This is my field so I'm always looking for the angle that new tech will take. I still rank this lower than VR— with all of its problems— for potential to significantly change player interactions. Tooling to make games is a different story, but for actual use in games? I don't see it yet.
Granted, I'm certain there will be copyrights issues associated with this capability, which is why I don't think it will be established game companies who first take a crack at this approach.
Automating the tools so a smaller workforce can make more worlds and more possibilities? We're already there— but it's a very large leap to remove the human creative and technical intermediaries.
"The problem is what it takes to implement that. I've seen companies currently trying to do exactly that, and their demos go like this "ok, give me a prompt for the environment" and if they're lucky, they can cherry pick some stuff the crowd says and if they're not, they sheepishly ask for a prompt that would visit indicate one of 5 environment types they've worked on and include several of the dozen premade textured meshes they've made[...]"
I was clearly directly addressing what they said. Unless you have a specific, substantive, on-topic question or statement, I'm going to assume that you're just fishing for things to argue about.
Plus listing past examples doesn’t indicate future possibilities must conform to that… unless there is a specific argument on why that should be the case on the balance of probabilities… so are you sure you understood my previous questions?
Huh? Is this an AI response?
Using the RP models, over time I've found certain things that can guide them to creating better stories; an agent system is much easier to use but even using single character cards it's not hard to stuff them with a narrator and several individual characters in one go. I recently switched from kunoichi (8b, decent) to an Aria derivative (13b, much better).
In the majority of role-play stories I do now, it's super easy to refine the prompt so that characters don't necessarily provide pointless details + avoid all the common tropes, especially with newer models.
Maybe I should make a PoC, would be a fun project. But yeah I agree that chatting to an NPC about its day doesn't necessarily make for great gameplay - but it's relatively easy now to guide it into interesting scenarios/experiences, which _does_ make for great gameplay.
Ie the wife of the hunter you murdered in a fantasy game; normally we just think that we killed a character in a game - but when the hunter's wife decides in the background to train with a sword so that she can avenge her husband, then finally comes to find you and calls you out for murdering her husband - suddenly it's murder, and a revenge story. It's not too hard to prevent a decent model from injecting fluff (like where she bought her sword and how much for) into it.
I can’t think of a scenario within the limitations of real games with visual assets that have progressive plots and characters for which that would yield a better game than having people craft it. Players are going to be no more tolerant of bugs, slowdowns, bad dialog, plot holes, misleading information, and annoyance just because an LLM is the source rather than substandard design or QA.
Maybe I’m not quite grasping what you’re proposing?
This Civ idea at least seems like a new approach to some extent, but it still seems to conceptually not add much. Even if not, learning that it doesn't it's still worthwhile. But almost universally these ideas seem to be either buzzwordy solutions in search of problems, or a cheaper-than-people source of creativity with some serious quality tradeoffs and still require far too much developer wrangling to actually save money.
I'm a tech artist so I'm a bit biased towards the value of human creativity, but also likely the primary demographic for LLM tools in game dev. I am, so far, not compelled.