Messaggio originale di fungal_entity:

I mean, this argument for legal restrictions, etc. makes a lot of sense, but copyright and consumer protections, hell even the nonsense obstacles to creating art independently, are so broken that such "correct" methods of intervention can't currently be relied on (debatable if that will actually change). this "AI" garbage is so entrenched in the "visions of the future" amongst people who are constantly failing upward that I don't see a way it can be handled "properly". I'd respect whatever valve is doing more if they actually put their foot down about this stuff. (some of the same could maybe be said about some recent workshop announcements?)

if valve is gonna claim to support developers and offer them a good service, they need to actually do that.

The difference is that laws can be influenced by established democratic processes, while arbitrary decisions by Valve can't be. While you might like them to ban AI, I very definitely don't want that. (Yes, there are some problems with intellectual property, but banning is not the right solution IMHO.) So some compromise needs to be found, but one company making a ruling is not the right way to do it.

Messaggio originale di fungal_entity:

what can a machine output, in terms of character dialogue, that's better than a good writer with their own voice? like, I've heard of this idea, but I've never heard of a game that incorporates this kind of thing to notable success.

Nothing, but that is not the point. Dialogue written by a writer works only if user reactions are limited to certain responses that the developers foresaw. If the user can say whatever he wants, pre-written dialogue doesn't work. So if you want free conversations, AI is the only possibility. (Of course, it's not perfect either, but works good enough.)

There are various games involving such a chatting possibility mostly in the adult game sector that use it with success. I could name one, but I do not want to single them out for negative attention by Steam. Normally that shouldn't be an issue, but given their irrational adversity to Live-Generated AI in adult games and some other rather arbitrary decisions about such games, I unfortunately can't be sure anymore.

yeah let's just try to control gaming industries... when the companies start using AI and launch them outside steam, Steam will comply and allow everything AI related. just a matter of time

I bought a game that used AI and now the creator said it will limit it's functions. Can I get a refund? Game creator redirected me to steam as it is steam's decision?

Messaggio originale di wolfwalker:

Messaggio originale di fungal_entity:

what can a machine output, in terms of character dialogue, that's better than a good writer with their own voice? like, I've heard of this idea, but I've never heard of a game that incorporates this kind of thing to notable success.

Nothing, but that is not the point. Dialogue written by a writer works only if user reactions are limited to certain responses that the developers foresaw. If the user can say whatever he wants, pre-written dialogue doesn't work. So if you want free conversations, AI is the only possibility. (Of course, it's not perfect either, but works good enough.)

There are various games involving such a chatting possibility mostly in the adult game sector that use it with success. I could name one, but I do not want to single them out for negative attention by Steam. Normally that shouldn't be an issue, but given their irrational adversity to Live-Generated AI in adult games and some other rather arbitrary decisions about such games, I unfortunately can't be sure anymore.

I've never seen some kind of dialogue system that can produce like, good and meaningful NPC convos. I'm not particularly interested in words both unpredictable and boilerplate, that weren't written, that don't do more than fulfill some obligation of a character existing.

As for democratic process, I agree that massive technological shifts deserve proper consideration, discussion, and regulation, especially from those greatly impacted by these phenomena. let's do that.

Wow so anyone trying make things like conversational AI for RPG's like the mantella mod author are screwed. I don't see how live generated AI content could have any legal or moral implication if you're talking about copyright or something like that it simply doesn't apply. I understand the idea of wanting to make sure games arent using AI generated content but where is the line there because there's AI assisted brushes in photoshop so what really is the issue. The unlicensed use of other content? unless the AI is directly copying from something that's absurd. Humans use the content they've consumed to fuel their work in the same ways. So at what point does a beneficial tool when used improperly make that tool inherently wrong. Using the mantella mod as an example. It uses preexisting game content to inform its dialogue and make it so you can have unique conversations with those NPC's by talking to them and having them organically respond with AI compiled recreations of each characters voice and personality. Putting an outright ban on these things i feel is shortsighted and might be big problem for steam in the next few years when this concept becomes more mainstream for RPGS. What steam is ensuring with this rule is that itll be another distributor thatll capitalize off of the whole concept. Innovations are nuanced and have good and bad implications. I hope people start seeing the good in non-generalized AI.

I will also add that i very much understand the issues with generated art being used without permission of the used works authors. My point is that there is a place for AI in the creative world. When used properly it can do alot of great things. Another thing to discuss would be actors, voice actors and their likenesses/voices being used without their permission. Basically imo if you hav permission you can sell it commercially. If you dont have written permission you can get sued, (so the same as it really is now except updated statutes that would apply to AI products in the future aswell.)

Essentially "AI BAD" isnt necessarily the case. Its complicated, nuanced and people get bogged in one side or the other. Just like literally everything else

Messaggio originale di SupernaturalCyanide:

Wow so anyone trying make things like conversational AI for RPG's like the mantella mod author are screwed.

Unless that's a system that generates pornography, I suggest re-reading the announcement because I think you got it backwards.

