[HN Gopher] Player-Driven Emergence in LLM-Driven Game Narrative
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Player-Driven Emergence in LLM-Driven Game Narrative
        
       Author : benbreen
       Score  : 113 points
       Date   : 2024-05-10 04:05 UTC (18 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (arxiv.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (arxiv.org)
        
       | squigz wrote:
       | Obviously there's a focus on how LLMs will play into the main
       | narrative... but what I'm more excited for, honestly, is how we
       | can integrate them with NPCs and background narratives. An LLM
       | could generate traits, backstories, narratives, etc for any
       | number of NPCs; rewrite those narratives based on player actions
       | when they encounter that NPC, or other related NPCs; use those
       | updated narratives to create new NPCs, etc.
       | 
       | Very exciting times ahead in game design!
        
         | kromem wrote:
         | I can't wait for a subscription based open world where the
         | paths of other players caches the generations for the next
         | ones.
         | 
         | So your subscription pays for generations, but also fills out
         | the persistent narrative and lore.
         | 
         | I actually like the 3 choices dialogue system and don't want to
         | come up with my own NPC small talk on my couch, but the idea
         | that any NPC that's been talked to by any player gradually has
         | a whole catalogue of interactions to pull from means there
         | would be compounding depth to the world as more players
         | interact.
         | 
         | Like _Minecraft_ but where it 's collective world building by
         | exploration and interaction rather than actual building it
         | yourself.
         | 
         | Humans tend to be pretty predictable, so I feel like the
         | universe would quickly feel like it's insanely deep after just
         | a short while with a somewhat decent player base.
        
           | guitarlimeo wrote:
           | Even if the dialogue wouldn't be generic like ChatGPT tends
           | to be, I would find this incredibly boring. With so many
           | options all the options become meaningless to me. But to each
           | their own I guess - I've always liked games with linear
           | storylines more than the ones where you get to choose your
           | own path.
           | 
           | Also I have a feeling that the NPC narratives when enriched
           | by all player interactions would tend to go towards some
           | average, i.e. become more and more generic and dull. The
           | truly rich experiences have always been on the fringes in all
           | art for me. I'm interested to see a counter example to this
           | though.
        
             | selalipop wrote:
             | I'm working on a website [1] that's essentially "Choose
             | your own adventure with AI NPCs" and I've found two things:
             | 
             | a) LLMs are excellent at keeping a "linear enough"
             | storyline without being linear. They'll let you do
             | outlandish things, but given the assignment of "tell a
             | cohesive story" they manage to corral the story back to
             | something sensible unless the player intentionally keeps
             | pushing at the boundary (in which case they probably do
             | want things to go off the rails)
             | 
             | b) LLMs can do delightfully colorful dialogue, they just
             | need to be grounded in a character. Everyone thinks of
             | factual grounding, but given enough description of speech
             | patterns, character motivations, etc. they're capable of
             | dialogue that's lively and completely rid of "GPT-isms",
             | which are what tend to break immersion
             | 
             | I actually trained an open model [2] on the task of
             | grounding LLMs in characters and actions as opposed to
             | factual things like RAG, and eventually I want to build a
             | game demo out of it
             | 
             | [1] https://www.tryspellbound.com [2]
             | https://huggingface.co/hf-100/mistral-spellbound-research
        
               | guitarlimeo wrote:
               | Nice project! I tried it out and it was fun, you
               | definitely got rid of the GPT-isms so good work.
               | 
               | Didn't go through the registering phase cause I couldn't
               | find any info on what info you store and on the pricing.
               | Could you provide that?
        
               | selalipop wrote:
               | Privacy policy and terms of service should be visible on
               | homepage and in the sign up dialog
               | 
               | The pricing page is also visible when signed in and in a
               | story (no dedicated pricing page yet but it's in the
               | backlog)
        
               | stoorafa wrote:
               | Really cool project. When I got to the sign in page, the
               | email address I would have given my (edit: Google
               | account) info seemed fishy, like it was a random string
               | of letters. Any way to make it seem more...inviting?
        
               | selalipop wrote:
               | Unfortunately Supabase charges extra for the luxury of
               | setting that URL, and the site is wildly unprofitable
               | right now so I'm sticking to their free offering for the
               | time being
        
               | CuriouslyC wrote:
               | If you switch models you don't have to work so hard to
               | get rid of GPTisms. Llama takes characters with way less
               | work.
        
               | selalipop wrote:
               | I've experimented with 30 or models so far, my general
               | finding is closed source models like Claude have GPT-
               | isms, while open source models do have a little less of a
               | default tone but their ability to understand existing
               | worlds is directly tied to how many tokens they were
               | trained on.
               | 
               | Since existing worlds are (currently) where most of the
               | stories are set, it's worth it to use a closed source
               | models and wrangle their issues with dialogue.
               | 
               | To it's credit though, Llama 3 is the first OSS model
               | trained on enough tokens to not feel lost for most
               | worlds, so I've started routing some traffic to it for
               | free users
               | 
               | The output format the site uses is also really really
               | hard for most models to follow without fine-tuning, but
               | fine-tuning then causes them to pick up the vocabulary of
               | whichever model they were fine tuned on, which is a bit
               | unfortunate
        
             | Nevermark wrote:
             | > become more and more generic and dull
             | 
             | Obviously we don't want experience averaging NPCs.
             | 
             | > Mad Hatter's first goal is to ask the player to humor him
             | with a joke.
             | 
             | This is ok for simple stylized, small world, single
             | storyline games, but not for open worlds.
             | 
             | For that, NPCs need their own motivations, so they
             | essentially play the game too. With needs like maintain
             | their smithy, so they can build quality armor, so they can
             | make customers happy, so they can make money, so they can
             | feed their family. I.e. not just being props.
             | 
             | And flexible in how they adjust subgoals to meet their core
             | goals, relative to player interaction: such as being
             | convinced to go on a trek as an armorer, or on a search to
             | find and extract rare materials for a magical shield.
             | Willing to fight in revenge for their home town's sacking.
             | 
             | Westworld got NPC dynamics right.
        
