AI in Gaming (a Poll) [+]

In your opinion, what are some acceptable uses of AI in the gaming industry?

  • AI-generated images (book art, marketing, video game textures, board games, etc.) are acceptable.

    Votes: 32 31.7%
  • AI-generated 3d models (for video games and VTTs), are acceptable.

    Votes: 36 35.6%
  • AI-generated writing (books, ad copy, descriptions, etc) is acceptable.

    Votes: 20 19.8%
  • Adaptive dialogue (for NPCs in video games and VTTs) is acceptable.

    Votes: 46 45.5%
  • Adaptive damage/difficulty (the game adjusts difficulty to your level, for example) is acceptable.

    Votes: 50 49.5%
  • Adaptive behaviors (NPCs, enemies, etc. react and change their tactics) is acceptable

    Votes: 64 63.4%
  • Procedurally-generated maps (dungeon generators, rouge-like game levels) are acceptable.

    Votes: 72 71.3%
  • Procedurally-generated challenges (traps, monsters, whole encounters) are acceptable.

    Votes: 61 60.4%
  • Procedurally-generated rewards (item drops, random treasures) are acceptable.

    Votes: 61 60.4%
  • Other acceptable use(s), see below.

    Votes: 11 10.9%
  • There are no acceptable uses of AI.

    Votes: 24 23.8%

All the anti-AI arguments so far, in addition to their total misunderstanding of how the technology works, also seem to incorrectly presuppose that Intellectual Property is a philosophically legitimate concept rather than just a fatuous legal fiction in the vein of corporate personhood.

EDIT:
Also. I feel that the anti-AI arguments are being made in bad faith. I don't believe you all really care about the training data being collected in some ritualistically pure way or some alleged soul or lack thereof inside of artwork; I'd wager money that money is ultimately all this comes down to.
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

That leads into something I've been wondering for a long time which is the reason the overall quality of the posts have EnWorld have gone down over the last 20 years is that I think the vast majority of posters are holding back any good stuff now because self-publishing has become such a big thing in the table top RPG community. We're no longer the "potlatch" community we used to be, because it's too easy to commercialize your own content.
That seems to be the way things are going everywhere. It both disgusts and infuraites me. Hopefully this new technology will help to reverse the trend by flooding the market Hudson Hawk style (side note: did anyone else start rooting for the villains in that movie after they explained their plan?)
 

Starfox

Hero
Project Gutenberg could be used ethically. There are likely museum collections that could be used ethically. Anyone with sufficient gumption could set up a project in which those with relevant content/data could offer to submit it to the training sets - say, in exchange for a share of the profits from its use.
A problem with using only files so old they are in the public domain to train AIs is that the AIs will then absorb the prejudices of that era.
 

Umbran

Mod Squad
Staff member
Supporter
A problem with using only files so old they are in the public domain to train AIs is that the AIs will then absorb the prejudices of that era.

Yep.

But... our world today is hardly bias-free. If you trained AI on content from only the 21st century, you'd still expect to have to oversee the results for bias, wouldn't you? If you trained AI on content only from the past year, there'd still be ugly biases in it.

So, overseeing AI for bias in its output is a thing you're going to want to do anyway.
 

Yep.

But... our world today is hardly bias-free. If you trained AI on content from only the 21st century, you'd still expect to have to oversee the results for bias, wouldn't you? If you trained AI on content only from the past year, there'd still be ugly biases in it.

So, overseeing AI for bias in its output is a thing you're going to want to do anyway.
Yeah, but it's still nowhere near as racist and sexist as it was in the second millenium
 


TiQuinn

Registered User
I don't believe you all really care about the training data being collected in some ritualistically pure way or some alleged soul or lack thereof inside of artwork; I'd wager money that money is ultimately all this comes down to.

I don’t know who proposed this line of reasoning versus a money motive but I’m perfectly fine with people using a money motive to advocate against AI training sets that use data without attribution and payment to create a product used for someone else’s monetary gain.
 


There's this idea people have that restricting AI to only be trained on IP you own will somehow protect artists from big corporations, but I call BS on that. Big corporations already own mountains of IP. They would be he only ones NOT impeded by it; it would actually make them richer by handing them ANOTHER monopoly. The ones it would hurt are small businesses and hobbyists

So... 25 years ago.
Yes, even the very end of the second millennium. A lot has changed since then.

Although admittedly I was thinking more pre-civil-rights-movement.

We're nowhere near stuff from after the civil rights movement going into public domain because copyright lasts forever and a day

EDIT:
And even the stuff that wasn't racist sounds racist because of the euphemism treadmill

EDIT:
The case of arabs is an exception. The first two decades of this millennium was more racist against arabs than the last two decades of the last millennium thanks to 9/11 and Bush, but thankfully society's finally starting to move on.
 
Last edited:

Voidrunner's Codex

Remove ads

Top