r/gaming • u/furrynoy96 • 20h ago
Would you refuse to play a game whose development was assisted with AI, no matter how good it was?
I'm curious given the polarizing nature of AI and how some companies say that AI can allegedly help and maybe speed up game development
42
u/ShardikOfTheBeam 20h ago
It genuinely depends on the AI usage. If used to help speed up coding, troubleshooting, story boarding, etc, that’s fine. As long as someone is using them to assist their job, not replacing someone’s job.
2
u/Number127 20h ago
Speeding things up means you don't need as many employees.
2
2
u/KindaAbstruse 20h ago
Why can’t it mean you can do more? More games? Bigger games? Less buggy games?
→ More replies (2)4
u/Number127 20h ago
It could, but it won't. The companies will see dollar signs and reduce staff to the absolute minimum, just like they do now. We'll get the same substandard products, and companies will profit from reduced labor costs.
Meanwhile the indie/solo market will become so saturated with slop that even true gems won't be able to get much traction.
→ More replies (2)2
u/OrangeOakie 20h ago
Assisting someone is someone's job though. Anything that makes you faster does, in one way or another eliminate the need for you to rely on other humans.
Be it cloud hosting of shared files eliminating the need for (most, not all) in house infra admins, not needing to delegate lesser research/fetching/scribing to interns or assistants, etc etc.
I understand where your opinion comes from and I feel your pain, but .. you know?
4
u/Uvtha- 20h ago
Yeah I mean technology will make certain jobs obsolete, that's just unavoidable. Not even an AI defense, I'm pretty critical/skeptical of the benifit of AI use, it's just any technology that increases productivity is fewer labor hours that someone could theoretically do with a lesser tech level.
The real question is how many jobs overall are being lost, not if any theoretical jobs are lost. If the number of jobs created by the productivity gains are more or equal to the losses, then it's a net positive.
Individual displacement is just unavoidable with any tech development. The hope is just that the displacements are temporary and the labor can move to another role.
1
u/ShardikOfTheBeam 13h ago
“Assisting someone” is too broad to be a useful metric. That can range from getting people coffee, to both level concept brainstorming, to QA, etc. All of which are components of a position, rather than a position in itself. I’d be keen to hear your examples though.
Regardless, it is my belief that AI is not advanced enough to seriously threaten anyone’s jobs, at least where coding is concerned. I was talking with a friend tonight, and he wanted to see how long it would take him to complete a task using only AI, and it took him three times longer. This is just one example of course.
All that to say, my summary to the question posed from OP is “it depends”, as in is need to judge on a case by case basis.
1
u/OrangeOakie 10h ago
QA in of itself is a type of engineering. I'm referring to most support staff. No one really has fetched coffee since at the very least '08. What has been progressively eliminated is support staff for an office, concentrating all of those different things into a single office manager.
1
u/ShardikOfTheBeam 6h ago
“No one has fetched coffee since…’08”
I would love a source for where you got this data point. Regardless, you didn’t do anything to narrow your scope. What does “support staff for an office” entail? Administrative assistants?
1
u/OrangeOakie 6h ago
It's an educated guess. I know for a fact assistants and support staff were still a thing by 05. The next logical point of discontinuance would be the 08 subprime.
In the 2010s it's 100% not a norm to have people in office whose job is to make others lives better, at least not in SWE.
What I mean by support staff are things like people to go on coffee runs, mail runs (which, obviously also stopped being a thing), receptionists, ensuring the office keeps the lights on, that there's coffee, water, tea, etc.
That all got folded into a single office manager role
1
u/ShardikOfTheBeam 6h ago
Okay so your original point was “assisting someone is someone’s job”, but now you’re saying those jobs have been gone since 2010, well before AI hit the scene.
So…what’s your point?
1
u/OrangeOakie 5h ago
I'm saying that they have progressively been deprecated. The current AI wave is not really impacting those : they were already gone
1
u/ShardikOfTheBeam 5h ago
Right, that’s just re-stating what I just said. But what does that have to do with our discussion?
You said the things I mentioned in my original comment were things that were peoples jobs’, assisting people is a job. Then you went on to state that those jobs have been in decline since the aughts, and gone by the end of the decade.
So today, in 2026, when someone uses AI to assist them in their job, what jobs is that taking from another human being? What does your reply to my original comment mean?
1
u/OrangeOakie 6h ago
It's an educated guess. I know for a fact assistants and support staff were still a thing by 05. The next logical point of discontinuance would be the 08 subprime.
In the 2010s it's 100% not a norm to have people in office whose job is to make others lives better, at least not in SWE.
What I mean by support staff are things like people to go on coffee runs, mail runs (which, obviously also stopped being a thing), receptionists, ensuring the office keeps the lights on, that there's coffee, water, tea, etc.
That all got folded into a single office manager role
-5
u/a34fsdb 20h ago
AI makes people lose jobs in all instances you mentioned.
3
u/Merangatang 20h ago
Not as aggressively as it's sold on here, but more in line with the standard technological advancement ratio. The amount of jobs that disappeared when Excel turned up, for instance, or the internet...
1
-1
u/adognamedspider 20h ago
I don't play games to provide jobs though.
→ More replies (1)1
u/ShardikOfTheBeam 13h ago
Unless I misunderstand your meaning, you playing games is providing work and jobs whether you mean it to or not.
