Home
Creators
Search Recent Random
Posts
Search DMs Popular Hash Lookup Tags Random
Importer
Import FAQ
Register Favorites Keys Review DMs Logout
Community
Telegram ThePornDude
Home Creators Posts Import Register Favorites Logout

Don’t Let the Gaming Executives Normalize AI | Unpacked (Patreon)

Published:
2025-11-21 16:03:38
Imported:
2025-11

Content

A new episode of Unpacked is now available!

Files

Don’t Let the Gaming Executives Normalize AI | Unpacked

This video is brought to you by Berserk B.I.T.S, a net-hacking auto-battler launching on November 20th – https://store.steampowered.com/app/2348540/Berserk_BITS/ Let's talk about AI. Support us on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/SecondWindGroup Second Wind Merch: https://store.dftba.com/collections/second-wind https://sharkrobot.com/collections/second-wind

Comments

Ubersupersloth

Why not? It’s automating a job and copyright law is cringe anyway. I suppose there’s the environmental aspect which is fair enough, though.

Second Wind

Hmm, almost like you're describing something being used for a creative application, and not what was talked about in the video itself. But, go on.

David C

Agentic AI probably refers to agents; an instance of AI trained for a specific job basically. But yes, you do need to know and understand what the AI is producing, cuz you gotta be able to fix it if it's wrong, and you need to be more creative anyways rather than just derivative to really solve the human nuances of the problems you're working on. I will say that it does save me time as a developer if I hand it monotonous tasks or if I need a starting point for research into an unfamiliar system; but I treat AI as junior developer that is very eager to help. I'm gonna be double checking its work and changing it to match what I'm doing.

Second Wind

You seem to be missing the point that it's not the tools that are the problem, but how executives are implementing them at the cost of the people who work for them. Laying off institutional knowledge in place of these tools to reduce costs and generate profit. Not sure how that's "doomer slop", but it doesn't sound like you want to hear anything negative about AI usage so I'll leave it at that.

YellaChicken

In answer to the question about how they think losing all their coding talent just to have to hire it all back again for more money later is going to go, most Execs don't care about that. That's a future Execs problem. Company "wants" (not needs) are often driven by shareholders who just want to see "number go up, fast". They want to buy shares, see them increase in value and then sell them. Execs that facilitate this get nice fat bonuses and then leave to go to another firm with a big green tick on their CV against the "provides shareholder profit" box. Shareholders and chairmen are the ones hiring these Execs, so the ones that work for short term gain are the ones that get hired. This is what modern capitalism has morphed into. Everything is temporary, and to be milked for maximum gain over minimum time. It fucking sucks.

Second Wind

In that case, would you be happy with Yahtzee being replaced by AI that imitates Yahtzee to make Fully Ramblomatic?

Dread Pirate Mittens

Maybe AI should replace a few executives. It can offer legal advice apparently.

SCP 3887B

So, does this effect your guys opinion on games like The Alters or Arc Raiders? I see a ton of people calling out CoD and other games like it, but continuing to praise these 2 games. You ask me, sometimes to stand up for something you believe in, means you have to stop playing games you might like or even love.

Second Wind

Well, you've said people need to learn different jobs or do jobs differently. So, if I'm an executive and want to reduce costs, why not use AI to make Fully Ramblomatic? Why not train Yahtzee's voice on an AI model, have ChatGPT write his scripts, and just generate the animations using AI? Or would you not like that? You say the video is doomer slop, but I'm giving you a direct example of how these companies think about art - while you're just saying people need to accept these tools are here and "get over it". And if you're going to complain about debates, you've made personal attacks twice now which isn't exactly good debate practice :)

Second Wind

You probably won't like my answer, but the use cases were different for all three games. Arc Raiders uses it for its Ping System with contracted voice actors who knew going in their voices would be used to train their system for that, The Alters used it for placeholder background art (so they say) and Call of Duty straight up used it as final assets for their calling cards to, I suppose, reduce the cost of paying artists for all the different calling cards they make, of which there are a lot. I do think there's nuance to it - Nick

Brian S

The key is the belief that AI will learn to fix its mistakes or won't make them in the first place. Whether or not that happens is still unknown. I'll stick with older games, independent developers, and specific companies.

