Latest 30 Comments

Quoting: scaineEdit to add: holy shitballs, don't look at the Steam forums for this game. Basically a bunch of incels demanding better looking men/women to shag in-game, or complaining about "woke" choices, like being to choose to be male or female in the opening screen. JFC. Where do these clowns come from??

Wait till they discover the gender roles and method of reproduction in Celestial society. They'll lose their shit at that 😆

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

I had to google what HD-2D is, but I guess I like it.

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

So many comments, some of which have already addressed my observations. I'll just add to a few of those:

Quoting: spymastermattI genuinely wouldn't be surprised if it's the very artists people are trying to protect, who wants to use GenAI for the same reason... Is does donkey work faster.

I've known a few artists in my time. In my experience, the drive for artistic expression is so strong that I cannot see them as considering any of their work to be "donkey work" or drudgery. It is the very act of creation that drives them, not the final result. I've experienced this myself, though I would not call myself an artist.

Quoting: spymastermatt[...] And yes, the bottom line is that takes some work away from artists by making each artist able to work quicker, but so did power tools for the trades.

I think your are confusing workers for craftsmen. We used to be able to distinguish the difference. Industrialization allowed business owners (now CEOs) to displace craft guilds and replace them with unskilled workers. Carpentry was once a craft, not just a trade. So yes, power tools can be seen in the same negative light as LLMs. They allowed less-skilled workers (compared to craftsmen) to produce finished results more quickly (and employ fewer people), which suited the industrial mindset. It is a matter of quality (craftsman) over quantity (tradesman).

Spoiler, click me

Note: I do not wish to offend any tradespeople on this forum. The above does not address the reality of grey areas, where a tradesman can be both a worker and a craftsman. IMO, they are rare in this industrial age.

A good example is the impact of fast food restaurants on the culinary trade. The production system used by most fast food chains can plug an unskilled worker into any position in the production chain. No skill or artistry is required. That is the industrial system at its best. Compare that to the brigade in a high-end restaurant. For the most part, that is where you will find craftsmanship and artistry. You cannot drop an unskilled worker into that brigade and expect them to flourish. Nor do we expect it. This is part of the reason for apprenticeship. They do the drudgery while they build the skills to be a more creative contributor to the brigade.

Quoting: spymastermattI guess then the problem for me is that we don't yet have a view or word to separate the ideasmith from the author in the way we do the songwriter and singer.

Look at the comic book industry. They have words for the various aspects of writing: "written by", "scripted by", and, most relevant to your concept of an ideasmith: "plotted by". In this case, another contributor is generally credited for the dialogue and/or scripting. Similar arrangements have happened in novels as well. The key is that both individuals are sharing credit for the authorship of the work and the nature of their contribution to it. The closest analogy to using an LLM would be employing a ghostwriter but an LLM is not a creative individual - it is, at best, just a data-analyzing tool that parrots the work of truly creative human beings.

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

Quoting: spymastermattI guess then the problem for me is that we don't yet have a view or word to separate the ideasmith from the author in the way we do the songwriter and singer.

There's ideator (not in all dictionaries, though), but as for a view... A song has writer(s), singer(s) and musician(s), it's easy to imagine that because these are "physically" separate things. A comic book has a writer, illustrator and sometimes a separate person who adds colours. But a book? A book is a monolith of text (okay, it can have illustrations, but let's not go into that for now). Even if it has two authors (like Good Omens), it's indiscernible who did which parts. Even if it went through correction, we can't tell which parts were changed. So it can only be viewed as a work of the author(s), there will never be a separate role of ideator in writing books (or any other form of art). If the ideator asked an LLM to write a book based on their ideas, there is no author. At all.

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

Just to point out again, that the evolved humans in Exodus are effectively aliens. They bear no relation in shape, size or indeed thought-processes to current humans. Many have genetically engineered themselves extensively both physically and mentally. Some are effectively immortal, by handing down their personalities and memories to their offspring.

They're definitely alien. It's just that they're, you know, actually highly evolved humans.