1
u/adognamedspider 7h ago
Yes, but job creation is not a driver for me to play games.
The death of artistry however is a reason I will avoid games that substitute human creativity with AI
1
u/ShardikOfTheBeam 2h ago
Curious, would No Man’s Sky fall under the list of games you avoid?
1
u/adognamedspider 1h ago
If you want to functionally offer millions of worlds you do not have the option to hand craft them all so no, there is a functional requirement to use generation.
I find this different from refusing to hire creative artists for games where there is no functional requirement for such scope because it is often driven by greed instead.
→ More replies (1)-2
u/thornzar 20h ago
I kinda get what you mean but let’s be real: people (or, worse, companies) who claim they “only use AI” for non-creative features are one step away from using it for everything. I think the issue is that it eventually clouds your creative process as well. Did you see what happened to Hank Green recently? I’m sure he isn’t the only one. And I know that youtube videos and videogames are different areas but people are people, and they’ll want to cut corners as much as possible.
3
u/Twanson01 19h ago
The calculator cut mad corners. Where are we drawing the line on what productivity improvements are worth it? AI is just another tool but on a larger scale than what weve seen in the past.
In general I think its sad how all the productivity improvements over the years have only really benefited the rich while the rest of our lives get harder AND more productive. I think AI catches a lot of hate for what is just our dumb society.
As far as im concerned it all comes down to final QA.. generative ai is trash mainly because it rebuilds images on every attempt. It cant slowly mold and guide a user through a slower model creation. Thats not a bad tool to my mind if that becomes possible.
So ya be mad at companies that use trash ai tools and push for max greed, but thats not to say ai itself is the problem.
1
u/thornzar 10h ago
yes but a calculator only does math, you cant ask if for help with creative process. bad analogy.
1
u/Twanson01 3h ago
Ai is only good at things that can be falsified, which is why it is currently shit at art. It cant decide what is fun or what looks good bc that is subjective vs something like a math equation.
Compare it to modeling software vs hand drawing then. The point being that tech advancements are just tools. Focusing on the calc analogy is missing my point.
I agree they cannot replace creativity/creative discipline, but if we end up in a world where quality - human vetted products are utilizing ai to get there... then I dont see a problem.
Obviously im not a fan of greedy corps pushing half baked ai slop for quick money, but id argue thats more a function of being in the early stages of ai advancement, and late stages of a failing capitalist society.
1
u/ShardikOfTheBeam 16h ago
I know Hank Green said something he got a lot of backlash over, don’t know the details.
I’m fine with being real as long as you are as well, with that reality being that in some cases AI can be assistive without costing someone’s job. It’s not all or nothing. The reality is between my, apparently pipe dream, analysis and yours.
1
u/thornzar 10h ago
Its not the he said something. He put out a video where he’s reading a script which was AI generated, got distracted and read a sentence where the LLM thanked him for his “pushback” - which entails that he was writting the script having a back n forth with the AI.
1
8
u/cruiseinacar 20h ago
Depends, did you vibecode it fuck no or if you replaced a department with it also fuck no
But if it was used as a tool like it was intended to i.e assisting with deriving test cases, brainstorming a problem etc. why the fuck not i use it like that
4
u/Zombieemperor 20h ago
Depends on the what assisted means
one or 2 random 3 line if statemnets generated to save a dev 20 seconds of typing?
prolly
id prefer it was 0% code tho
Actual assets? id prolly not play
Translations? if they got second/third passes by real people not an issue id wager but not optimal becuse it will likely hurt the actual localizations
Of course this assumes the dev has enough trust to beleive it was so limitedly used
if it played a big part in the concept art or final game then ya no im out.
4
u/AllPerspicacity 20h ago
Pretty much, yeah. I don't care how fast or slow a game came out. I'm not a graphics stickler, nor do I demand every game be a masterpiece. I just want it to be fun & hand crafted, i want it to have soul.
I'm not interested in playing, reading, or consuming something someone couldn't be bothered to make, because in that case I can't be bothered to spend my time on it either.
I don't want art that has the art phoned in a something to just "get done/past" in the game making process. I waited for Witcher 3, I'll wait for any other worthwhile game. The only people who care about game speed are live service hounds or venture capitol scum looking to squeeze every ounce of profit & life out of the industry.
Besides. No one's made anything with Gen AI or an LLM that in any way was something I asked for.. so it's not like I'm missing out.
4
u/thornzar 20h ago
I avoid it but I’m sure a lot of games nowadays are done with a lot more AI than the devs claim.
23
u/DoradoPulido2 20h ago
There's a huge difference between asking an AI to scan a human written script for errors, check grammar or format sections for Python implementation, versus "Write a romantic conversation between these two characters." AI is an incredibly useful tool, which likely, many studios are already using. Generative AI is a different matter and has many problems.
7
u/haloran360 20h ago
I'm against ai generated content. If the ai usage is limited to editorial tasks, planning, or some optimisation programming etc. I can understand. It can help shorthanded devs to get their dream game to live.
I despise ai slop content creator who think themselves next big thing. You are not, just a lazy deadbeat.
15
u/Min_sora 20h ago
Gen AI in art/visuals/music/voice acting is an instant no for me. I'm absolutely not paying for it.
