Well as everybody else is speaking about AI I thought I'd join in. When
I saw this my first thought was Ubisoft has script writers followed by
it's Ubisoft so it must be a bad idea.

Now I'm in two minds about it. The idea seems to be to have an AI
suggest some what they call barks which as far as I can tell are just
flavour lines that NPC's use and not anything to do with the actual
plotline etc. On face value this seems like a good idea as why waste the
time of script writers for the mundane parts.

So why the two minds, well the easy one first. This is Ubisoft so I have
my doubts they use this so that more time can be spent polishing the
creative parts of the dialogue. My expectation is you'll end up with
half the workforce producing the same output they currently do. The
second one, if this works I can see it then seeping into the more
creative parts and then you get into is an AI actually creative or is it
just efficiently rehasing someone else's work.

On Thu, 30 Mar 2023 10:21:13 +0100, JAB <noway@nochance.com> wrote:

>Well as everybody else is speaking about AI I thought I'd join in. When
>I saw this my first thought was Ubisoft has script writers followed by
>it's Ubisoft so it must be a bad idea.
>
>Now I'm in two minds about it. The idea seems to be to have an AI
>suggest some what they call barks which as far as I can tell are just
>flavour lines that NPC's use and not anything to do with the actual
>plotline etc. On face value this seems like a good idea as why waste the
>time of script writers for the mundane parts.

>So why the two minds, well the easy one first. This is Ubisoft so I have
>my doubts they use this so that more time can be spent polishing the
>creative parts of the dialogue. My expectation is you'll end up with
>half the workforce producing the same output they currently do. The
>second one, if this works I can see it then seeping into the more
>creative parts and then you get into is an AI actually creative or is it
>just efficiently rehasing someone else's work.

I can't get excited about this stuff. It's just using technology to
create a poorer product at less cost, resulting in shittier games and
fewer jobs. So-called "AI" like ChatGPT appears exciting at first
glance, but then you take a closer look at its output and realize it's
little better the auto-generated web-pages already spamming the
internet. To see that sort of output flooding into new avenues - TV,
music, games - is disheartening.

But I guess that's what we all deserve, when we put price as the #1
determinator of our sales.

Anyway, Ubisoft games are already barely worth playing, being
repetitive, by-the-number experiences. I can't imagine AI-generated
content making them much worse. Honestly, half of their games already
feel like they're procedurally generated.

On 30/03/2023 15:23, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
> On Thu, 30 Mar 2023 10:21:13 +0100, JAB <noway@nochance.com> wrote:
>
>> Well as everybody else is speaking about AI I thought I'd join in. When
>> I saw this my first thought was Ubisoft has script writers followed by
>> it's Ubisoft so it must be a bad idea.
>>
>> Now I'm in two minds about it. The idea seems to be to have an AI
>> suggest some what they call barks which as far as I can tell are just
>> flavour lines that NPC's use and not anything to do with the actual
>> plotline etc. On face value this seems like a good idea as why waste the
>> time of script writers for the mundane parts.
>
>> So why the two minds, well the easy one first. This is Ubisoft so I have
>> my doubts they use this so that more time can be spent polishing the
>> creative parts of the dialogue. My expectation is you'll end up with
>> half the workforce producing the same output they currently do. The
>> second one, if this works I can see it then seeping into the more
>> creative parts and then you get into is an AI actually creative or is it
>> just efficiently rehasing someone else's work.
>
> I can't get excited about this stuff. It's just using technology to
> create a poorer product at less cost, resulting in shittier games and
> fewer jobs. So-called "AI" like ChatGPT appears exciting at first
> glance, but then you take a closer look at its output and realize it's
> little better the auto-generated web-pages already spamming the
> internet. To see that sort of output flooding into new avenues - TV,
> music, games - is disheartening.
>
> But I guess that's what we all deserve, when we put price as the #1
> determinator of our sales.
>
> Anyway, Ubisoft games are already barely worth playing, being
> repetitive, by-the-number experiences. I can't imagine AI-generated
> content making them much worse. Honestly, half of their games already
> feel like they're procedurally generated.
>

I'm not sure I'd say I was excited but more mildly interested. Like you
I don't see the bigger publishers using tools like this with any other
purpose than cutting costs to increase profits. Maybe for smaller devs
it would help produce more content with their limited budget which I
think would be a positive.a

I've not used ChatGPT but currently it feels like a less reliable
version of using google to get an answer packaged in a more 'human' form.