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

That was a wall of text, @Thomas_Bechtold, but a very pleasing one. My wife is a children's author and I think she'd agree with every word in that. I was at the Cymera Festival (a literary event for Scifi, Horror and Fantasy works) last weekend and heard Adrian Tchaikovsky speak on the subject of voice and constant iteration. So it resonates.

One of the audience questions was how does he keep himself to a word count, when editors are constantly asking for reduction. He was funny - he said he mostly didn't, that if he wanted something to stay, he simply embedded some piece of plot machination in there, so the editor couldn't argue that it should be removed! 😅

It was a great event. If you ever find yourself in Edinburgh in early June, look out for Cymera and come visit!

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

Quoting: spymastermattFor me an author is the person that came up with the idea for the story, plot, characters, arcs, scenes, and development. So if the person (A) is doing all of that and describing them in the best detail they can to someone (B) who writes the actual words (be they computer or human) then in my mind A is still the author.

Quoting: spymastermattI guess then the problem for me is that we don't yet have a view or word to separate the ideasmith from the author in the way we do the songwriter and singer.

It sounds as though you don't really understand the work of artistic creation. I don't mean that as an insult; many people don't know the work that goes into something like writing a piece of fiction. (It's also possible that you don't understand Generative AI technology, though I find that less likely given your participation in this conversation.)

Ideas are the easiest part. "Good" ideas are just ideas that have been executed well. Ideas for stories are so common that there is a saying about everyone having a book in them. If you ask a verbal toddler for a story idea, they'll have one. That's how easy ideas are.

In written fiction, every single word represents a choice - at least one - that the author is making in service of the overall piece. Often, a writer will try one choice only to discard it in a later revision. I sometimes write entire scenes only to discard them later on. That doesn't make them useless; I learn something about the story as I write and revise, even as I discard the majority of the written work. All of the choices, be they in a major scene or "the gaps between the scenes," are important for the way an author expresses their work and the way a reader encounters the story.

Writing in a style and tone that fits the author and the idea (plot, character, theme, etc.) and refining that combination over multiple revisions **is the work**, and it is through that process that the depth of character and theme are realized. Purple Library Guy mentioned an aspect of the process that I quite like: at times, things happen in a scene or in a piece of dialogue that the author did not expect when sitting down to write. When that happens, the author discovers something about the piece, about the character(s), and maybe (if they have some introspection) about themself. This will change the way the author approaches the next scene, for instance, and may change the way the author writes the entire piece in the next revision. This discovery (and self-discovery) is what comes from doing the work, and is part of what makes that work into art.

This may be why we don't have a standard word for a person who merely comes up with ideas (maybe "collaborator" is the best word, though really, people generally get no more than a hat tip in the acknowledgements section for solving major plot problems). Ideas are easy. Writing, for most people, is hard. It gets easier with practice, but even then it is a matter of wringing the best version of a thought from your brain and presenting it for your reader in the most meaningful way, and then doing it again and again and again. Then getting up the next day and doing it again and again and again, sometimes discarding everything you did the day before. This constant chipping away in service of the vision is the creation of art. That's the process.

Quoting: spymastermattFrom my perspective there's a big range between Wrote the book entirely myself -> Had the AI spell and grammer check -> Had the AI fix up some scenes to make them read better -> ... all the way through to "Told the AI to write a sci-fi book about an alien who lives on earth" (which I 100% agree removes any creative direction from the human)

There are shortcuts to the writing process, and often people feel differently about products that come via those shortcuts. We have the concept of ghostwriters, for instance, which is a bit like what you're describing in the first quotation way up above: Person A has an idea and Ghostwriter B writes it for them. This is generally a close collaboration between two people, with the ghostwriter often trying to capture as much of Person A's voice and emotion as they can. Person A usually gets listed as the author, but nobody would compliment Person A on their writing. They didn't write it. In literary circles, Person A would get zero cred for this kind of work and Ghostwriter B would typically only mention it insofar as saying they got paid to write something.

If someone uses another person's fully realized ideas (characters and world, for example), we call it fan fiction. Many people (perhaps most, fanfic communities aside) would consider that work "lesser than" the original, regardless of the quality of the fan fiction. In literary circles, fan fiction authors typically get no cred for this kind of work. Ideas are easy; use your own. At the same time, nobody considers J.R.R. Tolkien to be the author of any of the Legolas fan fiction (even though the characters and world are his); coming up with the ideas isn't enough on its own to make you the author of a piece of work.