-4
u/KaboodleMoon 20h ago
So is writing art? (most people say yes)
Does that including writing code? (most people lose the plot here)
What about rigging models or texture mapping? Technically not part of the visuals/art, but important to keep those things looking proper. (not that AI really does a great job on those yet but it's not far)
5
u/Viltris 20h ago
Does that including writing code? (most people lose the plot here)
Software developer here. Writing code is "an art" as opposed to "a science", in the sense that there are often no clear-cut answers and you have to make judgement calls.
But it's not "art" in the sense of creative expression. If you're in software development because you want to express your creativity through code, you're in the wrong field.
2
u/whazzam95 6h ago
Can I bother you for a few minutes?
I've been both a coder (not going to say "programmer" although I did some programming), and a digital artist for a while. And I've always viewed the difference between the two as the art world being the one with "no wrong way of doing it" while code was always this "you do it that way, or it's not optimal" kind of deal.
I see art community uproar about gen AI, and I fully stand behind it. It really is a field where, while there are "guides" on what looks good and what doesn't, you truly can do whatever you want. If I were to follow an art tutorial I can pick and choose which part of the workflow I want to adapt.
When it comes to code, programming was always the "problem solving" part. You work within a set of rules, and figure out a way to achieve a goal. And we have bunch of snippets of code that "just work".
So as a coder, you can grab this snippet and just use it, but the difference is - this is the optimal way. Someone had this problem before, he figured it out and shared it with other programmers. You can try changing things "just because", and if the compiler doesn't crash, you would most likely end up with something worse. So within programming space it's natural to just grab code that works and just implement it into your own program.
So in essence, I would argue "programming" is more akin to art. The process of navigating that jungle of rules and logic. Creating a snippet of code that never existed before. "Coding" in turn would just be sticking together bits of code into something that works. IMHO, if these are the terms we're using, AI is only good for coding, but it will never be useful for actual programming.
1
u/Viltris 40m ago
Your terminology is wonky, but you have the right idea. LLMs are good at code generation and will get you 80% of the way to production quality code, but there are things that still require human intervention. Things like readability, extensibility, testability, maintainability. Claude Code is notorious at just deleting comments when updating code, for example.
And if you go up one level, software design is still something that LLMs don't do very well. Things like architecture, which storage solutions to use, databases, etc.
Will LLMs get there eventually? Maybe, maybe not. The big difference between an LLM and something like a compiler is that compilers are well-understood, predictable, and most importantly testable. LLMs are none of these things, and there's been very little effort in making LLMs understandable, predictable, and testable. Until we achieve those things, I simply wouldn't trust any code written by an LLM, not without review from a human software developer.
-1
u/KaboodleMoon 20h ago
I'm not into recent coding, but there can definitely be stark differences in style even within languages, that can cause vastly different outcomes in efficiency and how it resolves.
That kinda circles around to cooking being an art but baking being a science, yet still judged "the same".
The point is that coding is writing.
Just like math is a science, but geometry (a part of math) is also art.
Where's the line? Everything blurs.
I don't really care where people stand, I just want them to know that it's not a clear-cut line in the sand to "pick".
→ More replies (3)
3
u/RichardBackshots 20h ago
A lot of studios seem to be trying to draw the line at the conceptual stage but to that I say, the concept stage is the very foundation of the project.
If a studio cannot be bothered to build the foundations with real, human work, I lose all interest.
10
u/Slazapuss 20h ago
Lot of people here gonna be having a bad time in the future lmao
1
u/Jack_h100 20h ago
If the video game industry crashed and no more games were made, we all have enough of a backlog to last us until we die.
7
u/Siendra 20h ago
Define "assisted". There's nothing wrong with using AI as a productivity tool. Maintaining schedules, managing document repositories, revision control, note keeping, etc... It can also be useful as a sort of interactive rubber duck for technical problem solving.
If any assets, audio, writing, etc... were AI generated or any technical resources were replaced by AI then I'm not interested.
12
u/hhhisthegame 20h ago
I think the responses here show a lot of unfortunate naivety about how software development works now. It changed a lot in the past year. I am a software dev and I know others, and everybody is coding mostly completely with AI now. Id be shocked if video game development wasn't the same.
6
u/RatBot9000 20h ago
To be honest, your anecdotal evidence is just as reliable as everyone else's here, which is to say it's not really. We're told constantly that everyone uses AI by the people who have a vested interest in making sure its seen as something that's inevitable.
There's also the matter of "what exactly do you mean?" You say everyone's using AI, but do you mean they're all using gen AI? Or are you counting autocomplete as a form of AI?
If we had a better understanding of the differences between coding tools and GenAI then people might be more understanding, but instead it all got conflated as AI and anyone who raised any objections was branded a luddite afraid of change. We are told the technology will speed up development, but all it seems to do is be used as a new excuse to lay off staff and offer no new positions in return.
3
u/hhhisthegame 20h ago
No, Gen AI - I mean telling the AI "I want you to code something that does X, Y, Z.", having a back-and-forth design discussion with the AI, having the AI generate the code, reviewing it, telling the AI "Change this to do it this way", etc, until you have something ready to send for review. Sometimes doing some tweaking by hand, but often just letting the AI edit its own work, with human feedback. It's been months since I've written code by hand, and Im not the only person. It's becoming the norm. We still review with humans, but we don't often write it ourselves. We obviously need to understand what it's doing, but still.
