this post was submitted on 22 Oct 2025
372 points (99.2% liked)

PC Gaming

12597 readers
779 users here now

For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki

Rules:

  1. Be Respectful.
  2. No Spam or Porn.
  3. No Advertising.
  4. No Memes.
  5. No Tech Support.
  6. No questions about buying/building computers.
  7. No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
  8. No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
  9. No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
  10. Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] TheObviousSolution@lemmy.ca 41 points 1 week ago (3 children)

"We might deal in derivative IP, but it's our derivative IP!"

[–] AstralPath@lemmy.ca 39 points 1 week ago

Derivative over generative any day if you ask me.

[–] QuoVadisHomines@sh.itjust.works 21 points 1 week ago (1 children)

To be fair Nintendo was heavily inspired by other artists work when designing Pokemon.

[–] KingGimpicus@sh.itjust.works 12 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (4 children)

Nintendo wasn't "inspired" by shit. They made an ice cream cone a Pokémon. Keys on a ring? Pokémon. 8 varieties of elemental flavored dog? Check. Oh hey cool look a 2d image on a computer oh wait it's actually a Pokémon. Dog? Cat? Snake? Bird? Horse? All Pokémon. IMO nothing in Pokémon is actually "inspired", only ripped off.

[–] QuoVadisHomines@sh.itjust.works 13 points 1 week ago

Im casually suggesting they were "inspired" by other artists work. Many of the Red/Blue era were rip offs.

[–] Zahille7@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago

They made Goth Mommy GF into a pokemon with "Gothita"

How many sentient clouds are also pokemon? Or that one that's literally just a balloon?

I swear pokemon ran out of creativity by gen 3 - and I'm not even a pokemon fan.

[–] Bluegrass_Addict@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)
[–] Zahille7@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago

There's Rock, Rock With Arms, and Big Rock Snake

[–] paultimate14@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

What a silly thing to say.

Is Mickey Mouse uncreative because it's just a mouse? Is Yogi Bear uncreative because it's just a bear?

Is Sherlock Holmes uncreative because it's just a British guy? Especially if giving things magical abilities doesn't count, then vampires, zombies, magicians, pretty much the entirety of fantasy is just "ripping off" humans. You think Tolkien was a good writer? You fool- the Ents are just trees, how boring! Gandald is just an old human, frodo is just a short dude!

So what does that leave that is original? Should all of our ficitiln need entirely new ideas? Do our writers need to invent new qwarks and new rules for how they interact, so that fictional universes can have different elements where we can imagine life forms without carbon that interact? Would it still be derivative to you if we keep the strong nuclear force the same in this fictional universe?

[–] KingGimpicus@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 week ago

Inspiration is taking your peanut butter and putting it in my chocolate. You can't just take the chocolate slap some eyes on it, and call it chocomon. Make it do cool shit like turn into a giant angel or trex or some shit like a properly inspired pocket monster. Or make a funny little blue slime guy and give him apocalypse level magic spells or something. Yeah That sounds good.

[–] jaselle@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 week ago

Derivative IP is so fucking different from gen AI. It's stupid IP laws that force what could have been a commercial fangame to instead be legally distinct.

[–] oce@jlai.lu 8 points 1 week ago (3 children)

I think it could work to give dynamic and varied answers to secondary characters given good prompts and other guardrails to preserve the immersion. As long as the core elements of the games are not AI generated slope, and developers are honest about where it was used.

[–] OttoVonNoob@lemmy.ca 41 points 1 week ago (4 children)

As an amateur game dev, I believe AI will crash out for the public before it becomes truly useful for programming. I’ve heard colleagues try to use AI , but it often just creates more work. When the AI doesn’t know the answer, which is often. it makes something up, leading to errors, crashes, or hidden issues like memory leaks. I’d rather write the code correctly from the start and understand how it works, than spend hours hunting down problems in AI-generated code, only to never find the issue. Full disclosure I use Chatgpt to edit my dialogue as my English is not great.

[–] dukemirage@lemmy.world 9 points 1 week ago

Your anecdote checks out with a study I heard about. Office teams that were using LLMs for a few months reported that results are faster, but editing took longer than doing it conventionally in the first place. Generating boiler plate code and documentation could be another very useful use case in software dev, and I don't really care if that's used. Like in your use case, spell/grammar checking, using LLMs is a natural development of the tools that we already had. Your text processors marks errors, who cares if it's powered by an LLM or by a huge heuristic rule set?

