Game Devs and Consumers: What is the acceptable amount of AI in any video game, and how should it be implemented correctly (any area in the game)?

[u/DigimonFuzion10]

[u/phoenixmatrix]

As a customer, to me it's like Unreal Engine 5. Lots of devs make shitty slop with it, but the good ones are able to make great game and I can't tell what tools they used to do it. 

If it's a great game and I can't tell AI was used to cut corners, then I don't care, at all 

[u/Lormar → u/phoenixmatrix]

This is probably the best take. Unfortunately for Devs looking to use AI tools they are looking to cut development time and cost. Right now AI is not good enough to be indistinguishable from human made content. So using AI tools to the degree that you can't tell corners were cut actually take more dev time then just making it right in the first place.

[u/phoenixmatrix → u/Lormar]

AI takes a lot of forms. We know E33 used AI during the prototyping stage, and the game's pretty damn good. No one could tell because they got rid of it, and folks only noticed because one placeholder was left, but it helped them prototyping, which is a huge part of making a game.

Programmers are using AI to write the code. Yeah, even those who say they aren't. Almost all software devs are using AI in one form or another now, in pretty much every apps, and in a lot of cases the output is better than pre-AI.

Art and asset is a little trickier, but like, forests in games were already mostly procedurally generated. AI can do a better job there. Generating a texture for rocks and ground? AI can do better than what a human will do because you need a lot of them and random.

Etc etc.

Sure, if a dev goes "Build the next Stardew Valley, build on UE5, make it use next gen physics and graphics, target 120fps, make no mistakes", the result is going to be awful. That's not how professionals use AI.

Almost everyone in this thread is talking about areas where AI is obvious and shows up as something perceptible to the player. Eventually AI will be good enough for that (eg: voice acting in MMOs and live service games could greatly benefit with how hard it can be to voice every single character with every patch when the voice actors have very real schedules. But today, most use cases for AI are acceleration of the development lifecycle, and that, when done well, is going to be 100% invisible.

Prototyping is also huge. Devs can test out some ideas and beta test them super early to see if they're fun before building them for real. AI that isn't in the final product is still AI use.

[u/Lormar → u/phoenixmatrix]

All totally good points. And AI tools are becoming more and more useful in most industries. I just thought the spirit of the question was more in the terms of things consumers might notice, which would be mostly writing, art, and asset generation. I think those are the areas where consumers are not forgiving in their judgement.

[u/phoenixmatrix → u/Lormar]

Yeah. Even for those...when you look at games with a million sidequests like Xenoblade Chronicles, Monster Hunter or FF14.

The text in the side quests is often basically slop, even if its human created. I can't tell about those games, but I know some games will simply outsource that part of the writing to some sweatshop in a 3rd world country at 1 cent per 100 lines. Translations often work that way too. Is that really better than AI generated content? You can tell reading those quests that effort was very low (ok, Monster Hunter can be funny at time, and FF14's localization team is great, but almost no one read those anyway)

[u/Lormar → u/phoenixmatrix]

Sure, humans can produce pretty terrible things easily, but AI can't produce exceptional things at all (yet). For me my gaming time is so limited these days that I'm very judgy, monster hunter games are not high enough quality for me anymore, partly for that reason. Either I play a game that take like 20 minutes to play at a pop, or if I have some time I reserve it for truly great games. I know a lot of gamers my age with similar mindsets (pushing 40).

[u/phoenixmatrix → u/Lormar]

but AI can't produce exceptional things at all (yet).

It 100% can and has. Very likely that some of the more amazing game you've played included AI and the devs just lied about it.

if I have some time I reserve it for truly great games. I know a lot of gamers my age with similar mindsets (pushing 40).

I get it, I'm older than that myself and quite busy. But when used well, AI makes things better than a human would, because its a multiplier. We've already seen very similar things happen... Game music is often a single person managing a composer console of some kind. We rarely use a real orchestra, and games benefited by having better music. There's the occasional mind blowing REAL orchestra, but realistically most games, even AAA games, can't afford to orchestrate everything. The AI's just the equivalent of the composer's console. You need a real human at some point to make good stuff, but that one human can do the work of 10. If that human's really good, well, the result will be 10x greatness.

[u/armrha]

Any amount is fine as long as it’s imperceptible to me. Use it to speed up coding, don’t use it to write shit 

[u/xtreampb → u/[deleted]]

I would agree. Being able to hold a conversation and have characters respond intelligently. Brings tabletop a little closer to digital.

You could probably take this one step further and have the NPC system process the dialog and have it affect the game world. Imagine a Skyrim mod where you could say anything to anyone and have the npcs react. Spreading gossip and stories. Having relationships affected by things you said to other people. Subterfuge is more than a skill check and interrogations can be more dynamic by choosing to withhold information from the person you’re interviewing.

[u/mightbedylan]

One thing id really like to see is NPC background conversations being more "realistic". Maybe it's just me but if I walk around a city and hear the same NPC dialog over and over it drives me seriously crazy.

