4 ms·

Few Shall Return is now gen-AI free

archerx 10mo ago
Thank you for virtue signaling I guess. So I’m guessing you didn’t use any A.I. for the code as well because otherwise it would hypocritical.
- unethical_ban 10mo ago
  No it wouldn't.
  - cinntaile 10mo ago
    LLMs are of course generative AI. If they use that then their claim is not correct.
    - free_bip 10mo ago
      From the article, their claim is only about AI-generated assets (both in the game and its marketing), not logic. This is what people usually refer to when they say a game is "AI-Free"
      - cinntaile 10mo ago
        They should call it Gen AI-light!
      - archerx 10mo ago
        What kind of cope is this? You know damn well they are using LLMs and are being hypocritical which is ironic for a virtue signaling post.
  - archerx 10mo ago
    Yes it would.
wildzzz 10mo ago
Personally I don't care that much if a developer uses generative AI. There's a lot of single person studios out there that could greatly benefit from pushing some of the tedious tasks onto AI so they can get back to actually making the game run well. I think it's pretty obvious when a developer leans too hard into AI and makes a game that either just looks like slop or is indistinguishable from other cheaply made games in the genre. I'm playing Trepang2 right now. They used AI to write some of the messages found on papers and devices in the game. Finding them, or even reading them, has no bearing on the gameplay. They just help contribute to the lore and offer better insight into the world. I think there's some fun unlockables for finding them all. They found a way to add value to the game without drawing too much developer focus away from critical tasks (adding new levels and fixing bugs). Same with marketing materials. As long as the marketing doesn't misrepresent the game, I don't think it's a big deal that they used AI to make a 2D pixel art drawing in the poster for a 3D game. It's something else entirely if they used AI generated 3D characters in marketing materials for a 2D pixel art game. I think developers need to be careful when using AI, they have to ask themselves if the generated content either misrepresents the game or dilutes the creativity.
- ronsor 10mo ago
  My perspective is similar: I don't mind AI, as long as the game is good and fun. If your game is unfun and/or looks like crap (though this is subjective), then I want nothing to do with it whether you used AI or not.
  - BizarroLand 10mo ago
    To me it's a funding issue. If you have the $$$ to afford art for something you'll be selling that is art-dependent, then you don't have an excuse to not pay artists. If you don't have the money, especially during the prototyping phase, then feel free. You weren't going to be paying artists anyway. But, as you approach releasing the product, or once you're selling it and making money, you should strive to do everything you can to hire and pay artists appropriately, if for no other reason than you'll likely get a better quality product that is more cohesive across the board. AI assets are a gapfiller, not an end goal.
NuclearPM 10mo ago
Why?
jaredcwhite 10mo ago
This is what a pipeline which includes genAI tools should look like: using them for placeholders/prototypes/internal demos only, and making sure everything is properly labeled so it's replaced by correct, production assets created by real artists. Good for them to disclose this and do the right thing. Seems to be the expected path for follow in 2026 now that the hype cycle is crashing to a halt.

Thank you for virtue signaling I guess. So I’m guessing you didn’t use any A.I. for the code as well because otherwise it would hypocritical.

unethical_ban 10mo ago
No it wouldn't.
- cinntaile 10mo ago
  LLMs are of course generative AI. If they use that then their claim is not correct.
  - free_bip 10mo ago
    From the article, their claim is only about AI-generated assets (both in the game and its marketing), not logic. This is what people usually refer to when they say a game is "AI-Free"
    - cinntaile 10mo ago
      They should call it Gen AI-light!
    - archerx 10mo ago
      What kind of cope is this? You know damn well they are using LLMs and are being hypocritical which is ironic for a virtue signaling post.
- archerx 10mo ago
  Yes it would.

wildzzz 10mo ago

Personally I don't care that much if a developer uses generative AI. There's a lot of single person studios out there that could greatly benefit from pushing some of the tedious tasks onto AI so they can get back to actually making the game run well. I think it's pretty obvious when a developer leans too hard into AI and makes a game that either just looks like slop or is indistinguishable from other cheaply made games in the genre. I'm playing Trepang2 right now. They used AI to write some of the messages found on papers and devices in the game. Finding them, or even reading them, has no bearing on the gameplay. They just help contribute to the lore and offer better insight into the world. I think there's some fun unlockables for finding them all. They found a way to add value to the game without drawing too much developer focus away from critical tasks (adding new levels and fixing bugs). Same with marketing materials. As long as the marketing doesn't misrepresent the game, I don't think it's a big deal that they used AI to make a 2D pixel art drawing in the poster for a 3D game. It's something else entirely if they used AI generated 3D characters in marketing materials for a 2D pixel art game. I think developers need to be careful when using AI, they have to ask themselves if the generated content either misrepresents the game or dilutes the creativity.

ronsor 10mo ago
My perspective is similar: I don't mind AI, as long as the game is good and fun. If your game is unfun and/or looks like crap (though this is subjective), then I want nothing to do with it whether you used AI or not.
- BizarroLand 10mo ago
  To me it's a funding issue. If you have the $$$ to afford art for something you'll be selling that is art-dependent, then you don't have an excuse to not pay artists. If you don't have the money, especially during the prototyping phase, then feel free. You weren't going to be paying artists anyway. But, as you approach releasing the product, or once you're selling it and making money, you should strive to do everything you can to hire and pay artists appropriately, if for no other reason than you'll likely get a better quality product that is more cohesive across the board. AI assets are a gapfiller, not an end goal.

NuclearPM 10mo ago

Why?

jaredcwhite 10mo ago

This is what a pipeline which includes genAI tools should look like: using them for placeholders/prototypes/internal demos only, and making sure everything is properly labeled so it's replaced by correct, production assets created by real artists. Good for them to disclose this and do the right thing. Seems to be the expected path for follow in 2026 now that the hype cycle is crashing to a halt.