Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Diffusion models are real-time game engines

gamengen.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 430 posts

Re: Diffusion models are real-time game engines

#121

Post by reverius42 »

troupo wrote: post #86
refibrillator wrote: post #12

There is no text conditioning provided to the SD model because they removed it, but one can imagine a near future where text prompts are enough to create a fun new game! Yes they had to use RL to learn what DOOM looks like and how it works, but this doesn’t necessarily pose a chicken vs egg problem. In the same way that LLMs can write a novel story, despite only being trained on existing text. IMO one of the biggest…

> one can imagine a near future where text prompts are enough to create a fun new game Sit down and write down a text prompt for a "fun new game". You can start with something relatively simple like a Mario-like platformer. By page 300, when you're about halfway through describing what you mean, you might understand why this is wishful thinking

If it can be trained on (many) existing games, then it might work similarly to how you don't need to describe every possible detail of a generated image in order to get something that looks like what you're asking for (and looks like a plausible image for the underspecified parts).

Re: Diffusion models are real-time game engines

#124

Post by qnleigh »

agys wrote: post #102
qnleigh wrote: post #100

Could a similar scheme be used to drastically improve the visual quality of a video game? You would train the model on gameplay rendered at low and high quality (say with and without ray tracing, and with low and high density meshing), and try to get it to convert a quick render into something photorealistic on the fly. When things like DALL-E first came out, I was expecting something like the above to make it into m…

Isn't that what Nvidia’s Ray Reconstruction and DLSS (frame generation and upscaler) are doing, more or less?

At a high level I guess so. I don't know enough about Ray Reconstruction (though the results are impressive), but I was thinking of something more drastic than DLSS. Diffusion models on static images can turn a cartoon into a photorealistic image. Doing something similar for a game, where a low-quality render is turned into something that would otherwise take seconds to render, seems qualitatively quite different from DLSS. In principle a model could fill in huge amounts of detail, like increasing the number of particles in a particle-based effect, adding shading/lighting effects...

Re: Diffusion models are real-time game engines

#125

Post by godelski »

Doom system requirements:

  - 4 MB RAM
  - 12 MB disk space
Stable diffusion v1

  > 860M UNet and CLIP ViT-L/14 (540M)
  Checkpoint size:
    4.27 Gb 
    7.7 GB (full EMA)
  Running on a TPU-v5e
    Peak compute per chip (bf16)  197 TFLOPs
    Peak compute per chip (Int8)  393 TFLOPs
    HBM2 capacity and bandwidth  16 GB, 819 GBps
    Interchip Interconnect BW  1600 Gbps
This is quite impressive, especially considering the speed. But there's still a ton of room for improvement. It seems it didn't even memorize the game despite having the capacity to do so hundreds of times over. So we definitely have lots of room for optimization methods. Though who knows how such things would affect existing tech since the goal here is to memorize.

What's also interesting about this work is it's basically saying you can rip a game if you're willing to "play" (automate) it enough times and spend a lot more on storage and compute. I'm curious what the comparison in cost and time would be if you hired an engineer to reverse engineer Doom (how much prior knowledge do they get considering pertained models and visdoom environment. Was doom source code in T5? And which vit checkpoint was used? I can't keep track of Google vit checkpoints).

I would love to see the checkpoint of this model. I think people would find some really interesting stuff taking it apart.

- https://www.reddit.com/r/gaming/comments/a4yi5t/original_doo...

- https://huggingface.co/CompVis/stable-diffusion-v-1-4-origin...

- https://cloud.google.com/tpu/docs/v5e

- https://github.com/Farama-Foundation/ViZDoom

- https://zdoom.org/index

Re: Diffusion models are real-time game engines

#126

Post by lokimedes »

jonplackett wrote: post #115
lokimedes wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It makes good sense for humans to have this ability. If we flip the argument, and see the next frame as a hypothesis for what is expected as the outcome of the current frame, then comparing this "hypothesis" with what is sensed makes it easier to process the differences, rather than the totality of the sensory input. As Richard Dawkins recently put it in a podcast[1], our genes are great prediction machines, as their…

What’s the aphantasia link? I’ve got aphantasia. I’m convinced though that the bit of my brain that should be making images is used for letting me ‘see’ how things are connected together very easily in my head. Also I still love games like Pictionary and can somehow draw things onto paper than I don’t really know what they look like in my head. It’s often a surprise when pen meets paper.

