For news, discussions and memes!
This community follows the Lemmy.zip Instance rules, with the inclusion of the following rule:
You can see Lemmy.zip's rules by going to our Code of Conduct.
What to Expect in Our Code of Conduct:
If you enjoy reading legal stuff, you can check it all out at legal.lemmy.zip.
Another example of how Steam is the dominant PC gaming platform primarily because the competition keeps shooting itself in the foot.
'Everyone's doing it, so why hold ourselves to a higher standard?'
This is how society dies.
News from the "users are cattle to be herded, not humans to be listened to. Instead listen to ME! ME! ME!" department.
...seriously. Steam is doing it because people want to know if the games are made with AI or not. If that goes against the best interests of Epic, let them eat cake.
Another example that Steam doesn't maintain dominance via market abuse, but rather by being decent in a market where the competition is downright awful.
Right? If he doesn't like it he can just go make his own store with all the AI he wants...........
That would be an Epic fail on his part though
Legend has it that he does have his own store already, so I'm really not sure why he's saying anything at all.
I think this tells me that EGS is going to be pushing lots of ai developed games without any disclosure.
I don't want my games to contain AI without my knowledge i dont want it to be sweeped under the rug ,that's so stupid tbh.
I personally don't give a shit if ai is used on something I like.
It's unethical to present something as human-made that isn't though. That I do care about.
If I could 100% avoid AI, I absolutely would. I value the work humans put into what we do, even outside artistic creations. AI is the opposite of what we should be doing.
I value the work humans put into what we do.
I agree with this statement,but tbh am fine with AI not being used to replace Humans or used with a second thought or replacing creative parts(idk how to word this section out).
But the elephant in the room with AI for me is ethics:
Like:
I would prefer no AI not to uses at all tho.
I like the generative tech itself but feel disgust at the industry. First they grab the artists' content, with no permission; then they feed it into their models; then they make a product out of it; then they screech at those same artists "you've become obsolete trash! Our model makes everything you do!"; never acknowledging it's built upon their labour.
So I think there's a big case to tag the usage of AI into products, to mildly discourage it. And more importantly, people want this info.
who do i email to tell epic that they suck so fucking hard that i'm over here buying games on steam that i had already gotten for free on epic
I won't even take the free games on that shit
I don’t even have an Epic account… Been on Steam since 2004.
The most annoying thing was when they added Fortnite and I had to basically triple my account security when I didn't even play games on their launcher. Anyway I've basically given up on UE4/5 now. Not that I really make games anymore but Godot is refreshingly lightweight.
Shhh, don't give it feedback. Let it rot, let it be hated, without knowing why.
Fuck right off Tim. You cunt.
And you wonder why nobody wants to use your shitty storefront.
What astounds me is that the Epic Game Store sucks on purpose.
They've always wanted all of the money without any of the effort.
And I want the Epic CEO to fist himself with a live pin-less grenade in his hand.
We can't always get what we want.
Good thing he has no say in what happens on the Steam storefront...
I agree with the article, we should be less vague about what AI was used for. One game may use it for generating side quest storylines. Others might use it for writing the whole plot and designing all visuals. Gamers will always love to boycott things; at least with more detail they could see which companies are exploiting the technology and which ones are putting in some effort.
we should be less vague about what AI was used for
I agree as well, because it very much depends on what you use AI for.
If it's for prototyping or very minor things players wouldn't even notice, it's fine and I wouldn't put that kind of use on the same level of companies who want to use AI to outright replace workers just to cut costs.
To play devil's advocate here, it seems like I keep hearing people saying to avoid games/etc over AI content, and the actual AI content is really minor things that no one would have ever paid attention to.
I suspect as it continues to become more common, people will care less. But in the meantime admitting to even minor AI use for background assets/etc is enough to get you a bunch of negative reviews on Steam (judging from my discovery queue).
There was also how Arc Raiders got a terrible review from Eurogamer because of some disclosed AI voice lines.
avoid games/etc over AI content, and the actual AI content is really minor
There's no gradient for how much Ai goes into a game, so a little taint qualifies as diseased.
Right. If the A.I. content is inconsequential, why not replace it remove it?
Time and money are the only answers
Good. Fuck "AI". They should have to disclose exactly what it was used for and that should be displayed right at the top of the games store page, along with any extra transactions in the game, extra accounts or launchers needed.
What he wants doesn't count for shit. If Valve's customers want that feature there, he should just shut up and let it be there.
Does this mean they want to actually release something on steam?
As with SO much about tim sweeney: he is touching on something very important for all the wrong reasons.
The reality is... probably 99% of games SHOULD have that disclosure by the current rules. So many modern tools have "AI" tools integrated into them these days. A LOT of the modern Adobe tools fundamentally are based on generative AI (think "magic wand" in Photoshop but better). Similarly... what is the difference between asking chatgpt to write you a script, asking someone who may have asked chatgpt to do it, and having an editor that feeds all your data to openai?
And... you can bet that Unreal Engine is going to be integrating more and more of those tools.
I very much do appreciate the intent and I make it a point to check on that when I am buying games on Steam. In large part because... the people (knowingly) using AI tend to not be using it responsibly. Its not a full deal breaker but it very much puts the game into that "ONE thing and they can piss off" territory.
But at the same time? A game I've been working on (on and off) for a few years has very heavy Dwarf Fortress inspirations and relies quite heavily on simulation to advance world state. And while the odds of me ever publishing that are pretty low.. I do actually wonder how that would work with disclosures. And I very much assume a lot of the more crazy awesome devs are having the same concerns and just hoping nobody notices.
Right now? It is a pretty useful tool. But we are rapidly approaching the point where the devs who actually DO disclose it are the minority... and probably the ones doing things even slightly ethically.
Quit whining and put all the slop on the Epic store.
He sucks so much. Cheeses me that anyone heralded him as some harbinger of gaming equilibrium.
I wonder if there will be back lash over this
Someone's back ought to be lashed over this