To address your specifically mentioned shortcuts:

If someone were to use Gen-AI to spell-check their fiction, I would wonder why they needed AI to do it; we have spell-checkers that don't rely on Gen-AI (and thus don't fall afoul of the various compelling energy-use arguments against Gen-AI). Still, spell-check is a relatively minor change to writing that usually doesn't affect meaning; if someone wants all of their work to be spelled in a standard way, fine. I'd recommend being careful about dialogue and other parts of writing that are heavily affected by character voice.

If they were to use Gen-AI to do a grammar-check, I would start to feel uncomfortable. Grammarly, for instance, claims to correct one's grammar, but it actually re-writes text to conform to the average writing in its corpus. It does not take into account the emotional content or other intention behind a piece of writing. It does not understand that there are situations that call for an abnormal sentence structure or a sentence fragment. It can't hear the tone and rhythm of language and other factors that constitute an author's voice. If you're writing dialogue, it doesn't understand that people often speak in ways that are not grammatically correct. Gen-AI tools can be prompted to try to account for these weaknesses, but you're still going to get the average of whatever that model can generate according to your prompts rather than work that fits the specific emotion and meaning that you want. If someone were to use Gen-AI for a grammar-check, I would want them to go through and re-write the work afterward to correct the voice - at which point, I'm again forced to wonder why they chose to use Gen-AI. A human is far more likely to pick up the emotional content and voice (and understand the author's intent); just use a human editor and go through the process of writing, revising, and refining your work until you're comfortable with the grammar. Your writing will improve over time.

The next step in your spectrum is having Gen-AI "fix up some scenes to make them read better," which is begging the question (in the philosophical sense) of what Gen-AI can do. It can't write a section to improve someone's voice; it doesn't know an author's voice better than they do themself. If someone doesn't like their writing voice, they should work on it; Gen-AI can't do that for them, either. I guess I'm not entirely sure what is meant by "make [the scenes] read better," because Gen-AI simply can't do that. It can make things read *average*, or even the average of a specific prompted style, but neither of these things is "better" than what a writer can achieve by iterating on their work over time.

The most common conclusion of that saying about everyone having a book in them is something like "and that's where most of them should stay."* This is generally taken to mean that most people shouldn't try to write a book because writing well is hard work. I agree that writing well is hard work; I disagree with the idea that most people shouldn't attempt to do it. I think that the more people try to capture their thoughts and emotions in their own words, the more likely they are to appreciate the work of others who try to do so as well.

*This is often attributed to Christopher Hitchens, though I've never seen a record of his actually saying it.

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

Quoting: TriciaPearsonI really liked Mass Effect, even Andromeda (which is a somewhat hot take I know, it has flaws but still, a decent game nonetheless for me, regardless of what other people think or say).

I also liked Andromeda quite a bit.

Now, a 'silver lining' with respect to the absence of advanced alien species could be this, though:

Spoiler, click me

It might imply that the story won't revolve around YET ANOTHER variation on the 'ancient aliens' theme. Mass Effect leaned heavily on it; and together with its 'secret history/lost civilization' spin, I think this is a template that's *way* overused in popular media -- not to mention the self-styled renegade 'independent researcher' grifters marketing the same idea as though it were factual.

Asimov's universe also had no intelligent aliens, and he made it work very well.

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

They still need to fix the system requirements. When the store page went live, it said "25MB" for storage, now it's 25GB... but the OS still says "OS: Windows 10 54-bit" 😄

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

I really liked Mass Effect, even Andromeda (which is a somewhat hot take I know, it has flaws but still, a decent game nonetheless for me, regardless of what other people think or say). I usually always like the Bioware games, even the latest Veilguard one (which I'm sad they fired the DA team because it was EA's fault for rebooting the dev twice for forcing their own stupid greed - like wanting to make it onto a multiplayer like service - onto Bioware's dev team but anyway... let's go back on track)

I really look forward to this Exodus, especially knowing Drew Karpyshyn is writing this story, given that he wrote ME1 (my favourite ME) and ME2 (ME's favourite for a lot of fans) and that a few ex Bioware employees are working there too.