JAB <noway@nochance.com> wrote:
>So why the two minds, well the easy one first. This is Ubisoft so I have
>my doubts they use this so that more time can be spent polishing the
>creative parts of the dialogue. My expectation is you'll end up with
>half the workforce producing the same output they currently do. The
>second one, if this works I can see it then seeping into the more
>creative parts and then you get into is an AI actually creative or is it
>just efficiently rehasing someone else's work.

Well, humans even at their most creative are still just mostly rehashing
someone else's work. Everything is derivitive, so it's more a question
of degree, how closely these AIs are copying other works.

I don't know what Ubisoft specifically is trying to do with AI, but
I think AI has some interesting potential for games, specifically
for dynamically generated content. For example, I could see it being
used with procedurally generated quests, to give each generated quest
distinctive NPC dialog. So rather than just replacing kill 10 goblins
with kill 12 kobolds in the same text, you'd have unique dialog each
time explaining why these monsters need to die.

I could also Grand Theft Auto type of game having one of those post-game
recap sequences where the accomplishments of the player are recounted,
but in the form of AI generated rap video. Or imagine an RPG where
the pre-generated characters in your party aren't just bantering with
each other, but also responding what you have your own character say.
People more creative than me will probably come up with better ideas,
but I think there's fair bit of opportunity for AI to enhance games in
ways like this.

It'll probably go badly at the start, with games just trying to cash in
on the AI craze and results that are widely mocked, but I think it's
something that could be refined into something 10 years from now that
we're taking for granted.

--
l/ // Ross Ridge -- The Great HTMU
[oo][oo] rridge@csclub.uwaterloo.ca
-()-/()/ http://www.csclub.uwaterloo.ca:11068/
db //

On 01/04/2023 20:23, Ross Ridge wrote:
> JAB <noway@nochance.com> wrote:
>> So why the two minds, well the easy one first. This is Ubisoft so I have
>> my doubts they use this so that more time can be spent polishing the
>> creative parts of the dialogue. My expectation is you'll end up with
>> half the workforce producing the same output they currently do. The
>> second one, if this works I can see it then seeping into the more
>> creative parts and then you get into is an AI actually creative or is it
>> just efficiently rehasing someone else's work.
>
> Well, humans even at their most creative are still just mostly rehashing
> someone else's work. Everything is derivitive, so it's more a question
> of degree, how closely these AIs are copying other works.
>
> I don't know what Ubisoft specifically is trying to do with AI, but
> I think AI has some interesting potential for games, specifically
> for dynamically generated content. For example, I could see it being
> used with procedurally generated quests, to give each generated quest
> distinctive NPC dialog. So rather than just replacing kill 10 goblins
> with kill 12 kobolds in the same text, you'd have unique dialog each
> time explaining why these monsters need to die.
>
> I could also Grand Theft Auto type of game having one of those post-game
> recap sequences where the accomplishments of the player are recounted,
> but in the form of AI generated rap video. Or imagine an RPG where
> the pre-generated characters in your party aren't just bantering with
> each other, but also responding what you have your own character say.
> People more creative than me will probably come up with better ideas,
> but I think there's fair bit of opportunity for AI to enhance games in
> ways like this.
>
> It'll probably go badly at the start, with games just trying to cash in
> on the AI craze and results that are widely mocked, but I think it's
> something that could be refined into something 10 years from now that
> we're taking for granted.
>

This one is in the development process to help write voice scripts so
not dynamically generated content. For that part, I like you, can see
some interesting possibilities for creating more lived in worlds where
NPC's actually go about their everyday lives and don't just stand there
forever waiting for the PC to talk to them and then they splurge out
whatever they are meant to say. For something like quests I'm not so
sure but I could see having a tool that allows a developer to bounce
ideas of an AI being useful. I've had a lot of fun playing AI Dungeon
which is basically co-op story telling but the second participant is an AI.

One I would really like to see, much because this seems not to advanced
for years and years - enemies in FPS'es that actually respond to threats
in a more lifelike way. A game that did try this was Brother in Arms.
The second one in the series was the best example as enemies would react
to, for example, being flanked and try and move to different cover on
indeed try to outflank you. It was interesting but I wouldn't say wholly
successful as you could see that it was still scripted it's just those
scripts were more complex.