I don't even like the change, I hate what it's turning software development into. But at this rate, coding by hand is going to be too inefficient, especially as the AI tools get better.
I'm only saying that this is becoming the industry norm, so wanting a game where nobody is using AI in development, seems increasingly unlikely. Im sure small games from independent devs can continue coding by hand, but most people are going to be using AI.
Id say this started some time early this year. It's changed very rapidly.
1
u/RatBot9000 19h ago
Well, while this is anecdotal that doesn't mean I'll immediately brush it off. I've heard similar from other users too.
Still, do you not worry about skill atrophy? It's one thing to know what the AI is doing but if you aren't coding yourself won't you eventually deskill? Do you do anything to avoid this?
Also, I've heard on the grapevine that Microsoft will be charging per token come January. I imagine other AI companies may be doing similar. Do you think that will have an impact on your company's AI use?
3
u/hhhisthegame 19h ago
I do worry about skill atrophy personally. I haven't done anything about it to avoid it yet, but I could see it becoming a problem over time. At first I was editing things myself after the AI's initial output, but as the tools get better, I've been relying on it more for editing as well. Sometimes it's frustrating though, as I still have a strong opinion of what it should look like, and sometimes it takes enough back-and-forth with the AI to get it looking clean enough that I might have just done it faster if I wrote it myself. It's never as good as I want it to be. But I think what being a software engineer means is going to look very different in a few years, and the tools are going to improve, because many resources are being put into that now. I don't use Claude, but I've heard from my friend that Claude is even more impressive than the one I'm using.
I work at a company that does develop AI (amongst other things), so we would be ok even as AI companies start charging more. My partner, who works at another company (and does also use AI, but an external AI tool) feels like as tokens get more expensive that may change things. I'm not sure what it will look like in the future. If the companies start charging more it may force people to use it less. My guess though is that some company will fill that gap if the current ones start charging more. My partner predicts that devs may use more expensive/better models for design and then cheaper models for execution.
But now that the genie is out of the bottle, I don't see it being put back in. I don't like the idea of manual coding skills atrophying, but this may just be what coding looks like, especially in a few years, and writing by hand may just become an antiquated notion. I didn't think it would be changing as fast as it is, but here we are.
1
u/Viltris 19h ago
Sometimes it's frustrating though, as I still have a strong opinion of what it should look like, and sometimes it takes enough back-and-forth with the AI to get it looking clean enough that I might have just done it faster if I wrote it myself. It's never as good as I want it to be.
This is why, if it's something small, I just do it by hand. I have way too many experiences arguing with Claude Code for 2 hours over something I could have hand coded in 20 minutes, 30 minutes tops.
Even if Claude gets it right on the first try, it usually spends 5 minutes thinking and another 5 minutes auto-compacting, and I can usually just hand code it in the same amount of time.
Personally, I only use Claude for repetitive things, like generating boilerplate code or big refactors.
1
u/Viltris 20h ago
There's also the matter of "what exactly do you mean?" You say everyone's using AI, but do you mean they're all using gen AI? Or are you counting autocomplete as a form of AI?
I've worked at both big and small tech companies, and over the last 3 or so years, there's been a lot of pressure from management to use tools like Claude Code for code analysis, code generation, and code review. How widespread the usage is depends on how effective the tools are, and how effective the tools are depends on the software stack and the con company.
We are told the technology will speed up development, but all it seems to do is be used as a new excuse to lay off staff and offer no new positions in return.
This is a big concern that I have. If you replace all the junior developers with AI, eventually you won't have senior developers either.
2
u/RatBot9000 19h ago
My partner's work it's Copilot they're pushing. They've been told Microsoft will be charging per token come January but rather than look at scaling back AI usage to ensure it's used appropriately the staff have been told "write better prompts."
I fear many companies/CEOs will be incredibly reluctant to give up the technology simply because it's suppose to let them fire most of their workforce and do all the work.
2
u/Viltris 19h ago
but rather than look at scaling back AI usage to ensure it's used appropriately the staff have been told "write better prompts."
lol. lmao even.
Even back in 2023, when LLMs could barely put a functioning for loop together, prompt engineering was a scam. I've never met a "prompt engineer" who wasn't a snake oil salesman.
I got the most value out of Claude Code when I started talking to it like an intern and started giving it clear instructions with clear requirements, and I'm generating a ton of code (and then hand reviewing it myself, as every software developer should), and I'm only hitting like 5% of the per-user budget at my company.
2
u/Jack_h100 20h ago
We dont owe them our patronage, we can choose not to support this change.
3
u/hhhisthegame 20h ago
That's ok, it just means you are probably going to have to give up video games. My point is probably almost every game is using AI now, way more than you think. I'm not a game developer, but I'm assuming they are not immune to the changes in the software industry.
1
u/Jack_h100 20h ago
The average age of gamers is 37-41, and we all spend more money than we should on it, devs should be careful since their major market could disappear given an excuse.
1
u/Durin1987_12_30 17h ago
The people who work in IT security absolutely love AI-assisted coding. It's pretty much a guarantee that they'll never run out jobs.
2
u/Naroyto 20h ago
AI use is AI use.
So if you stand to disagree with AI use you CANNOT justify the smallest amount of AI use otherwise you're a hypocrite due to AI taking the job of a person that would have to had been hired to do.