That being said, I would offer one concern, or not necessarily concern but like one big difference : from what we saw and from what I've searched on their official website, there's one BIG difference that the comparison to Mass Effect might make him suffer, I don't think it's a big spoiler because that's basically what we see / don't see in the trailers more or less, but I'll put it in a spoil quote nonetheless because I'll "spoil" 1 or 2 things of Mass Effect 1 / 2, not plot related or anything just universe-related :

Spoiler, click me

The crude lack of alien species. I think there's 2, maybe 3 alien species, depending on if you're counting the " Evolved Animals " as an alien species, while Mass Effect had dozens of alien species (not even counting animals like pyjacks, varrens, space cows, klixens, etc) : Asaris, Salarians, Turians, Batarians, Volus, Elcors, Hanaris, Drells, Krogans, Quarians, Vorchas. And Rachnis, if we want to go to the place of " evolved animals " like Exodus.

It's this immense diversity and feeling of a huge living galaxy with tons of lore about each species and conflict / peace / tensions that made me love Mass Effect, and I worry about the lack of other species, our characters and other human characters look like they're resembling John Shepard ME1 / Ashley / Kaidan / Jacob, like they feel so generic and annoying already, that's my worry, compared to characters fan favourites like Garrus, Tali, Liara, Wrex, Thane, Mordin to only quote those 6 aliens which all are a different species each.

At least we'll be able to customize our character and like get a woman because damn this main character lacks charisma.

Other than that I'm not in the least worried by the story. I also don't really have any expectations / try not to have ones, I just hope the game will deliver, and perhaps will launch a saga, same with Osiris, I'm craving for more Sci-Fi Space Opera Action RPGs like those two, and I hope it will bring back the craving and the vibe of doing more Sci-Fi Space Operas game which we desperately lack compared to how many horror / zombies / vampires / Medieval Fantasy games are releasing each year (which is good for people who like them nothing wrong with that, but damn I'm really starving for games talking to me like those Sci-fi Space operas games, each year at all the conferences and stuff).

Plus Bioware might not even be here anymore in a few months / years given that EA is like 20 billions in debt and the people buying them might just like close Bioware to spare some money and focus on the big games (since like even when at its highest, Bioware only amounted for around 5% MAXIMUM of one yearly EA's benefits, while costing dozens of millions of dollars so they might think it's better allocated elsewhere where it gives back way more benefits for them, so like I'm not optimistic for ME5) and want other licenses like this Exodus and The Expanse games to come out and be good games and be hits so that we can build more games around those. Also I've seen statements that there's going to be more serious Star Trek games in the future, so that's good too.

Sorry, big message, I just really like Space Opera RPGs lol. I'm pumped we'll get at least two games by Q1 / Q2 2027 (unless one or both are delayed).

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

Did a second Edit. Uff sorry for that wall of text, but arguments require some room.

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

Quoting: ArehandoroI'm afraid the game looks too similar to Mass Effect, and that could work against it.

Quoting: SupayYou may want to add that it is also a book series by Peter Hamilton. It's called EXODUS as well, with the first book being named The Archimedes Engine.

Are they good?

Hamilton's books are generally excellent, although this one felt slightly slower than I'd like. As usual, Hamilton has gone full epic-space-opera, with a wide cast of characters across a seriously extended timeline. So extended, in fact, that any "aliens" you see in this game are likely just evolved humans. Thanks, time-dilation!

The idea is that humanity spread from a dying earth, looking for new planets to settle in hundreds of arkships. Some settled early, but by the time they'd settled sufficiently to send the "found a good spot over here" signal, that signal then has to catchup to the other ships, and THEN, they have to turn around and start flying at near-lightspeed to the signal source. So when they arrive, civilisation has been going on for hundreds of thousands of years (time-dilation, remember?), and humans are now "celestials" and are extremely prejudiced to all these "normal" humans showing up in ancient arkships over thousands of years. So it's a feudal system where humans are serfs to their celestial masters.

