Palworld studio Pocketpair says its new publishing division won't handle games that use generative AI: 'We don't believe in it'
-
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.
you forgot rock.
-
Yeah that’s kind of my point. That’s a vastly more complicated thing than SQL.
But it also doesn’t need to be as exact as SQL, which removes some kind of complexity.
-
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.
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.
-
This post did not contain any content.
Palworld studio Pocketpair says its new publishing division won't handle games that use generative AI: 'We don't believe in it'
Pocketpair Publishing boss John Buckley says we're already starting to see a flood of 'really low-quality, AI-made games' on Steam and other storefronts.
PC Gamer (www.pcgamer.com)
Obligatory @Angry_Autist@lemmy.autism.place
-
Procedural generation is theoretically deterministic, but it’s a fairly minor distinction.
Generative AI is too. Maintain your seed and you should get the same result every time.
Most of the SaaS AI tools don’t expose control over their RNG, but some self-hosted ones do.
-
you forgot rock.
There’s Rock, Rock With Arms, and Big Rock Snake
-
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.
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.
-
Generative AI is too. Maintain your seed and you should get the same result every time.
Most of the SaaS AI tools don’t expose control over their RNG, but some self-hosted ones do.
Generative AI is by definition non deterministic.
-
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.
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?
-
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.
I’m not making assumptions about their financial situation. I’m critical of their hypocrisy. I don’t care about the excuses.
-
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?
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.
-
I’m not making assumptions about their financial situation. I’m critical of their hypocrisy. I don’t care about the excuses.
Your expectations are too high and your cynicism is clouding your judgment.
-
Generative AI is by definition non deterministic.
Neural networks are deterministic. In LLMs, it outputs probabilities, which are picked from via seeded RNG. Image generation tries multiple options based on different seeds, then picks the best fit as identified by a neural network and repeats. For both, if you give a specific model the same inputs, you’ll get the same output.
The public-facing interfaces don’t give seed control, which means they give a different output each time, but that isn’t an inherent property of generative AI.
-
Your expectations are too high and your cynicism is clouding your judgment.
My expectations are perfectly reasonable, and my cynical judgement of the industry keeps getting justified.
-
My expectations are perfectly reasonable, and my cynical judgement of the industry keeps getting justified.
You sound like me when I was young and stupid. Have a good one my dude
-
“We might deal in derivative IP, but it’s our derivative IP!”
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.