Messaggio originale di SupernaturalCyanide:

Wow so anyone trying make things like conversational AI for RPG's like the mantella mod author are screwed. I don't see how live generated AI content could have any legal or moral implication if you're talking about copyright or something like that it simply doesn't apply. I understand the idea of wanting to make sure games arent using AI generated content but where is the line there because there's AI assisted brushes in photoshop so what really is the issue. The unlicensed use of other content? unless the AI is directly copying from something that's absurd. Humans use the content they've consumed to fuel their work in the same ways. So at what point does a beneficial tool when used improperly make that tool inherently wrong. Using the mantella mod as an example. It uses preexisting game content to inform its dialogue and make it so you can have unique conversations with those NPC's by talking to them and having them organically respond with AI compiled recreations of each characters voice and personality. Putting an outright ban on these things i feel is shortsighted and might be big problem for steam in the next few years when this concept becomes more mainstream for RPGS. What steam is ensuring with this rule is that itll be another distributor thatll capitalize off of the whole concept. Innovations are nuanced and have good and bad implications. I hope people start seeing the good in non-generalized AI.

I will also add that i very much understand the issues with generated art being used without permission of the used works authors. My point is that there is a place for AI in the creative world. When used properly it can do alot of great things. Another thing to discuss would be actors, voice actors and their likenesses/voices being used without their permission. Basically imo if you hav permission you can sell it commercially. If you dont have written permission you can get sued, (so the same as it really is now except updated statutes that would apply to AI products in the future aswell.)

Essentially "AI BAD" isnt necessarily the case. Its complicated, nuanced and people get bogged in one side or the other. Just like literally everything else

I...actually agree with most of this.

It's the details that matter. Like, there's a lot of uses/implementations for "AI" that I think are just bad, evil, or at best misguided. I also think this big nasty conversation/movement/forced adoption/"industry" that's full of "nuance" that doesn't actually matter is limiting our capability to actually talk about the few potential ways that "AI" art could be cool as hell. Yes, I think I actually do want to see homebrewed glitchy nonsense models, images, and animations born from just code, color palettes, and the ineffable human spirit and insanity that led someone to create such a disaster of purpose. I don't want to see "AI" used to create the familiar and expected, because it really really really really sucks at doing that in a way that is at all interesting or good.

Also, I worry for the future of basic IDE code autocomplete/suggestions when/if copilot, et al. dies, and possibly takes the actually useful stuff with it.

Messaggio originale di fungal_entity:

Messaggio originale di Big Pappa:

This is some ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ to be honest. some of my Favorite experiences have used AI to allow for fluid conversation with NPCs but they have announced they are taking the feature away.
Not a fan of this decision. The games have announced they are taking down the feature based off this decision.

what can a machine output, in terms of character dialogue, that's better than a good writer with their own voice? like, I've heard of this idea, but I've never heard of a game that incorporates this kind of thing to notable success.

VR Hot did very well with this. You could have indepth conversations with the AI, act out roleplays. It was amazing. There will be a way to use it off of the steam store. It was easier when it was just able to be there. Mods it is

it's like the Y2K panic, the world was going to end or something.

Sure, this is the policy for games, but what about Applications?
What is the policy, if say, Vocaloid was on Steam?
What is the policy, if say, Blender had a plugin that uses a transformer model to generate meshes / scenes?

And a very specific case, that currently exists for blender, is that there are already plugins that you can install, that will let you generate textures with Stable Diffusion. What is the policy on this?

What about reporting games that do not declare the use of AI on their steam page? I had considered purchasing a game, but reviews mentioned about AI imagery and voices in the game. The developers responded, confirming the use of AI, but their steam page has no AI content disclosure.

Messaggio originale di Lizuzuzu:

What about reporting games that do not declare the use of AI on their steam page? I had considered purchasing a game, but reviews mentioned about AI imagery and voices in the game. The developers responded, confirming the use of AI, but their steam page has no AI content disclosure.

The AI disclosure part popped up after they came up with the policy, but it did not automatically update if project was uploaded pre-change to the policy, so there doesn't seem to be any area to fill that out as far as I can tell (ran into it in my game Star Shift Rebellion):
https://store.steampowered.com/app/1824040/Star_Shift_Rebellion/

But when I did the soundtrack, it did ask about AI and I mentioned it there:
https://store.steampowered.com/app/2820050/Star_Shift_Rebellion_Soundtrack/

"The developers describe how their game uses AI Generated Content like this:

1. We used ChatGPT-4 to make some custom javascript plugins.
2. Used ChatGPT-4/DALL-E3 to generate some of the faces of NPC's, also some icons for the system menu."

Messaggio originale di Psychronic Games:

Messaggio originale di Lizuzuzu:

What about reporting games that do not declare the use of AI on their steam page? I had considered purchasing a game, but reviews mentioned about AI imagery and voices in the game. The developers responded, confirming the use of AI, but their steam page has no AI content disclosure.

The AI disclosure part popped up after they came up with the policy, but it did not automatically update if project was uploaded pre-change to the policy, so there doesn't seem to be any area to fill that out as far as I can tell (ran into it in my game Star Shift Rebellion):

You can update your answers to the content survey at any time.

Here's a direct link to the page for that specific game: https://partner.steamgames.com/contentdescriptors/editsurvey/1824040/

You get there by clicking the name of the game from your dashboard and then it's linked to in the Store Presence section.

Messaggio originale di Ben Lubar:

Messaggio originale di Psychronic Games:

The AI disclosure part popped up after they came up with the policy, but it did not automatically update if project was uploaded pre-change to the policy, so there doesn't seem to be any area to fill that out as far as I can tell (ran into it in my game Star Shift Rebellion):

You can update your answers to the content survey at any time.

Here's a direct link to the page for that specific game: https://partner.steamgames.com/contentdescriptors/editsurvey/1824040/

You get there by clicking the name of the game from your dashboard and then it's linked to in the Store Presence section.

Ok thanks, I'll do that.