Second book comes out next week, I believe - June 18th.

Edit to add: holy shitballs, don't look at the Steam forums for this game. Basically a bunch of incels demanding better looking men/women to shag in-game, or complaining about "woke" choices, like being to choose to be male or female in the opening screen. JFC. Where do these clowns come from??

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

This just looks like a glorified patch for COH 1 that they're making you pay for. Come on Relic, there was a time when you made great games...

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

Quoting: pbYeah, the AI is incapable of replacing artists, but it's capable of chewing up all the artists' works and spitting out something more or less acceptable by an executive. So yeah, it won't replace artists but it will be used (by CEOs) as a replacement for a junior illustrator, who with some work, persistence and money (to support day-to-day living) might have grown to be an artist, something that will now be a bit harder...

Personally, I think the only thing AI has any use for is for brainstorming ideas, and maybe creating textures that would've been easy to generate procedurally anyway. They won't be replacing talented junior artists. If you're the team lead for a project, and your standard is to churn out a product that's only just "more or less acceptable", your audience is going to notice, and you'll pay for it in the end in a way that you didn't intend to. They don't call it "AI slop" for no reason.

Quoting: spymastermattI saw a fantastic sculpture in Birmingham UK made out of knives from an amnesty. It must have taken hours to put together, but that's not what made it impressive. It was good art (to me) because of what it represented.

I'm only just touching on the surface when I talk about appreciating the time and effort it takes to produce something worth looking at. Like you've mentioned here, part of what gives a piece of art meaning is what its creator meant to represent. An artist doesn't necessarily have to have the technical skill to create something that's very moving and unique - it just has to have passion. Cavemen painted on walls 1000s of years ago to communicate how his day to day life made him feel, and maybe as a record of history that he wants echoed through time. Beethoven composed Fur Elise to express how he felt about a woman that he loved. Michaelangelo sculpted the Pieta to show his interpretation of what a mother must feel to have her son die in her arms. Machines can't imbue art with any meaning, and at the end of the day, that's really what it's about.

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

Quoting: spymastermatt

Quoting: tuubiIgnoring any and all other concerns: As long as they don't then imagine that they've actually written a story, and try to claim copyright to the result, I guess it would be fine? I'm sure it feels rewarding for them to get that story out. They haven't become an author, more like an amateur editor, but still, good for them.

I guess this is where we differ. For me an author is the person that came up with the idea for the story, plot, characters, arcs, scenes, and development. So if the person (A) is doing all of that and describing them in the best detail they can to someone (B) who writes the actual words (be they computer or human) then in my mind A is still the author.

I don't think you can find a dictionary definition of "author"—at least in the literary context—that doesn't explicitly refer to the act of writing. Consider writers of non-fiction: They don't come up with stories, plots, characters, arcs etc. but they are authors. They might employ researchers to collect information to base their work on, and they might not even come up with the original idea, but the author is still the one actually writing the "story".

Ghostwriters exist, but they explicitly give up their rights to their work in exchange for money. Doesn't make the one paying for their work an author, in my opinion, even if legally they are just that. For example, I don't believe the current president of the United States ever authored a single book, but he sure has his name on the covers of several. Still more ethical than producing the books using an LLM, in my opinion. At least the original writer gets paid.

Quoting: spymastermatt

Quoting: tuubiI think the situation would be different if they'd actually written the whole story to the best of their ability, and used these tools to give them suggestions on how to make it better. A lot more effort, but there's a reason even established authors work for months, sometimes years, to write a novel, even with getting help and feedback from professional editors and readers. Most of us haven't got the talent or the patience for that, but that doesn't make it okay to just outsource the bulk of the effort.

That's a fair point and I guess then it comes down to how much of each. My friend (who is not actually considering using AI at this moment I should point out) has written several scenes of the book himself. If he uses an AI to help fill in the gaps between the scenes, is there a moment for you when it becomes not his work, or is it simply if he uses the AI at all? Genuinely interested in your opinion here, I appreciate from your later comment that my tone has not reflected that.