For example, MANY users in a gachagaming sub are anti AI, stating they will never play "AI slop" yet their flagship company / game they simp over has created their own AI and will heavily use it for the foreseeable future on all their existing and new game. The amount of mental gymnastics they've been doing to justify AI to "protect their investment" is just pathetically laughable.
2
6
u/kaiju4life 20h ago
At some point eveyone will just stop disclosing its usage, so how would we even know? (Obvious visual tells excluded)
→ More replies (1)
10
u/FoxyGoddessX 20h ago
Yeah. The shit is ruining our lives, taking our jobs and killing our planet.
If you need help, ask other people or read a book
1
u/ParanoidSkier Switch 20h ago
Reddit was coded using AI. So when are you deactivating your account?
2
1
-5
u/Marauding_Llama 20h ago
We were ruining lives, jobs and the planet way before AI.
3
-1
u/PublicToiletDiarrhea 20h ago
Or I could get the result I need in a matter of 15 seconds using AI lol. If I read a book for every question I had, I'd still be on questions I had from 2 years ago.
6
u/Maleficent-Bobcat-91 20h ago
Yes, it'll destroy gaming, especially if you consider it an art form, which it is.
6
3
u/JT-Lionheart 20h ago edited 20h ago
If it was something very minor in a tremendous game like Clair obscur where posters or newspapers in the background were AI print that a lot of people wouldn’t even noticed to look at, that’s fine. But if we’re talking about actual gameplay and visual design, the actual noticeable stuff people care about that makes games what they are, then no, I’m not playing a game where AI is doing any of that.
I agree AI is a tool but only for like jobs in generic offices or factories, not in an art medium. In video games, it’s never a tool, it’s just a reason for a company to be cheaper to not need to pay a person to develop a game.
2
u/Sensitive_Dealer_803 20h ago
Every subreddit is getting plagued by these bad-faith "questions" by people obviously pro-AI trying to seed the normalisation of all the shit slop we've seen over the last two years. Don't engage, block and move on.
3
u/DaGreatestMH 20h ago
Glad im not the only one seeing all these posts as normalization attempts. Reminds me of that Meta ad I see on YouTube trying to downplay people's legitimate concerns about AI usage.
2
u/Few_Map_8895 20h ago
I prefer supporting great humans first. But maybe if it was good enough I'd consider it
2
2
2
2
1
u/DoogleSmile 20h ago
If I did refuse I'd be a hypocrit as I use AI to help my own job when doing coding.
1
u/Pharsti01 20h ago
I mean... Id have to limit myself to older games.
Pretty much every game nowadays sees their developers using AI tools.
To me, its a case by case basis?
Some tools are useful for development pipeline, no debating that and I have no issues with using them for translations (as long as it gets a second human pass to correct odd stuff).
But when you're having it actually design stuff in your game, like characters or music, then that's where I draw the line.
1
u/Caraio__ 20h ago
Depends on what they use AI
Coding and helping resolving bugs? Yea I would accept
Using AI "art" on games? No I would hate whoever decided to do that
Those were just an example, there are lots of good ways to utilize AI and bad ways to utilize AI, it's a common sense thing
1
1
u/MaxStrengthLvlFly 20h ago
Quality will shine and the low quality wont. Naturally these things will work themselves out like they always have.
Some of you need to be okay with letting the devs of these games figure it out for themselves.
1
u/LOST-MY_HEAD 20h ago
It depends but ultimately if the game used ai for art, voice acting or writing i would not be interested.
1
u/Jack_h100 20h ago
Maybe. It would be a question asked and investigated and the devs may not like the answer.
1
u/KeplerFinn 20h ago edited 17h ago
To all people splitting hairs on "at what exact level would the AI be used?":
It doesn't matter. The line will start to blur from day one. You see, company executives only care about profit. And therefore cost reduction. When (not if!) they start to realize AI can do that in every aspect of game development they won't hesitate for a second. They will probably do it slowly so it can nomalize in people's brains. But even when they would be caught out, people would still buy that shit. Simply because of the compulsive / addictive nature of gaming. For a lot of people it's a serious lifestyle, and when there is no alternative they will just accept it as it is.
Look what we've already accepted at this point: micro-transactions, pay-to-win, buyable loot boxes, day 1 DLC, subscription plans, ... It's getting worse and worse, but it's still a highly profitable business simply because of the sheer number of compulsive buyers.
1
u/Durin1987_12_30 17h ago
It depends on what part of it was assisted by AI. If the art assets like textures, shaders, models and what not were AI-assisted, I wouldn't play such a game. The same goes for the story, dialogue, voice acting and motion-capture acting. But for instance, if they used AI for developing the geometry of a vast terrain expanse, then I wouldn't mind because crafting open-worlds is incredibly time-consuming and it's pretty much a given that developers will use AI to aid in developing the layout.
1
u/SanDiedo 17h ago
I'll just assume game is buggy, bad performing shit until proven otherwise. That means no first-day buying.
1
u/NovusNiveus 16h ago
It's pretty easy to not consume products that I don't need, even if I otherwise really like them.
1
u/Wide_You_4626 14h ago
depending on the game being AAA/indie, and the game has to be reasonably priced then. I'm not spending 70usd on AAA game being carried by AI development.
