Hard facts: Steam has over 73k games - and is growing at over 10k games per year and increasing. The median game on Steam earns less than $800 - down from $4k in 2020. Making a game is not hard - marketing a game is.
> Making a game is not hard - marketing a game is. Literally no one who has ever made a game says this. Making games is so incredibly hard that the phrase “making games is hard” is a running meme!
Building an AI game studio: what we've learned so far
201–210 of 312 posts
Re: Building an AI game studio: what we've learned so far
#202This is genius! I currently work on attention loop games (the kinds you see ads for on your social newsfeed). A big bottleneck is the number of new games we are able to produce per week. New games generally have a better ROI and get more installs and clicks than older games, which age out. Having the ability to programmatically generate new games would be amazing. It would be great to have the game completely generat…
You want to leverage AI to automate the cycle of creating low quality games to display in low quality ads that leverage gambling mechanics to entice clicks?
Re: Building an AI game studio: what we've learned so far
#203Earlier quoted context omitted.
Uhm…, even you use something low-code, or even no-code tool, you still have to learn how to code (former) or learn how to use some kind of visual scripting tool (latter). If you could simply type in plain English what are the mechanics you have in mind instead, then this new (simpler) way of creating game logic it may has the potential to unleash creativity from a broader audience. It is like saying why would I need…
If the AI doesn't get the mechanics right, and you have subtle game-breaking bugs that make it impossible to complete, you will never be able to fix it.
There is a non-intuitive feature of current LLMs, and that is, they are capable of refining over and over their own previous outcome. You can ask to revisit it, to improve it, check it, etc etc. use this to fix its own bugs.
Re: Building an AI game studio: what we've learned so far
#204 const tentsFacingNorth = getAllUnitIds()
.filter(unitId => getUnitString(unitId, "unitStrings/tags")?.includes("tent"))
.filter(unitId => Math.abs(getUnitRotation(unitId) % (2 * Math.PI))
This code only works if getUnitRotation() returns values between -pi and pi, with north pointing up. This isn't an unheard of convention, but it would surprise me -- if you asked the AI to generate movement code I'm sure it would do const moveX = Math.cos(); for instance.I would more traditionally expect a range of 0 to 2pi, but then this code wouldn't work for anything close to 2pi on the other side. And if the range was -pi to pi, why have the modulo use 2pi :)
Additionally, "facing north" probably implies a bigger epsilon than 0.01 radians. That's only half a degree! Even if it was super tight, I would expect maybe 10 degrees slop in either direction, which would be 0.17 radians.
The gameplay programmer way to do this would be to get the facing vector and dot that with the vector for north, and compare the results. Dealing with angles isn't worth it.
Oh, also, I'm guessing getUnitString().includes("tent") would work for anything with substring tent, so no adding tentacles to your game.
Re: Building an AI game studio: what we've learned so far
#205I think a part of the reason why I'm kind of dismissive of AI when it comes to creative endeavors is that I haven't seen it do something that isn't already possible using a "not-intelligent" solution. For example, AI website builders. It's impressive as a tech demo that you can prompt an AI to make a website for you, but otherwise I don't think this is going to be disruptive to the web design industry since it's alre…
Uhm…, even you use something low-code, or even no-code tool, you still have to learn how to code (former) or learn how to use some kind of visual scripting tool (latter). If you could simply type in plain English what are the mechanics you have in mind instead, then this new (simpler) way of creating game logic it may has the potential to unleash creativity from a broader audience. It is like saying why would I need…
So... who the hell is going to buy it? Because videogames as an industry is already entirely saturated with products that range a whole spectrum from utter dogshit to amazing works of technical expertise, writing, design, etc. There are over 70,000 games on Steam alone now, with 9,000 added in the last 9 months. If this tech actually got to this place, there will be exponentially more games, because all you have to do is tell an AI what you want to play.
And you can take that further: Movies are also highly saturated as an industry, especially as larger studios move ever further into less making "movies" or "series" and just making "content" endlessly remixing their intellectual properties. So now, all of those companies (and all the people who like their stuff) can now just make their own Iron Man movie? Their own Wandavision? Just endlessly making and remaking and remaking, as though tons of people aren't already sick to death of all the television programs and movies that are being made?
