Gaming

So, if a dev uses AI, they fail because of haters, but they also win because they're more productive than devs that don't?

Being strong and weak at the same time is always a fun rhetoric.

Also, afaik, Valve only asks for disclosure of generative AI for asset generation, not productivity tools like coding assistance.

Very “if we stopped testing for COVID there would be no cases” energy.

Sweeney's not a fan of informed purchase practices. Good to know, Tim, I'll make sure to not float any cash your way.

I don't get it, if AI is so great and the future, wouldn't you be happy to disclose your use of it in your product?

Transparency sucks
-- Every snakeoil salesman ever

Usually it's more responsible to disclose things.

can we have two weeks without a shit take from Tim Sweeney ?

Weird way to admit they're using AI, but OK.

Timmy is just mad because his new game engine pressures devs to fill their games with AI slop, and Steam will force their developers to disclose it.

Hmm... Do I side with Epic, famous for:

1. Apple app store lawsuit because they didn't get enough of the profit
2. Google play lawsuit, ditto.
3. Paying publishers to release games exclusively on Epic Games Store, pushing up prices to gamers.
4. Many allegations by former allegations about toxic work culture, very long working hours, especially "crunch" times leading to burnout and mental health issues.
5. Aggressive loot boxing and monetization of games specifically targetting children.
6. Having to settle a lawsuit with the FTC for $275m to escape prosecution for breaching children's privacy laws and forced to issue a further $245m in refunds to customers who were victims of "dark patterns" employed by Epic.

Or with Steam?

Tim Sweeney claims it’s a “Scarlet Letter” which makes players “try to kill the game”

Yes, and?

I bet sketchy food producers also balked at the idea of ingredient lists when they were first rolled out. If you're offering something to others and think they might not like something you used in it, maybe it's better to avoid the thing rather than complain that you're being forced to tell people about it.

"we should be able to lie and sneak ai in. If they found out they wouldnt want it, and the people paying for it shouldnt have any say in the matter"

Utterly deranged take, as expected from him

I want to play quality games crafted by hand with love and intention and an artistic vision that the author brings to life.

Anybody who tries to argue that their product won't sell if the consumer is well informed doesn't make a quality product worth buying anyway.

He thinks his game won't sell because it has the AI scarlet letter but if he doesn't use it, his competition would have an edge over him because they use AI.

Does he realize how stupid he sounds since they would then have the scarlet letter of AI and his game wouldn't and would then sell better.

Tim Sweeney claims it’s a “Scarlet Letter” which makes players “try to kill the game”

That's because we don't want slop in our media, and we have a right to not want it.

What this shithead is saying is that customers should be lied to so they can't choose a product based on what they actually want.

ah ok, what's next? should we stop steam from forcing games to have their publisher's name linked to a game? Having "EA" on your game is a bit like a Scarlet Letter. But that's not fair, having a big publisher can help you get it as widely publicized as possible!

ah ok, what's next? should we stop steam from forcing games to have their bad reviews linked to a game? Having bad reviews on your game is a bit like a Scarlet Letter. But that's not fair, having a bad reviews makes it harder to get it as widely publicized as possible!

ah ok, what's next? should we stop steam from forcing games to have their price linked to a game? Having high margin prices shown publicly on your game is a bit like a Scarlet Letter. But that's not fair, revealing the full price after the user has already made emotional commitments can help you get it as widely publicized as possible!

Boo fuckin' hoo, Tim.

It's wild that a CEO can just say this out loud without a mob of haters trying to kill their product.

AI content is so loathed and despised that the influencers, film studios, software developers who have embraced it are simultaneously all desperate to downplay, lie and hide it.

But definitely not a speculation bubble! Keep repeating to yourselves that demand for AI is real and that people really value all the nauseating disgusting chatbot generated "art" and "insight" that you're spewing upon humanity.

Its deeply irresponsible to humanity that Epic Games exists and I have to hear a CEO's opinions

They see that AI badge lowers their profits so of course they are lobbying against such thing. Big corps are not your friends.

Complete lack of self-awareness making such a statement.

In order to be successful, games have to launch on our competitors platform!

Moron.

Epic games can shove it's corporate opinion up it's own corporate ass.

“If you want to launch a game, and get it as widely publicized as possible, you’ve got to put it on Steam so people can wish list it, and if you want to play it on Steam, then you have to get this Scarlet Letter of AI attached to your product

You don't have to, just don't use A.I. Easy.

If you’re proud of your use, it’s a non-issue, if you’re ashamed of it, why are you using it?

Transparency is only ever an issue when concealment and deceit are core elements of the activity.

Epic Games CEO can go fuck himself!

Tim should get in a small airplane

If what Steam does is such a problem for everyone involved, why doesn't Sweeny make a better product himself then?

Oh, he has but it's worse?

Whould've thought!

Tim Sweeney continues to be a whiny jealous entitled bitch, more at 11.

🤡

As a fan of AI, I want disclosure. Just as tech vegans get to avoid AI, I too would be able to actively seek out games that are doing neat things with it. Disclosure is good for everyone.

With an attitude like this, you have to wonder how many EA development teams are simply going to lie when prompted.

Not that they've released a game worth playing in a long time, but this makes me suspect the entire studio is drowning in AI slop.

While I think I understand what he means with regards to catching hate for being marked "AI". I think it should be marked, but give a scale of sorts. Then it is easier for people to decide what things they are "okay" with vs what they aren't. Like "AI voice over" is different than a game done "Mostly/completely AI". Which would also help the random people that really like AI to find games using it (obviously that crowd is niche).

Maybe allow marking in detail elements that are AI place holders for Early Access games, where the dev is a small team or single person (no excuse for AAA games with huge budgets). The context matters, and people that don't want any AI would already be leaving really bad reviews when they find out AI was used at all (along with demanding refunds). Could even be good for those Early Access games to find people to work with in replacing the place holders if people see things are still needed and reach out.

Would also be good if the same kind of scale markers could be applied to games that don't use AI but do use pre-made assets. Not like AI is the only cause for all the slop games.