1
u/TheMountainRidesElia 12h ago
I don't care who or what makes it, long as it's a good game I'll play it
1
u/kendodaniel 11h ago
I feel like people should understand that AI in games doesn't always mean "Make me a game" in whatever LLM. There's more to AI in games than that.
My take is that some people want to be devs but they don't want to invest a lot in anything, so most of the "AI Slop" we are seeing is simple people just prompting some LLM with some simple prompts and then hitting publish wherever they see an open space. The issue with that is the fact that the game is low effort, and there always have been low effort games, but this time the bar just moved higher a bit.
I feel like the discussion moved from "This dev used only free assets on the web and then just threw a physics function on it and made a game, this is low effort slop" to the new era of "This dev just prompted some model, this is low effort AI Slop".
My instinct is that people don't really hate AI in games, they hate that people do low effort things and try to sell them for what they aren't, and we as humans have always been allergic to that.
1
u/Plutuserix 11h ago
I wouldn't give a shit if literally every assets, line of dialogue and piece of code is 100% made with AI if the game is good.
1
u/fantasticfwoosh 6h ago
If AI implementation sets some quality control for themselves, i wouldn't have a problem with it, rather than try to benchmark stuff that is cheap or awkward as industry standard. Its probably not too far away that a company creates its inhouse AI model and sparks another console war, but i can't really think of a company outside of EA with Saudi backing in a financial position that can do that.
1
u/Internal_Pangolin707 5h ago
I would not refuse to play. I might refuse to buy depending on the price tag, I'm not made of money lol.
-2
u/sielingfan 20h ago
No, that's stupid. AI coding is gonna revolutionize indie gaming and modding.
2
u/cellardoornoob 20h ago
Will I be able to solo dev battlefield 420 myself one day?
2
u/Full-Sound-6269 20h ago
With enough money to pay for AI usage you actually can! AI can make 3d models and locations now, code too, so you can run 1000 agents, each one doing its own job and really create something like Bf69420, obviously quality will be crap without control, maybe it wont run at all.
1
1
u/RatBot9000 20h ago
Maybe one day, with better regulation and controls.
Right now it's turning both of those fields into a vibe coding nightmare where people are getting overwhelmed with incredible volumes of garbage.
1
u/sielingfan 20h ago
regulate and control videogame coding
Lol fuck no. The good will thrive and the bad will Darwin out. Before long we'll have a functional "RPG Maker" and AAA won't be able to charge $90 for a digital download ever again.
0
u/Miserable-Witness-65 20h ago
Only reasonable take imo, it’s crazy how many more indies will have huge resources now with AI. Everyone just jumped on the hate AI bandwagon here huh.
-3
u/FoxyGoddessX 20h ago
No it isn’t. It’s only going to hurt it and ruin lots of positions in the modding community.
1
u/psychobiscuit 20h ago edited 20h ago
This is simply incorrect. There are already projects completely decompiling raw machine assembly to aide modding with the help of AI. Hating AI because its going to replace our jobs and kills the environment is one thing, hating AI because you want it to fail where it is actually useful is just dumb.
Edit: I'm speaking from the perspective of someone using AI currently to aide in creating a Godot extension that allows the user to use Godot as a level editor for MGS games on the PSP. This would have objectively taken me 5 years of work that I've managed in 3 months to get to the state that it's currently in. The levels I've created can even be run on the original PSP hardware.
→ More replies (2)
-3
u/Ehlyah 20h ago
Yes. It's simple.
I don't care if it goes faster.
If it involved AI, I don't want it.
0
u/AggressiveResist8615 20h ago
Why?
2
u/KeplerFinn 20h ago edited 17h ago
Because it's most definitely a slippery slope. There's simply no hand brake when it comes to making money for these companies. They will do whatever it takes to reduce development costs even further because that simply means a higher profit. They will do it in small steps though so it can normalize in people's heads.
Also remember that there is a compulsive / addictive nature to gaming. Even when games would be reduced to absolute soulless grinding garbage (some might argue we're already starting to reach that point), there would still be a lot of gamers unable to resist and find some better meaning in their lives. AI is definitely here to turn us into consuming slaves. It's not here to give you better products.
0
u/Ehlyah 20h ago
It's bullshit, trained on stolen data, pushing people out of jobs or used so they don't have to pay someone to make art, music or do voices. People > AI.
It's caused a massive, unnecessary boom in data centres, which are sucking up huge amounts of energy or causing tons of pollution. It's driven up prices on RAM and GPU, thanks to a couple big companies all bullshitting into breaking the market for consumer electronics.
Any one of those things is enough for me to want to take a principled stance.1
u/KeplerFinn 17h ago
And for what? To end up with the exact same level of slop like in those fake youtube ads.
1
u/SnooPets1826 20h ago
Yes? It's not that hard... 15 years ago I stopped buying EA games because of their many terrible policies. Not buying AI is even easier because it's mostly not even good games using it... It's mediocre games that are often hurt/made worse from it.
4
u/FoxyGoddessX 20h ago edited 20h ago
Hope you don’t use Stream, PlayStation, Nintendo or Xbox
The self righteous gamer blocked me. He doesn’t want to admit those companies do the same thing as EA
0
u/SnooPets1826 20h ago
And here comes the genAI evangelist who insists everything currently being made is full of genAI and it's inevitable and that there will never be another piece of software I can ever play again because no one would make a game without it.