And again, you can just keep extending this to any media: print, music, art... we have more of everything now than we ever have before and the goal of companies like Adobe, like OpenAI, etc. is to put even more powerful creative tools into even more hands, broadening the group of people who can create stuff but like... even if you take it as granted that this can be done...
Who the hell is watching all of this stuff? Who is playing all of these games? And why in the world would you pay to watch someone else's AI movie when you can pay to generate your own with whatever you want in it? Why would you ever buy a game off Steam again if you can just ask your game making AI to make you the exact game you want, even just copying the damn description out of steam?
All I see this doing is potentially killing off dozens of creative industries and funneling shit tons of creative control and platform-style power to a handful of massive corporations, running warehouses full of fucking graphics cards, to generate the same games, the same movies, the same music, over, and over, and over, to suit everyone's personal taste, and absolutely destroying entire rainforest's worth of electricity to accomplish it. And like... why do we want that?
Re: Building an AI game studio: what we've learned so far
#206What a neat idea! Next: a strategy game where you give orders in plain text, instead of hundreds of clicks per minutes
I guess with a LLM you could make interacting with the game a bit more interesting than what a 1989 text-parser could handle.
Re: Building an AI game studio: what we've learned so far
#207Earlier quoted context omitted.
Uhm…, even you use something low-code, or even no-code tool, you still have to learn how to code (former) or learn how to use some kind of visual scripting tool (latter). If you could simply type in plain English what are the mechanics you have in mind instead, then this new (simpler) way of creating game logic it may has the potential to unleash creativity from a broader audience. It is like saying why would I need…
If the AI doesn't get the mechanics right, and you have subtle game-breaking bugs that make it impossible to complete, you will never be able to fix it.
I don't know about the article's studio specifically, but regarding AI game engines, I'm mostly worried you won't be able to make engine edits, or the engine will only be able to make an extremely narrow subset of games, or exiting the WYSIWYG/SaaS means starting over from scratch. If the engine targets a specific genre, it could cause a flood of low effort garbage. Some genres are already flooded because the easier game engines have tutorials and asset packs for them.
Re: Building an AI game studio: what we've learned so far
#208Earlier quoted context omitted.
If the AI doesn't get the mechanics right, and you have subtle game-breaking bugs that make it impossible to complete, you will never be able to fix it.
AI can create bugs, sure, as well as humans do. With time, I am more inclined to think it will be easier to ask an AI to fix them for us rather than the other way around. There is a non-intuitive feature of current LLMs, and that is, they are capable of refining over and over their own previous outcome. You can ask to revisit it, to improve it, check it, etc etc. use this to fix its own bugs.
Re: Building an AI game studio: what we've learned so far
#209Earlier quoted context omitted.
Uhm…, even you use something low-code, or even no-code tool, you still have to learn how to code (former) or learn how to use some kind of visual scripting tool (latter). If you could simply type in plain English what are the mechanics you have in mind instead, then this new (simpler) way of creating game logic it may has the potential to unleash creativity from a broader audience. It is like saying why would I need…
Something that I never see addressed for this: So, let's just grant that someday, the tech will be mature enough that this is possible, and let's even say it goes beyond videogames to movies, to visual art, to graphic design, to writing, etc. Let's say that AI gets to a place where any joe blow can put in a prompt, and get a competent, and even let's be generous and say good product out of it. A solid 8/10. So... who…
You won't have a "game making AI" that isn't already owned by big media companies, crippled and handicapped, and expensive as hell. You won't legally be allowed to compete against them. ChatGPT is never going to do that. That isn't how capitalism works.
Re: Building an AI game studio: what we've learned so far
#210Earlier quoted context omitted.
Something that I never see addressed for this: So, let's just grant that someday, the tech will be mature enough that this is possible, and let's even say it goes beyond videogames to movies, to visual art, to graphic design, to writing, etc. Let's say that AI gets to a place where any joe blow can put in a prompt, and get a competent, and even let's be generous and say good product out of it. A solid 8/10. So... who…
If AI works well enough that just a vague prompt leads it to spit out a professional, compelling and creative game with assets, VO, music, coherent level and production design, and everything else that goes into successful modern games... companies are going to own that and keep that on lockdown, because it's essentially a free money machine. You won't have a "game making AI" that isn't already owned by big media com…