI is already entrenched in so many products (thanks hype-machine!) that there's no getting away from it. That ship has sailed. No putting it back in the box. Investment, shareholder pressure and a general public who are happy to take shortcuts on their writing skills have "enabled" it. It's here. We need to deal with it.
The second is within our control as consumers. If GTA6 (or any other game) launches and they've used a single line of AI bullshit to replace a voice artist (because they're on strike... because... AI) then it's up to us to yeet that shite right into the sea, where it belongs. Along with AI "art".
Last edited by scaine on 7 Feb 2025 at 1:07 pm UTC
And the copyright issue will be solved too, each company will have their own trained AI silos, trained with their own copyrighted material. Right now is just confusing transition time.
See more from me