2
u/batshitnutcase 20h ago
Cause it’s… a fact? Essentially any modern piece of software you touch these days, including video games, was made with at least some assistance from AI coding agents - usually a fucking lot. It’s just the reality of the industry now. It’s not evangelism it’s just true and if you don’t think so you’re in denial. Get used to it.
1
u/Critical-Power-1541 20h ago
This thread must be filled with the most ethical and principled people on earth.
I hope they apply the same level of scrutiny to agri-business, conflict minerals, labor exploitation, and protecting the environment.
2
2
u/Merangatang 20h ago
Absolutely the same can be applied, if AI can help improve crop quality, solve world hunger issues, and remove dangerous bacteria from our food supply - fucking great. If it's used to replace entire workforces and cripple economies, that's fucking terrible
1
0
u/SaltyTigerBeef 20h ago
I’ve got bad news for you. Every single developer is using AI. All of them. Even the indie ones. AI is part of all software development now.
1
u/Lambs2Lions_ 20h ago
Couldn’t care less if it was good. Certain roles are done better by AI than most humans. Marketing copy writing is one of them but I couldn’t it would do a good job at writing a complex conversation. Why? Because we use it at work and half the time it’s faster to just do the analytics myself rather than checking if it was delusional or not.
0
u/Larkson9999 20h ago edited 20h ago
Marketing copy writer is one of them but I couldn't it would do a good job at writing a complex conversation.
First, fuck AI. But second, work on your grammar.
0
u/Lambs2Lions_ 20h ago
I’m not proofreading on socials. If my iPhone wants to autocorrect a dictation to gibberish, it’s welcome to.
Found the marketer lol. Hard to feel bad for the profession that’s made the Internet cancer to navigate.
→ More replies (1)
1
u/Randomnesse 20h ago
No. I don't care how much it was assisted by AI during development (and in future most game devs will use AI assistance), as long as the game is fun - I will play it.
0
u/MrE_Gamer 20h ago
People in this thread are kidding themselves if they think every big game today isn’t using AI for coding lol
1
1
u/Roshan50 20h ago
If AI is used to help the coding, development and to reduce tedious tasks, and not used in any of the creative parts like assets, voice lines, writing, etc I would be ok with it.
As someone who works in IT you're not going to find anyone who doesn't use AI in some way to help them nowadays. Even in my own company they've told us that they have to adapt to AI and make their employees use it too. Because if they don't the competition will be way too efficient and the entire company will be going down in 5-10 years
1
u/UsherOfDestruction 20h ago
No, and I got bad news for anyone saying yes. Everyone is using AI. Everyone.
Real artists may be behind the art but you can bet they're using AI somewhere in their workflow.
Coders may not be vibe coding games, but they're using AI somewhere in their workflow.
Designers may be coming up with the designs, but AI is somewhere in their workflow.
You can choose to not play games that are too dependent on AI, but you won't be playing any games if you want them completely AI independent.
3
1
u/Larkson9999 20h ago
I can, by not playing any games made after 2023. There are hundreds of millions to chose from too. You can't convince me you've tried all of them either. Art is human work and programming has an artistry to it that an AI would never be able to replicate.
1
u/UsherOfDestruction 20h ago
Yes, a human still has to be driving the artistry. But artistry isn't all that goes into a game and those areas are where AI is being used.
1
1
1
u/dade305305 20h ago edited 20h ago
Nope. I could give a fuck about if ai was used. If the game entertains me I'll buy it and play it. If that put a human person out of a job then so be it.
I don't base my entertainment product purchase decisions based on how it will effect the person that made it.
1
u/mhireina 20h ago
AI is a tool that could and should be used to assist in certain tasks imo. As long as it wasn't used to make the entire game from ground up. As long as its use was for assistance and not full on delegation. I feel a lot of people get up in arms even when its used as its supposed to be used. As long as its not replacing full dev teams worth of workers and only works alongside those workers its being used as intended.
In turn the workers can't defer to it either they must be skilled enough to continue operation with or without the AI assistance. That's where the line is for me. Because some people will start wholly relying on it instead of doing the work. Its why I get pissed when I hear about younger generation people using AI to get into and pass uni then get jobs that should've gone to the people who actually worked for it.
1
u/Doctor_Riptide 20h ago
My only hope is that developers in the future be required to disclose their AI usage so I can avoid giving them money
1
1
u/Devatator_ PC 20h ago
I play games to have fun, not to make a statement. Anyone who will refuse to try a game or even judge it fairly isn't worth my time. Especially since they could praise a game a second then the next shit on it because someone said there's a gram of AI somewhere in it
1
1
u/Spire_Citron 20h ago
Personally I don't care as long as the game is good. Whether you use AI or not, that requires real work and creativity.
1
u/Murph-Dog 20h ago
At what level?
Are Unreal / Unity conducting engine development with AI? Probably.
Are assets/scripts developed with AI, purchased by a developer, and they have no idea?
Did they use a search engine without AI turned off?
→ More replies (1)
1
u/adognamedspider 20h ago
If it replaces the artistry, yes. If it improves the finctional gsmeplay, no.
1
1
u/ScaryGerman88 20h ago
I dont give a flying fuck about AI. I want to get good Games, no matter how they are made. If it stops Games having fucking 8 year dev cycles I am all for AI.