[–] ryathal@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 week ago

I don't think AI code generation is going to be a revolution anytime soon, but AI voice and AI image generation is likely going to stay.

[–] oce@jlai.lu 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I am using them as a side tool for development. I think LLMs are already very performent for web knowledge search (e.g. replacing a search on stackoverflow), suggestions, explanations and error detection. Although is it worth the resources consumption? Not sure, but I can't afford not staying on top of the tooling available for my job. However, I agree, in my experience, the edit/agent modes are not efficient for coding, for now.

Generating secondary dialogues for a video game is quite a lower quality requirement than software engineering. So I think it could work there. It requires sounding natural, not being exact, LLMs are good at this.

[–] JayGray91@piefed.social 0 points 1 week ago (2 children)

web knowledge search

yeah for low stakes how-tos I've been asking more and more using one of the free LLMs. For higher stakes I ask for their sources if they can give it and go from them on my own.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Jesus_666@lemmy.world 13 points 1 week ago (5 children)

You'd think that that's the one thing LLMs should be good at – have characters respond to arbitrary input in-character according to the game state. Unfortunately, restricting output to match the game state is mathematically impossible with LLMs; hallucinations are inevitable and can cause characters to randomly start lying or talking about things thy can't know about. Plus, LLMs are very heavy on resources.

There are non-generative AI techniques that could be interesting for games, of course; especially ones that can afford to run at a slower pace like seconds or tens of seconds. For example, something that makes characters dynamically adapt their medium-term action plan to the situation every once in a while could work well. But I don't think we're going to see useful AI-driven dialogue anytime soon.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] makyo@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

I am really praying for the day corporate drops this foolish nonsense of foisting it on their company and employees - maybe even gasp enabling their teams to access and use the tools that help them do better and more creative jobs.

Because AI can fit into a lot of people’s toolsets really nicely, especially in creative fields like game design. Just need to drop the idea that AI is an authoritative final answer to our design problems and instead realize that it’s just another tool to help us get to those solutions.

[–] ICastFist@programming.dev 6 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Pocketpair Publishing boss John Buckley

Any relation to loss guy?

[–] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago

We're all cousins, so probably?

[–] ShinkanTrain@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Isn't that Garfield's owner

[–] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

That's Jon Arbuckle

[–] ShinkanTrain@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 week ago (1 children)

We don't believe in AI, says the developer of AI Art Impostor

[–] ICastFist@programming.dev 7 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

With how badly that game was received, maybe they understood the point. Maybe

[–] Tattorack@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

But... The developers of Palworld made a game featuring AI generated images.

[–] omarfw@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Companies can change their mind about stuff like this.

[–] Tattorack@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Yes. Except they're still selling that game.

[–] omarfw@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Yeah because they spent money making it. If you spend millions of dollars making a video game, you can't just shut it down and refund every order of it without putting your studio in serious jeopardy financially. That's not an option for them, so the best they can do is just not rely on AI anymore. Clearly they tried it and learned that it actually sucks ass.

[–] Tattorack@lemmy.world 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

It's a small game. They have Palworld to rake in the big bucks, so if their stance on AI use has changed, they can just remove that game.

[–] omarfw@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

They're currently being sued by Nintendo and palworld did not make anywhere near the kind of money that would let them survive a lawsuit AND a game cancellation.

You're making assumptions about their financials that are only ever true for enormous studios like epic games, which pocketpair is not. The gaming industry does not operate as simply as you think it does and companies don't have the freedom to throw money away on something as simple as virtue signaling.

It doesn't matter if a company used AI back in 2022 when it was new and less understood; it matters what companies choose now. If you're going to throw blind skepticism at them for not making arbitrary financial risks just to appease you, then you're not worth appeasing anyway because you're too cynical to be a potential customer.

[–] Tattorack@lemmy.world 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I'm not making assumptions about their financial situation. I'm critical of their hypocrisy. I don't care about the excuses.

[–] omarfw@lemmy.world -1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Your expectations are too high and your cynicism is clouding your judgment.

[–] Tattorack@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

My expectations are perfectly reasonable, and my cynical judgement of the industry keeps getting justified.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Shanmugha@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago
load more comments
view more: next ›