Hacker News Reader

Comment by Hilliard_Ohiooo | Hacker News Reader

Video game seem like the perfect fit for llm use and I don't understand why it hasn't happened already.

It's expensive, early attempts didn't impress, and many gamers are hostile to the tech because it threatens the livelihood of game creators and impacts gaming hardware prices.

IMHO at least 2 reasons, the jagged frontier (you cant easily evaluate the capabilities of your companion, I expanded a bit on https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49419952 ) and probably riskier in a lot of story games the risk of spoilers if the model isn't sandboxed properly, which I don't think is trivial to do as you don't know the training set which probably includes games and books games might be based on.

It depends on if you want samey games or anything creative.

You could have complex realistic dialogue for innkeeper #28917 in the little hamlet of ass backwards, but:

One: do you really want that? There is such a thing as too much realism in a video game.

Two: do you really want all NPCs in all games to speak nigerian business english?

Reminder for 2: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2024/apr/16/techscape...

It's a simple thing:

Who wants to read AI-generated articles and respond to AI-generated comments? Probably not many. For same reason gamers mostly don't want to chat with AI-backed NPCs. More is only better when it has meaning.

> More is only better when it has meaning.

Well there are a lot of AAA gaming companies that should learn that. But instead they feel they have to ad MOAR CONTENT and then complain of balooning costs...

at the current token prices, far too expensive, but in medium/long term I think we will see a revolution in this field, the concepts are already there (and the expensive proofs of concept already work)

Because games are entertainment, but outputs generated by current AI are rage inducing and felt hostile, not entertaining. It just isn't past the "make it work" stage.

Why would anyone want to have an LLM generate content in a game when people can barely stomach it generating awful pictures and generic prose?

Who would want to have a non-deterministic, unreliable, out-of-your-control companion in a single player game?

What kind of game designer would find it acceptable to have no control over large swathes of their own game? Who would like to play a game that no one really created?

Games are where art meets engineering to create entertainment and awe. LLMs don’t fit.

I'm especially interested in how this can be applied to the world of the game. I think that creates much more interesting results than NPCs who can hold dynamic conversation. Imagine an MMO where quests you complete actually shape the world (its landscape, structures and enemies). Then dynamic quests can be created based on the new world, creating a living loop.

It did, look at the game Suck Up or a variety of Skyrim mods. Problem is gamers are hostile to any obvious trace of IA in their games. Also, consumer hardware is overall too weak to run a convincing llm model.

LLMs have only been really good for a couple years. You can bet that the remaining AAA studios are working hard on figuring this out in current unreleased products.

One challenge I see is that to work well and stand above 'easy' implementations the game would need to provide a rich context for the AI to exist in and interact with. Skyrim is a richly detailed world with an engine that allows that level of interaction, especially as it builds upon earlier elder scrolls games. Then there's the factor of whether commercial studios with the capacity to make that world in the first place (which has been a major draw for players) will invest further budget into AI to add more value, and if they have options to see a return on that investment via the main purchase price or additional costs.

just offer a separate subscription to host the companion model. I feel dirty typing this.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com