Seems simple enough: The parts he wrote himself are his, while the bits in the gaps are not. (Of course you didn't mean it so literally, but you know what I mean.)

Quoting: spymastermatt

Quoting: spymastermattI guess my analogy in this case would be is the songwriter who writes clever lyrics, less of a songwriter because they can't sing it themselves? Should we scorn them for using a singer instead of just singing it themselves like a real artist

Quoting: tuubiThe analogy doesn't work. Why wouldn't they be called a songwriter after writing a song? They'll get their share of the royalties. They just can't be called a singer. Just like your friend isn't an author after prompting and editing a book.

I guess then the problem for me is that we don't yet have a view or word to separate the ideasmith from the author in the way we do the songwriter and singer.

Sure. If you think the title matters. Although I'm quite sure I've read a ton of books where the author thanks other people for giving them the idea for or helping them develop the story.

All I'm saying is that your friend is literally (pun not intended) not the author of any text he didn't write. Of course, I'm not sure that matters, unless he wants to make money off of the result. I don't think he should be able to sell a story he didn't write and claim to be the author, but maybe that's just me.

Quoting: spymastermatt

Quoting: spymastermattAgain, we've taken the idea that AI can make a book given a one sentence prompt and blanket swept that that must therefore be the only way people use it

Quoting: tuubiNo, what you've done is ascribe a lack of understanding to people with valid criticisms of the technology and how it is being used in the real world. Sure, some people react with their gut, but critics do include a lot of people who are actually in the know, but crucially not invested.

I apologise that this is how I have come across, I was intending to question what feels like gut reactions but I appreciate that has come across as assuming people don't understand.
I was trying to separate PurpleLibraryGuy's suggestion of

Quoting: Purple Library Guyif someone tells a large language model "Write me a book about this" and thinks it's theirs because they had an idea (which apparently does happen) . . . that's incredibly stupid.

from the idea of people using AI to fill in gaps rather than write the whole story. From my perspective there's a big range between Wrote the book entirely myself -> Had the AI spell and grammer check -> Had the AI fix up some scenes to make them read better -> ... all the way through to "Told the AI to write a sci-fi book about an alien who lives on earth" (which I 100% agree removes any creative direction from the human)

And yes, a lot of the reactions to every announcement of AI use in any form feel to me like
"100% AI = bad, therefore 1% AI = bad"

Incidentally, you might find a "creative director" in the credits of a game. They direct the developers and artists to achieve a coherent vision, but do not get to claim credit for their efforts.

I'm not sure if you'd consider this anecdote a good illustration of my point, but I'll tell it anyway: Years ago, I commissioned a skilled carpenter to make a piece of furniture according to my specifications. I designed the thing, I made nice schematics and drawings, with precise measurements and details for how I want the parts cut and joined and everything, but they're still the one who actually made it in the end. I don't mind that I don't get to call myself a carpenter now. Not that I would call myself a furniture designer either, at least with a straight face, but that's beside the point.

All that said, I fully understand and empathise with your viewpoint and that of your friend. The world is full of very creative people with their heads full of great ideas, but most of them are not able—for one reason or another—to make anything of them. I've always been an avid reader and gamer myself, and I've obviously come up with (and sometimes even written down in detail) my share of story and game ideas that'll never see the light of day. I suppose that's a shame. Assuming those ideas were ever any good. 😅

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

Anyone interested in a Thief-inspired modernization should definitely check out The Dark Mod https://www.thedarkmod.com/
Free and open source for Windows, Linux.

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

Quoting: spymastermattSaying that a studio shouldn't use GenAI at all feels a bit to me like saying I won't buy furniture if the carpenter used a power saw

A power saw does not destroy the planet in the same capacity in a very critical time span (right now we have to solve the climate issue, every year later it may becomes the year too late to stop the dipping point chain - aka point of no return) and forces people to pay 5 times higher power bills and stealing all goods of the world without paying anything in return. There are even leaked chats of NVidia where they agreed using millions of pirated books.

All of you defenders are never ever speaking about the negative consequences beyond "a tool can be used for good and bad". And even this argument is very weak. People can also do bad things with a power saw and kill people with it like in many video games. But in reality it does more good than harm and I already know more people who died due neuronal networks (further as NN) (autonomous cars killing people) than chainsaws. LLMs are destroying much more right now than they produce benefits.