Second Wind

I'm covering in this video how the executives see this stuff. You see it pragmatically; the executives see it as a way to reduce costs. That's the difference. I have no issue personally with how they used it in Arc Raiders. They had the consent of the voice actors that trained their systems to make updating their ping system, which indicates every individual item in the game, more efficiently. That's a good use of it, imo. These tools should help with efficiency, but the way these executives see it, and trust me, I know having worked with them and they wanted to replace SEO writers with AI writers, they only view it as a way to reduce costs. That's what the entire video is about. They don't see it as a tool like you do. They see it as replacement. - Nick

SCP 3887B

To an extent yes. But at the same time, a lot of this is from the side of the ones making the games. Unless something has come out I don't know about, we don't know the terms of the Voice Actor's contract for Arc Raiders, with many VAs in general coming out about how unfavorable these contracts usually are and how it hurts them in the long run. We saw this extent thing happen with their last game, The Finals. As for The Alters, I admit there is more nuance. That said, even if we give them the benefit of the doubt and assume that they wouldn't have said or done anything if it wasn't caught, that still shows a willingness that people will still buy and praise these games. In the end, even if you give the biggest and best interpretation of these situations, its still at an industry level the same "2 steps forward, 1 step back" approach that gave us $70+ dollar games, pay walled "time savers", and a number of other practices that got us to this point.

Second Wind

Embark has said how they handled it with The Finals and Arc Raiders. For the most part, it SEEMS ethical, but we don't know if there's a royalty in place which would obviously make it even more ethical and better. If you've played the game, it makes sense that they would use it for their ping system. It points out every individual item in the game. For efficiency, I don't think it's realistic to have someone come back to the office every week to say the word "Toaster" or "Toothbrush". Opinions may vary - Nick

SCP 3887B

I suppose in this case we'll have to agree to disagree. Like I said in my original post, sometimes you have to stop supporting games you like/love to stand up to these kinds of practices. And I don't mean just AI. I personally have done this many times, and will probably do it again in the near future with a couple of games that are in development and/or ones I'm supporting at the moment.

Second Wind

Taking in the context of many of the larger game's publisher's actions over the last five years or so, it's hard not to see how they're just using it as a way to increase profits over actually taking care of their people. It's not like the AI tools for efficiency are new. It's the generative nonsense, AKA, the calling cards in Call of Duty that make it clear where the path is that they want to take these things. And just like with MTX, you give these people an inch and they take the whole runway. Consumers will decide at the end of the day, they're not wrong, but I don't think that means we shouldn't call it out and fight for checks and balances on these things.

Second Wind

Like I said earlier on in this convo, it's all about how you use the tool I think. Though, with the data centers and all that sucking up so much resources - while the tech behind gen AI might be interesting, it needs regulation. Right now, the people pushing the tools maybe aren't the best representatives of what it can actually help with or do, and much like NFTs and Crypto and all that, come from the most cynical money grubbing places.

Ubersupersloth

If the AI were as funny as Yahtzee, absolutely. It’s not so it’s a moot hypothetical but I genuinely wouldn’t see the problem.

Ubersupersloth

Ok but I don’t see why people being replaced by AI is bad in a vacuum. “Oh no. People will lose jobs.” Just like they did with pretty much any technological advance that led to more automation. I think the loom was a good thing even though it meant there were less need for weavers. The problem is how the loss of labour means that people get screwed over and a handful of rich people get even richer. That’s not an issue with AI, that’s an issue with capitalism.

Ubersupersloth

Well, there’s the environmental aspect of AI which is pretty damning. Plus, it’s not like the most profitable games are the best. Microtransactions/lootboxes aren’t good for a game but they don’t ruin the games enough for the loss in money from sales to counteract the increase in revenue of their inclusion.

Grump Chan

Do you believe every job needs to be automated, especially in the creative field? And do you have any reasons why copyright law is bad?

Grump Chan

Do you think human creativity is bad? Do you think humans don't want to be creative any more? Do you subscribe to AI channels? Like genuinely, why isn't it bad to you to get rid of the human connection aspect of art and culture and replace it with algorithms that just regurgitate what's already been done? Did you look at Buzzfeed or WatchMojo and think to yourself "everyone should emulate this"?

dateariane

"Whispers from the Star" is the first true agentic AI game that I know about. This is the dream: an AI driven NPC you can literally talk to. It has not gone well for the indie developer that made it. All the "let's play" videos I've seen are exercises in frustration. Now Microsoft wants to turn Windows into this?

