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.
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?
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 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.
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.
Transparency sucks
-- Every snakeoil salesman ever
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.
Usually it's more responsible to disclose things.
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.
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.
Hmm... Do I side with Epic, famous for:
Or with Steam?
can we have two weeks without a shit take from Tim Sweeney ?
They see that AI badge lowers their profits so of course they are lobbying against such thing. Big corps are not your friends.
Tim Sweeney claims it’s a “Scarlet Letter” which makes players “try to kill the game”
Yes, and?
Epic Games CEO can go fuck himself!
Complete lack of self-awareness making such a statement.
In order to be successful, games have to launch on our competitors platform!
Moron.
“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.
It's wild that a CEO can just say this out loud without a mob of haters trying to kill their product.
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.
Tim Sweeney continues to be a whiny jealous entitled bitch, more at 11.
"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
Weird way to admit they're using AI, but OK.
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!
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.
I don't care that much, but I rather have that information then not.
Tim Sweeney
Fuck him, and fuck Unreal engine.
His last "point" doesn't make any sense.
You have to choose from either not using tools that can make you way more productive, and probably failing due to competition that does.
If "you've got to put it on Steam" and Steam tells you whether a game used AI or not, then everyone is on the same playing field.
That means if you think your game will fail because everyone is boycotting AI games, you are free to not use AI... and you won't "probably fail due to competition that does," because their games are also on Steam!
Hope I am explaining what that sounds like to me (a contradiction of his whole statement).
Also he can go to hell. Gaming is being kept alive by Steam and It's always little timmy trying to tear it down with his shitty manipulations. Why doesn't he buck up his ideas and go make an actual competitor to Steam?
What a nincompoop, an ignoramus! A real maroon!
Some people will be turned off, some people won't care. Don't see the issue of labelling games as containing AI assets as some people want to support games made through 100% human input, give them that ability.
Epic sucks, unreal sucks like nobody acts like mcdonalds is the worlds best burger because it sells a lot, it's easy cheap junk food. But these software ceos think they actually produce great software when it's just easy cheap junk too.
Why should they fail when the competition fails by default in his argument.
Take a shot whenever you hear or read 'Epic Games CEO says'. Physically impossible to read that shit sober.
“If you want to launch a gamesnack, and get it as widely publicized as possible, you’ve got to put it on Steamstore shelves so people can wish listsee it and if you want to play it on Steameat ot, then you have to get this Scarlet Letter of AIingredients attached to your product, and now there is a hater community [of parents] trying to kill the gamesnack.
...
I think it’s really irresponsible of Valvethe FDA. They shouldn’t do it, because it makes it much, much, much harder for a game developer snack company to have a chance of success. You have to choose from either not using tools that can make you way more productiveyour product way more addictive, and probably failing due to competition that does [in less regulated markets?]."
Boo fuckin' hoo, Tim.
🤡
Sure sweeney, how about you address your defence of Grok doing kiddy stuff first.
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.
It’s not really surprising, they’re forcing so many slop tools into ue6 that they don’t want to ruin another engine’s reputation after ue5’s disaster.
They’re not interested in actually doing the thing that would earn positive reputation though, they’d rather hide it
Hey Tim grab deez nuts dickhead.
Fuck off, Sweeney.
If disclosing the use of genai will make a game fail, then not using it can't make studios "fail due to conpetition that does", because said competition will fail. You just said that, Tim.
Bro is just salty cause he has to admit he likes using AI slop if he wants to publish on steam
how about fuck off?
Wait, so studios will have to avoid using AI tools, but then other people that do use those tools will be eating their lunch? Either there are a significant number of people that will base purchasing decisions on whether a game used AI in production, or there are not. This is a trivial question to answer by polling customers, or looking at what happens with competing products in your market segment, or any other variety of basic market research. Companies have to work with questions like this constantly.
Epic is exclusively mad because they think there are many people that will avoid (or pay less for, or delay purchase, or expect higher quality, or more worthwhile content, or... Anything like that) games that are produced with AI, and every game made with UE6 will have to bear that scarlet letter, and suffer lower sales. If they really believed you can make much bigger and better games with the new tools, then they would do it, and people will get over their skepticism to play fun games.
Epic games can shove it's corporate opinion up it's own corporate ass.
Imagine using AI, an environmentally and moral impact. People should be aware of that before making any kind of purchase; Valve not only agrees with such, but also is enforcing such policies in places they can enact such causes. Those who cry out it’s unfair are the people who want to hurt the environment and the people (both workers and customers)
No one’s asked nor wanted this treatment. Tim swiney has horrible takes and should be processed like any other capitalistic pig
oh nooo, I'm so scared of my game losing to the competition using AI tools that everyone fuckin hates. Whatever will I do to have value in the eyes of the customers?
Lol
What a piece of shit. Stfu.
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.
top 91 comments