I'm tired of all these excuses and I am not even a NN hater. I would use NNs in my own game, if there is a real benefit. Prototyping or programming or generating textures/models would not be part of it. Prototyping is actually one of the most fun and creative works and bring a lot of new ideas and inspirations, I would not want to lose that process in favor of more time. That way I may would have a feature more, but all features would probably more boring. On the other hand "guessing" physic could become a huge advantage over calculating physics for using hardware more efficient and creating better visuals. These models are also much more ethical and the opposite of slop. I just wonder why all the corps oversee these possibilities.

In such a case I would explain in detail where and why I would use is. Not just to get trust back, but especially to show "it is the right way to use this as actual tool, not as sloppyfier". It is also about transparency and respect of my games community. Sadly I have not to knowledge and capacity to program these tools this way, I am more designer than programmer. And no, I don't fear NN can replace me, because it cannot do things on the cutting edge.

Edit:

Quoting: spymastermattFrom my perspective it also enables the opposite, people with good ideas for games, but without the skills / time / money to make art for it can now make their game.

People who lack skills to make a game also lack skills to do it with LLMs. I lacked skills myself a decade ago, but the engine developers deliver tools that everyone can learn to make games these days. You lack skills creating textures? Just use one of the thousands of CC0 licensed assets, you don't even need to pay money or generate them. There are experts telling you for free how to create shaders in a professional way which enables you to make the free textures look like something completely different. You still need a lot of time, even with LLMs, if it should not just become the next slop everyone hates, even if it would be handmade. And money? If you lack money you can forget to create a good game with LLMs. They will definitely eat all your financial resources, because the cheap models are not capable enough for a complex 3D world. Yes you can get a bad Super Mario 2D clone, but not a complex 3D RPG.

Edit 2:
Okay there are such heavy issues in your arguments that I just need to speak about all the heavy ones.

The other thing that attracts a lot of scorn is people using it to create art "instead of employing an artist" but often times that's a false dichotomy. The choice is not AI art or human art, it's AI art or no art. The art in this context is simply not worth enough to warrant the cost of a human artist.

I was thinking this at first, too. But the reality shows that money counts more than anything and it replaces even work where artists are worse the art, but not the money. And even worse: those who actually do great art and employ people instead of LLM, spam the market with so much slop, that it becomes really really hard for human artists to survive, because they have to get found in all the spam. It was even a problem with human artists only. Now its twice as bad and it becomes worse in next years.

It even begins on creating your own webpage. LLM-generated webpages are optimized for search algorithms of Google and the others. Human made pages are not, even if they do at least some adjustments (as replacing a picture that Google does not like). People who hate LLMs already start to slopify their homepages, just to get back into the Google charts. Otherwise they would lose their entire business. Luis Rossmann was speaking about it and I know people in private how they lost their businesses after not being listed in top 10 any longer.

But I'm not entirely sure that the way AI has looked at art and uses it to generate more is all that different from the popularity of anime-style games.

It just doesn't matter how it is generated. The issue is the stealing in first place. They even steal from free software and knowledge projects. Free licenses do not mean they are allowed to use it the way they do. Let's speak about Creative Commons licenses.
CC0 -> Can be used for training without restrictions.
CC-BY -> There have to be a list of authors or sources next to the model which contains all original authors of the work which is used and training would be okay. To my knowledge not a single company of the big models is doing so. A violation of licenses.
CC-BY-SA -> This license forces everything trained and generated by NN to publish it with CC-BY-SA again. You know the reality, license is violated (including the issue from CC-BY).
CC-BY-ND -> No free license, but close. Even with this you can train your model, but you are not allowed to make money with it. Even advertising beside the product is forbidden. Big Tech would never use this license if they want to make money in a legal way. Yet this kind of licensed arts are abused and part of the big models.