Grump Chan

"Just don't play the game" really doesn't get into the aggressive monetization of this. But I do have to say, if you disagree with Nick and this video, just don't watch it. You complaining about it is bad actually and you should just avoid it.

Ryallen

There *should* be nuance in this topic and there *can* be good uses for generative AI in the hands of creatives but the main problem is that it creates far more problems than it solves. There are a couple of content creators online that are able to use it in a way that's fun and harmless (as harmless as this sort of thing can be, that is) but too many people are going to use it to replace actual workers, solve problems that AI shouldn't be asked to solve, or even purposes more nefarious like, say, forging evidence. People who are in favor of AI are too focused on what it could be rather than what it is and what it is is facilitating mass layoffs, polluting the planet, and spreading misinformation about just about anything. I think the best nuanced take we can have about this is to not condemn people who *have used* AI (case by case, of course) and to condemn those who advocate for it. (possibly case by case but probably not) You're not a bad person if you used AI for a personal project or to help you save time in something that shouldn't need that much supervision but if you're out here saying that AI is the future then I don't know what to tell you but the future is really bleak at the moment and we should probably try to prevent that

Sean Laverty

There's a difference between "automation to replace people" and "automation to enable people". In my company we're all working hard to leverage AI tools to alleviate our toil and enable us to provide more, better output. It is so far proving to be A Very Good Thing.

Ronny Cook

Yes, and certain lawyers who have submitted AI-generated briefs containing hallucinated case references and been sanctioned as a result have seen how that turns out... On the other hand, executives making unoriginal and derivative decisions would be nothing new. Increasing the bottom line by sacking your most expensive (and critical in the long term) workers is a trope for a reason. AI in its current form is the ultimate yes-man. If you ask it to solve a problem, it will generate a solution, and if it needs to invent facts for the solution to work, it will happily do so.

Colonel Sandurz

Word. Never been a better time to start on the old backlog or revisit some retro classics.

Ubersupersloth

1) If something can be automated, I think it should be. Surely the ideal is nobody has to work? Fully Automated Luxury Space Gay Communism and all. If someone wants to make something using creativity, I think that’s fine but the “you must do it to make a living” thing isn’t really worth protecting, IMO. 2) Copyright law, as it exists now, puts WAY too much power in the hands of the “owners” of whatever patent/trademark/whatever. It is almost exclusively used not for the common good (which is what it was designed to facilitate) but to make big businesses even richer.

Paul Evans

A good nuanced example is Cyberpunk 2 using it *with full consent of SAG actors* to spoof voices during iteration in writing/development. They are then going to get those actors to record the lines properly at the end. Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ocpXZyYdnJQ&t=42m

Jeff Hibbert

in re: Paul Evans' comment... I would be hard-pressed to believe that they WOULD bring me back in, if I was an actor, OR that every scrap of the fake stuff had been removed.

jombilywobbily

The problem with GenAI art is that it takes from artists, without credit, to generate the slop. I don't believe there's nuance in that AI is an awful umbrella term for many things, some good, some bad, and I believe we should review things on a case by case basis and go from there As for me, I'm very guilty of using OpenAI for search purposes. If Google hadn't dropped the ball and given me just Pinterest results for years on end, I wouldn't need to use ChatGPT as I did Google's search algorithm in the past. So far, I haven't been guilty of generating slop (though I don't think some databases have consented to being used; one does wonder and worry)

jombilywobbily

While there's definitely nuance between the three, I don't like how little we know in Embark's case and that which we do know, seems to set a bad precedent, to me at least

jombilywobbily

Break it up, you two This is insane, anyway. Star Trek is a show, it's not real, you guys

Tim Wilson

I was getting ready to warn Nick about the last time he got into this kinda stuff but this has been some very good, reasoned and professional responding from SW that’s further improved my understanding, as much as the other side of the “debate” has threatened to shrink my brain. Nice one Nick :D

Tim Wilson

I can only really comment on this from my own Profession, but in the legal sphere, which is mostly entirely data driven, AI is constantly pushed and constantly failing. The makers of the products rarely actually understand the market and at best you get a slightly incompetent, but very quick, PA. But I’m sure using it for incredibly complex computing creation and artistic endeavours can only be an unqualified success(!)