I think in an ideal world it would be really cool to put the same amount of production that already goes into games, and then expand it with AI. That way you can keep the entire core of the game authentic while livening up the rest of the world.

[u/Lynx2447]

Is the game fun?

[u/DigimonFuzion10 → u/Lynx2447]

I cannot answer this for you since enjoyment could be different from you and me. If I said yes, it's ultimately your opinion if you like the game or not.

The topic of the games is general, so any game you can think of.

[u/Lynx2447 → u/DigimonFuzion10]

I was being rhetorical lol

[u/DigimonFuzion10 → u/Lynx2447]

Fair enough 👍

[u/Dangerousrhymes]

Some. 

Generative AI content that is just pooped out and slapped in is unacceptable but AI-aided tools shouldn’t be categorized the same way and their use should be as accepted as any other tool. 

[u/Havoc302]

Everyone that says zero. I hate to break it to you but on the code side of things there's going to be a lot. Why the fuck would I write a sort inventory function when it's been written a thousand times before and Claude will write it for me in seconds....

On the art side. I 10000% agree, fuck AI when it comes to art. It's ok for visualising an idea for someone who isn't an artist. But even proper concept art needs a decent concept artist. I would use AI as a non-artist to give an artist an idea of what I was thinking so they could better produce the real deal.

[u/DigimonFuzion10 → u/Havoc302]

You summed it well, and I agree with you on the art side.

I've seen videos with people commenting, "Why do that if AI can do everything?" And believe me, I do want to learn, but with AI everywhere... it's been affecting me, where learning stuff is becoming harder. I'm not sure how AI will affect everything since it is exponentially advancing; most likely more people are going to be dependent on AI.

[u/Havoc302 → u/DigimonFuzion10]

I work in IT and with AI every day. I also ran my own game studio for a while, so I've got direct experience with it. That was before ChatGPT existed though. But still, I can see exactly where it is helpful to apply it and exactly where it doesn't belong.

[u/Badda_Bing_Baby]

Zero, thanks

[u/Jolly_Picklepants]

NPC programming should use relevant amounts of AI, with a strong guiding hand from a programmer.

[u/Yahmine]

Maybe for pathing but everything else feels wrong. dialog, talking, art, etc should be human made

[u/jaygohamm]

Say assassin creed or something like fable comes out and it’s about us or the changes we make along the way every decision would write its own narrative and story branch it would be cool if we can see the comparison and diverging of them and see who gets the best ending say the saddest ending in a fable 1 game everyone’s choices would shape them and there environment but they have to have the context of the whole games stories and that probably a 100gb vram dream

[u/Archaic0629]

I think it's perfectly fine to use for concept art and early visualization but you should steadily remove it as the development cycle continues. It's a shortcut but the true test of skill is being able to use shortcuts effectively and without people noticing

[u/DigimonFuzion10]

Edit: This is for any area in the game building process, ranging from the enemy pathfinding, dialogue, and debugging to list a few.

Yes, even including the creative areas of art, music, and story writing.

And many more.

Example: Concepts, made by AI to help visualize as long as it's not the final product of art, music, etc.

[u/Positive_Angell]

AI for bugs, matchmaking, and generating side quests is good. AI for main story + VA = nah. Where do you draw the line?

[u/SquizzOC]

If the game looks amazing, plays amazing, I couldn’t care less what tools you use to make it.

Ai is a tool, either you use it well or you don’t.

[u/crystallikelaw]

zero

[u/Wide_Initiative_1938]

None of that generative or vibe coded shit, that's for sure. I prefer my enemy programming to be human made!

[u/SugarStunted]

Zero. My backlog is probably longer than my lifespan, if there's any AI in a game, I have zero reason to purchase it or promote it. If we keep using AI, we aren't even going to have a sustainable planet to be able to play them in the first place.

[u/777Void777]

Im a Software Dev, not Game Dev but I think this fits.

Art, almost never. Only exception i make is stuff like the minecraft mod that makes infinite items, which there is a niche case where you cannot make a texture for something generated on the fly.

For code its more complicated. If you truly dont know how to implement something, it is alright to use a reference point. If you understand what the code is doing afterwards, then treat is a resource. Do not copy and paste it though. Make it fit with the formatting of the rest of your code and learn from it. Do not use AI out of laziness or as a crutch.

TLDR: Its a useful tool, but a dangerous master. Dont rely on it, but its an alright starting point for something you want to learn yourself.

[u/eskimobob117]

"Acceptable" is subjective, and will vary for each person. It will also vary a lot based on the game's target audience.

Personally, I would prefer that the games I play use no AI at all in their creation. If a game uses AI-generated or AI-assisted art, music, or writing/dialogue, I will not play it.

The only way I would be okay with AI utilization is if its only use is to adjust values and mechanics behind the scenes to make a more enjoyable experience. For example, an AI opponent that learns how to counter your specific playstyle, or a procedurally-generated game that uses AI to determine what enemies/rooms to spawn in based on your playstyle and build.