I agree, it is my own experience as well. Craig Venter In one of his books also credit this way of representing knowledge as abstractions as his strength in inventing new concepts.

The link may be that we actually see differences between “frames”, rather than the frames directly. That in itself would imply that a from of sub-visual representation is being processed by our brain. For aphantasia, it could be that we work directly on this representation instead of recalling imagery through the visual system.

Many people with aphantasia reports being able to visualize in their dreams, meaning that they don't lack the ability to generate visuals. So it may be that the brain has an affinity to rely on the abstract representation when "thinking", while dreaming still uses the "stable diffusion mode".

I’m no where near qualified to speak of this with certainty, but it seems plausible to me.

Re: Diffusion models are real-time game engines

#127

Post by dbspin »

lokimedes wrote: post #33
wkcheng wrote: post #9

It's insane that that this works, and that it works fast enough to render at 20 fps. It seems like they almost made a cross between a diffusion model and an RNN, since they had to encode the previous frames and actions and feed it into the model at each step. Abstractly, it's like the model is dreaming of a game that it played a lot of, and real time inputs just change the state of the dream. It makes me wonder if hu…

It makes good sense for humans to have this ability. If we flip the argument, and see the next frame as a hypothesis for what is expected as the outcome of the current frame, then comparing this "hypothesis" with what is sensed makes it easier to process the differences, rather than the totality of the sensory input. As Richard Dawkins recently put it in a podcast[1], our genes are great prediction machines, as their…

Worth noting that aphantasia doesn't necessarily extend to dreams. Anecdotally - I have pretty severe aphantasia (I can conjure milisecond glimpses of barely tangible imagery that I can't quite perceive before it's gone - but only since learning that visualisation wasn't a linguistic metaphor). I can't really simulate object rotation. I can't really 'picture' how things will look before they're drawn / built etc. However I often have highly vivid dream imagery. I also have excellent recognition of faces and places (e.g.: can't get lost in a new city). So there clearly is a lot of preconscious visualisation and image matching going on in some aphantasia cases, even where the explicit visual screen is all but absent.

Re: Diffusion models are real-time game engines

#128

Post by lewhoo »

modeless wrote: post #36
danjl wrote: post #4

So, diffusion models are game engines as long as you already built the game? You need the game to train the model. Chicken. Egg?

If you train it on multiple games then you could produce new games that have never existed before, in the same way image generation models can produce new images that have never existed before.

From what I understand that could make the engine much less stable. The key here is repetitiveness.

Re: Diffusion models are real-time game engines

#129

Post by snickmy »

godelski wrote: post #125

Doom system requirements: - 4 MB RAM - 12 MB disk space Stable diffusion v1 > 860M UNet and CLIP ViT-L/14 (540M) Checkpoint size: 4.27 Gb 7.7 GB (full EMA) Running on a TPU-v5e Peak compute per chip (bf16) 197 TFLOPs Peak compute per chip (Int8) 393 TFLOPs HBM2 capacity and bandwidth 16 GB, 819 GBps Interchip Interconnect BW 1600 Gbps This is quite impressive, especially considering the speed. But there's still a ton…

Those are valid points, but irrelevant for the context of this research.

Yes, the computational cost is ridicolous compared to the original game, and yes, it lacks basic things like pre-computing, storing, etc. That said, you could assume that all that can be either done at the margin of this discovery OR over time will naturally improve OR will become less important as a blocker.

The fact that you can model a sequence of frames with such contextual awareness without explictly having to encode it, is the real breakthrough here. Both from a pure gaming standpoint, but on simulation in general.

Re: Diffusion models are real-time game engines

#130

Post by godelski »

mlsu wrote: post #31
refibrillator wrote: post #12

There is no text conditioning provided to the SD model because they removed it, but one can imagine a near future where text prompts are enough to create a fun new game! Yes they had to use RL to learn what DOOM looks like and how it works, but this doesn’t necessarily pose a chicken vs egg problem. In the same way that LLMs can write a novel story, despite only being trained on existing text. IMO one of the biggest…

With enough computation, your neural net weights would converge to some very compressed latent representation of the source code of DOOM. Maybe smaller even than the source code itself? Someone in the field could probably correct me on that. At which point, you effectively would be interpolating in latent space through the source code to actually "render" the game. You'd have an entire latent space computer, with an…

  > With enough computation, your neural net weights would converge to some very compressed latent representation of the source code of DOOM.
You and I have very different definitions of compression

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41377398

  > Someone in the field could probably correct me on that.
^__^
Post reply on HN