Most companies do not care what data they are using. They just take everything they can get. They even know it is stealing as the example with NVidia shows. And at the end US laws seem to make everything "non copyright able", which leads to even further violation of licenses like CC-BY-SA or GPL code. And both are made to protect the art/software staying free for ever and to not getting prioritized.

they're using 150 watts

No, they own a PC that can run 150W or more. My PC is a gaming/workstation PC with 350W graphics card, but idling the graphics card eats 5-10W, 15W with some activity. Same with CPU, eating 3-5W idling. Depending on parameters a generator is using the full 300W power of the graphics card (don't want it to waste much power for little gain) for a very long time.

But even if it becomes more efficient. A human has only a limited amount of capacity. As often in tech, there is a paradoxon where more efficiency leads to more energy consumption. And NN can not just shrink the time of generating a picture from hours to seconds, so you probably generate 100 images in the same time someone draws a picture on PC and the 100 images require strong PCs (you don't want to lose too much quality compared to a real artist, so you are taking a better model) which runs on 100% usage when generating. The artist on the other hand draws the image most of the time with idling CPU, except the rendering tasks where a filter becomes applied etc.
Oh I told about 100 images? Why not 1000? The work is easily parallelize-able and can be automated. You even can use a NN to generate 1000 images and another LLM to filter the images to only get the 20 probably most useful where you can chose the one you need. Just showing where it could go if we follow the way big tech wants to lead us. NVidia is speaking about producing computers for LLMs and money, not for humans. So the goal is clear: make as much money as possible and let LLMs do jobs for the sake of doing something to generate endless growth of money. There is not even a real benefit behind this vision other than money.

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

Quoting: neolithNot only do long for some new experiences every once in a while, but I also think that many of them are just nostalgia bait.

"Because it's old, it's good!" "Because it's new, it's better!" Classic dilemma exploited for profit by marketroids since prehistoric times.

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

Quoting: NezchanI'll probably never be good enough to see most of the biomes, if we're being honest, but real cool they're finally completing all the lands.

Valheim got nifty settings for decreasing the difficulty. No raids, peaceful enemies. Etc

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

between this awesome looking game and the Expanse Osiris game, 2027 is looking pretty amazing for old school ME fans!

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

Quoting: Dmitri SeletskiIt better not be WOKE.(becuase if it is - I am offended that I am not given an opportunity to be a choo-choo train and have romance with a dolphin)
I want to be insulted I want my morals to be questioned. I want adult entertainment. Not visual novel with "lived happily ever after" with extra pew pew steps.
Otherwise, it does look interesting, but interface does look blend.

don't bring this garbage around here please.

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

I'm hyped for this 🤓

My AC7 gadgetry is on another level though.

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

Quoting: Dmitri SeletskiIt better not be WOKE.

Quoting: Dmitri SeletskiI want my morals to be questioned. I want adult entertainment.

Sure...

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

It better not be WOKE.(becuase if it is - I am offended that I am not given an opportunity to be a choo-choo train and have romance with a dolphin)
I want to be insulted I want my morals to be questioned. I want adult entertainment. Not visual novel with "lived happily ever after" with extra pew pew steps.
Otherwise, it does look interesting, but interface does look blend.

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

I'm afraid the game looks too similar to Mass Effect, and that could work against it.

Quoting: SupayYou may want to add that it is also a book series by Peter Hamilton. It's called EXODUS as well, with the first book being named The Archimedes Engine.

Are they good?

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

Relic needs revenue. Rather desperately, looking at the botched Dawn of War upscale job they then spent significant time fixing. Time that should've gone into fixing actual bugs.

Speaking of, I bought that remaster hoping for some ancient (20+ years) bugs to finally get fixed. They weren't, none of them. I submitted a report for one that is very noticeable, obvious and in the game for 20+ years only to learn it is, in fact, known, and that a fix is coming. Almost a year (and 2 decades) later still in the game. I'm not playing the game because of it.

So no, no more trust for Relic from me. DoW was a careless effort to re-release the same game for attention, in the guise of a remaster. Not falling for this again.

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

"Mass Effect spiritual successor" is quite a mantle to wear. I hope it will work out

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

I was told the first Thief was the best one so I definitely want to try this.

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

This looks hella fun.

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

GODZILLA!!!!!

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment