Very soon protesting the use of LLMs is like going to be like protesting the advent of the television. There is no stopping it. We should endeavour to ensure it is used ethically rather than becoming puritanical about its use.
this post was submitted on 29 Jun 2025
151 points (100.0% liked)
Games
19990 readers
431 users here now
Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)
Posts.
- News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
- Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
- No humor/memes etc..
- No affiliate links
- No advertising.
- No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
- No self promotion.
- No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
- No politics.
Comments.
- No personal attacks.
- Obey instance rules.
- No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
- Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.
My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.
Other communities:
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Nope, fuck that, fuck genAI it is unethical by virtue of stealing to train and vastly draining resources to power slop garbage.
Television was a medium, communication. GenAI is not communicating shit, it's trash sold on a lie.
Television was a medium
Yeah. We called it that because it was neither rare, nor well done. Bad writing has always existed.
it's trash sold on a lie.
You sweet summer child... The French have an expression for this: Plus ça change
It will take a fundamentally different algorithmic approach to make further progress in ML.
We have never figured out a different approach since it's inception in the 60s
There's still plenty of people who don't watch TV.
From the article:
Danilov posited that the mistake was either the work of a "careless translator taking shortcuts", or it was "done by someone on the dev/publisher side who couldn't be arsed sending last-minute missing lines for translation and decided to throw them in a random LLM without oversight".
Handong Ryu, who handled the Korean translation for the game, replied: "I was responsible for translating the vast majority of the Korean version of The Alters. Unfortunately, the same issue exists in the Korean version as well, which makes it more likely that the second scenario you mentioned is closer to the truth.
Sounds like this text was either added late in development or simply overlooked until after the last set of translation work had been completed, so the devs decided to let an LLM do it rather than getting billed for another batch of localisation.
Very dumb, especially as this puts them in direct violation of the Steam AI disclosure policy, but given the context I guess they figured no one would notice.
I have done translations and even for my own language I often use an LLM. It's the one thing they are actually amazing at. It's also probably not about "anybody noticing". It can very much be a single developer doing it on their own ChatGPT account and the QA didn't notice it.
I really don't care about this stuff though. The AI label should be for gen AI and not revising some text or translation imo.
The issue becomes: if they used Gen AI to create background filler text, can we be 100% certain it wasn’t used elsewhere in the production of the game?
If they really wanted background text, they should have paid someone to write some, or use Lorem Ipsum if they didn’t want to spend the money and no one would have cared.
Look at the salty downvotes
They could have used Google translate for these short last minute additions, and not a single fuck would probably notice. I hate this stupid overconfidence in AI.
Google Translate also uses an AI model.
When people are talking about dissatisfaction with AI usage, in this context they specifically mean Llama and GenAI. Google translate may use LLMs as part of their translation model, but it doesn't make up the whole pipeline and will work completely differently than copy pasting some text into an LLM and telling it to translate something.
It probably uses a GPT of some sort at this point, tbh. There is no reason whatsoever using Google's ML translation or ChatGPT's ML translation should make any bit of difference to people who are actually upset over this if they have given any thought whatsoever to their concerns.
"like it or not, gen AI is becoming an invaluable tool for developers"..
..who wish to take a dump on their work.
Super weird take, honestly. Procedurally generated content gets no hate, despite it being janky dogshit, too.
EDIT: lol your downvotes don't make your opinion more consistent
Like procedural generation, generative assets that are done well will be either indistinguishable from hand work, likely because there will be some involved, or will be incorporated in a way that they mesh well with everything else.
Everyone hated the procedural generation in no man's sky, for example, until enough work was done to make that just a piece of the game.
No Man's Sky was one of the most hyped video games in history due to procedural generation. The fact that they botched it on release is not relevant.
I don't agree at all, the hype was evident, sure, but the procedural generation was largely the reason people didn't like the game.
You stated that procedural generation isn't hated, but 'botching' the usage of it at release is the piece that irrelevant. The people hated it because of the, admittably bad, procedural generation.
You must be young. proc gen used to get tons of hate in the 2010 and such era, gamers complained about devs being lazy and not being willing to actually make levels/worlds/dungeons/whatever. This complaint was of course inconsistently applied.
These days people mostly just got used to it as normal. In 10 or 20 years, I'd wager the same will be true of gen ai.
load more comments
(4 replies)
There’s more than one argument against generative AI being used in games, and they don’t all apply to proc gen content. It’s an apples to oranges comparison in most cases.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Ita because you are still putting in the work to license or produce the individual parts used in procedural generation rather than using people's work without pay or permpermission.
load more comments
(32 replies)
It will be used as a tool in pre-production and early stages of asset creation and no one will notice afterwards.
You're expecting it to be used responsibly when we ourselves in general are very lacking in that department.