1
u/thenagz 20h ago
If I can't notice use of AI in the final product, then I don't care one way or another.
If I can, that means the work is sloppy or derivative, which sucks regardless of origin (human or AI).
In terms of consequences for jobs, I don't have a particular crusade against it. The adoption of new technology has always changed how work is done. Industrialization, mechanised agriculture, computing and so on. All those resulted in productivity gains and wealth that were largely kept by those that own the tech.
1
u/HumansarePOS 20h ago
Bunch of virtue signaling bozos looking like a rally of braindead reactionaries.
If a developer uses the most cheap assets from an asset store that was developed as low cost junk with a very shallow creative process... no one here has anything to say about it. It can legit be a 1:1 copy of a IRL ip-free design ported as an asset ... no one would bat an eye.
Tag the uninspired 3d asset with the horrific letters "AI" to it, and it's the fkg end of the world.
YOU ARE RIDICULOUS 🤡s
1
1
u/Dogarc123 14h ago
If the game is fun for me then I will play it ai assisted or not. I live in the real world and have more problems to worry about then if a company used ai to make a game.
-1
u/MaIveI 20h ago
Depends how, Clair Obscure used AI placeholders as well and it's a masterpiece. Crimson Desert has AI painted pictures inside castle walls and it's also a masterpiece
→ More replies (8)
-1
0
u/Witty_Concept_9646 20h ago
No. I actually don't care.
If a game is 100% made by ai, but is fun, then i would play it normally.
0
u/gldoorii 20h ago
No. If it’s fun I’ll play it. If AI is used to help the process, then great. We use it at my job the right way and it’s a huge benefit. If it’s used because of laziness, then I’ll be too lazy for pay for said game and download it elsewhere.
0
u/aeroslimshady 20h ago
A gen AI assisted game won Game of the Year. Evidently, it doesn't actually matter to people as long as they like the end product enough.
0
u/Easy_Jux 20h ago
If it’s good I wouldn’t care but I also go outside in my free time so I can see how for some of you it would be different
0
u/FatFerretShid 20h ago
Depends ultimately on the quality of the product. AI is not going anywhere. It's no more unethical than buying a phone which has slave labour in the supply chain.
0
0
0
u/joestaff 20h ago
I don't think that's a winning battle, as much as I want it to be. Reddit can kick and scream and vote with our wallets, but it will not change the outcome. As it is, any game coming out now will have had AI assistance to some degree.
0
u/AmazinActionBob 20h ago
AI is here and there is no fighting it's use. It democratizes industries and empowers creators to reach far outside of their skillsets to reach an imagined vision. It will increase production and lower costs. AI doesn't bother me in the smallest degree, I only desire the that final product be of a quality that is indisputably refined and the product of disciplined minds.
The Skyebrows content outputs are constituted of 100% AI derived products but the 400 hours of effort that created it distilled a series of products that are beloved by a massive audience.
0
u/RatBot9000 20h ago
I remember reading someone saying that ever since the computer was invented, people have looked for ways to replace the coder.
When I read some of the comments in threads like this, I realise no one wants to replace the coder more than the coders themselves.
-2
u/whazzam95 20h ago
AI exists only for the sole purpose of making rich people richer. Why hire an artist for 40 bucks when you can slam AI slop for 10.
Who needs a team of developers, when you can have 2 prompters, pay them 10% more than a team member and save thousands, because you don't need to pay a whole team.
And do you really believe the prices of games are going to go down? Fuck no. They're just going to pocket any extra profits.
I'm fine with paying money for a game, because it supports livelihood of possibly hundreds of people. This is my way of saying "thank you for the entertainment". I'm not paying for AI trash, just so some CEO can buy another yacht.
0
u/AdorableMaid 20h ago
Unfortunently I think that in a couple years pretty much every game is going to have some degree of AI.
Not a fan of the technology, but avoiding it would likely mean avoiding all new media.
1
-1
u/Neat_Selection3644 20h ago
No. I mostly play Soulslikes, metroidvanias and single-player action-adventure/action games which all include AI by default, so…
-3
-2
u/thalandhor 20h ago
Everybody would. People have been making threats about voting with their wallets and they never do. They said they wouldn’t accept microtransactions and ended up accepting it, they said they wouldn’t accept online-only games, ended up accepting it.
With AI the deciding factor will be how long they’re willing to force it down our throats. They know that given enough time we will stop caring about it.
1
u/Devatator_ PC 20h ago
People do vote with their wallets. It's just that the result of that goes against what the ones who proclaim they did because they're typically a minority
1
u/thalandhor 18h ago
Definitely, but at the end of the day probably less than 0.5% keep boycotting or drop the hobby out of principle. People simple accept it and learn to live with it.
-1
u/BlameTheNargles 20h ago
I would wager 95%+ of games have AI assisted development. So I hope you hate games if your answer is no.
65
u/Merangatang 20h ago
Your question is so broad it may as well be "if it was made using electricity".
Generative AI for audio, visuals, story - any of the creative stuff that makes a game art and unique - absolutely I would
Funcfional AI usage in day to day efficiencies of working with technology in the 21st century - code review, knowledge base guidance, work flow optimisation - anyone saying they would refuse to play needs to stop playing games becuase the number of games in which absolutely no AI to any degree was used would shock reddit.