Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 9455355" data-attributes="member: 4937">So, I think you do agree with me in this example.  If the book is 20 pages long, it won't feel like an RPG.  The same would be true of a book that is 200 pages long or even one that was 2000 pages long and supported say 50 different endings (44 deaths and 6 different good endings for example).  But the LLM model is clearly improvising.  For some level of ability, the LLM is replacing a human DM and providing that improvisational skill.  And for that matter, I'd argue that your hypothetical "1,000,000 page" book is congruent to a trained LLM on a particular domain.  It's when you get up to those large numbers that we start seeing emergent property that feels like creativity and improvisation.  If we get up to say a quintillion page book that supports thousands of links between pages, then we are getting up to a LLM in terms of skillfulness in responding to input.No.  True "not planned for that content" throws a run time error and the game breaks.  In the case of Nethack, long years of refinement by the developers means that not only does the game not break when you do something "creative" but the developers typically have already anticipated it and coded the most appropriate response within the games conceit.  "The DevTeam Thinks Of Everything" is so well known as to be a trope, but that is not the same as improvisation unless we start getting up to the level of your hypothetical LLM that emulates human intelligence and thus appears to improvise.  At a fundamental level, as vast as your move options are at any point, they really come down to 50 or 60 commands some of which have one of 10 directions and others of which utilize the finite list of things that can be in your inventory.  While the developers might have planned for any of the thousands of combinations that provides, it's still not a true RPG.  I remain skeptical until demonstrated otherwise.  Totally agree.  Exactly.  It's possible to improvise a scene well, particularly if you've got a lot of experience and some ideas you've been toying around with.  But there is a certain level of complexity and coherence and consistent illusion of serendipity that we see in the best long form stories (a long series of scenes, definitely "more than three") whether novels or RPGs that exceed human ability to implement without planning.  To implement a good long form story without planning and effort would require greater inexplicable savant ability than someone who can multiply two large numbers together in their head.  That's an objective claim, because we know the computation required to multiply two numbers is much less than in an LLM, regardless of whether humans take round about routes to get there.  Every example of a claim of being able to run an RPG without putting in that prep work that I've seen is explainable by Dunning and Kruger's observations.  Which of course, doesn't prove that there isn't someone out there that can do it, but only that I've not seen any evidence of it in a score or so GMs.And I mean as a practical matter, if you go to a convention game and the GM has prepared nothing and tells you that he plans to improvise everything, one's intuition about that is probably going to be, "We're screwed and why did I waste my time and money?"  Now, have I seen the game's creator do wonderful improvisation at a convention game.  Yes.  But they did that "improvisation" within a framework both of a well planned scenario and deep understanding of and experience with the setting so that they "know" all sorts of facts about it that they can bring to bear.</blockquote>

Verification