This here is a very good example of the actual use that will happen. A rush job to meet unrealistic deadlines. And that's what will happen as is the norm.
We don‘t know the cause in this case. Not replacing placeholder assets was a common mistake even before ai tools.
That's kinda the problem. We're already careless with the things we do ourselves. It can't be helped, nobody's perfect. But once we start delegating tasks, we lose the direct experience. Priorities shift, attention moves to something else and the chance of carelessness rises because it's no longer a problem we have to concern ourselves with.
Meanwhile, the LLM "learns". What it "learns", nobody knows because it does so mechanically. There's zero understanding.
It keeps "learning" every time it's fed something, so you don't have a static program that does what it's told. Instead it's a "living" program that applies what it "learns". And that makes it unpredictable in the long run.
This turns the user into a glorified middle manager who has to hover over their employee and make sure they did their job as they should have. And how many middle managers do you know with that kind of dedication, that isn't spiteful at its core?
The push against this is that the people depending on it to do the work become less dependable themselves. And unless you're an independent developer without a profit driven publisher breathing down your neck, this will be used in all the wrong ways as a standard instead of it being the exception.
I don’t think it’s important where the placeholder assets come from, or that mistakes will be more common when someone used gen AI instead of non-licensed stock image from a web search.
You're right. It's an opinion and only as important as the one having the opinion decides it to be.
According to the article as cited in this comment, we do know the reason and a rush job to meet a deadline is precisely why.
I wouldn’t say „precisely“ as those are (plausible) speculations.
"You're not actually supposed to read that text so this is not an issue." Good job missing the point.
That's kinda sloppy, mainly in the disclosure and translation department, but nothing that some updates won't solve.
I'm happy to support these devs with original ideas, even while they use some AI in a non-intrusive way. They have done something more important for in my book, which is following regional pricing.
It's stupid how several studios think charging my 3rd world country the same or even more than the US is a good idea. CDPR and bethesda think it's ok, but It's disgusting. I would rather support 11bit.
Damn, I was looking forward to playing this. Glad I read this first
Boycotting because someone made a mistake? Ok
Boycotting because they used generative AI to make their game instead of hiring writers. Even if this was the only part of the game they used it on (if you believe that, l have a bridge to seII you), I'm not going to give someone money if they couldn't even be fucked to hire some sci-fi writer off of fiverr to write their fill text with it.
I personally know artists and writers who are having to get jobs at fucking Walmart because of this shit. I'll be less irate about generative AI once we have universal basic income so that real artists can continue to generate real art alongside these soulless husks.
So they shouldn’t even use it as placeholder assets, instead of Lorem Ipsum?
Correct! If you're not going to support artists and writers, the least you can do is not support the industry that's actively destroying the fields of art and writing (on top of the myraid other problems with generative AI)
No artist or writer would have been hired for producing placeholder assets.
So do you just not play video games at all? Because the way you've just presented yourself you're not against using AI in games, you're against any use of AI.
How can you be sure that in any game AI wasn't used to generate some sort of an internal document or asset that would never be in the final product but was integral to the creation of the final product? Clearly you don't write every dev and ask if they use AI in any capacity, so what do you do?
My point is that I think you're taking a stance where you're unwilling to compromise on the use of AI, but only if you're aware that AI was used.
How can you be sure that in any game AI wasn't used to generate some sort of an internal document or asset that would never be in the final product but was integral to the creation of the final product?
I never claimed to be omniscient. I simply don't support a company after I find out that they have unethical business practices. What are you not understanding about this?
Got it, you're fine with AI usage as long as you don't know about it.
No? I just don't know that I should avoid a product if I don't know about the ethical problems with it. That's how boycotts work...
That's like saying you boycot Nestle but won't stop using any of their subsidiary products unless you accidentally find out that a brand not named Nestle is actually owned by Nestle.
You had a bridge to sell to anyone with the naivete to believe it's the only place AI was used. What about your naivity of believing that other games are not using AI, unless of course you stumble on the information about AI usage? Seems hypocritical to criticize others for giving the benefit of doubt while giving the benefit of doubt to all other developers simply because you don't know any better?
How the fuck would I boycott a brand for being owned by Nestle before I find out that it's owned by Nestle?
I don't know if other games are using generative AI. Maybe they are. If I find out they are, I will not buy them. If I don't find out that they are, how would I know that they're using it? The fact that I'm not able to detect it 100% of the time doesn't make me okay with it when I don't know it's there. What in any of my comments has made you think I have an "I don't care as long as I don't notice it" attitude???
How the fuck would I boycott a brand for being owned by Nestle before I find out that it's owned by Nestle?
Consumer research, look up the brands you don't know before you buy them, the corps aren't generally out here running shell companies to hide relationships.
Im not being snide and I don't care about the rest of the argument with OP, this is the literal answer to that one question, that's all.
view more: next ›