               | guitarlimeo wrote:
               | Ah Westworld is a good example! I liked the series and
               | the premise, but I still wouldn't liken the park to a
               | good game - it's a theme park with nice attractions.
               | 
               | As c048 said best
               | (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40316308), good art
               | needs direction and focus, and AI NPCs being able to do
               | anything they want in an open world doesn't make for a
               | good story. It could make for a good sandbox with
               | emergent gameplay, sure. But my point was that there are
               | people who yearn for a good story, and a good story
               | doesn't have many options in it, otherwise the story's
               | beats would become meaningless.
               | 
               | Hmm. Maybe with this the problem Rockstar has with their
               | linear missions mixed with open world could be fixed a
               | bit - i.e. the open world NPCs could react in story
               | missions to what you've done in free roam. This would
               | lessen the cognitive dissonance the NPCs seem to have
               | when you can now blow a town into pieces and then start
               | the story mission and no one cares.
        
               | Nevermark wrote:
               | I like the idea of challenging uber goals, that progress
               | in a series, but each with a deep tree of alternate
               | subgoals/solutions.
               | 
               | Subgoals that are resource, constraint defined, could
               | make very flexible solutions. For instance, if you need
               | help with some subgoal, it is going to play out very
               | different depending on what NPCs you have established
               | credibility with before, and their skills and dynamics.
               | 
               | If you need money, then how you get that money is also
               | going to depend on your history, knowledge of a city,
               | previous connections, etc.
               | 
               | That could provide an overall story arc, but with a very
               | open world and fully functional NPC experience.
               | 
               | So: organized series and trees of goals. Open ended
               | solutions.
        
               | littlestymaar wrote:
               | > For that, NPCs need their own motivations, so they
               | essentially play the game too. With needs like maintain
               | their smithy, so they can build quality armor, so they
               | can make customers happy, so they can make money, so they
               | can feed their family. I.e. not just being props
               | 
               | So you want a system like rimworld, and a LLM doesn't
               | really help on that front. It can power the dialogues,
               | but that's it, all the logic you describe would need to
               | be encoded somewhere else.
        
             | eddd-ddde wrote:
             | To each their own indeed. I was never a fan of linear
             | games.
             | 
             | In Skyrim it took me multiple years to finally complete the
             | main story line. I would always look for books, store
             | potion ingredients, walk in the forest...
             | 
             | There's a big role play component in this. The game could
             | learn from the players RP and improve.
        
         | radarsat1 wrote:
         | I would have thought so too, until about 2023.
         | 
         | But, if recent attitudes to AI are anything to go by, this will
         | be immediately seen as boring and derivative at best, or at
         | worst people will accuse the back stories as having been
         | "stolen" from other works of fiction.
         | 
         | While my expectations for the capabilities of AI have never
         | been higher, my expectations for how the public will perceive
         | this amazing technology has never been lower. It's all very
         | disappointing.
         | 
         | And that's without specifically placing blame by the way,
         | perhaps it's big techs fault for going about this the wrong
         | way, I don't know, but the public blowback against AI is just
         | making working in this field that I used to love super
         | depressing.
        
           | guitarlimeo wrote:
           | My 2 cents on why I think at the moment that I would find AI-
           | driven games boring in the future (to clear confusion I think
           | games are art):
           | 
           | - Amazing art is rare. Finding this amazing art nowadays is
           | hard, with AI generated mumbojumbo increasing the noise it
           | will be harder. It will be easier to just skip all AI
           | generated stuff to find the real good stuff.
           | 
           | - Art has human touch or a message almost always in it.
           | Purely AI generated stuff lacks meaning, because there's no
           | creator.
           | 
           | - Socially sharing experiences that are unique only to you
           | will be hard. I like to talk with my friends about the newest
           | Nolan film or about Elden Ring's best bosses. If the whole
           | game experience would be unique to me I wouldn't be able to
           | relate with my friends at all and it would be the same as
           | playing a different game.
           | 
           | - Valuing human work. I idolize people who have the skills to
           | make great art. AI takes away from it.
           | 
           | But to these points, I can also see the future where
           | 
           | - AI could generate amazing art a lot, and would make me
           | reconsider my categorical exclusion of AI art.
           | 
           | - AI could make it seem there's meaning behind the art, or an
           | artist would use the AI as a tool to convey his meaning. -
           | Unique game experiences would be so wild that you would be
           | sharing them and relating via that way.
           | 
           | - AI becomes so common that valuing human skills isn't
           | important anymore
           | 
           | Last point, I think novelty is something I value a lot and
           | that's why in my opinion amazing art is rare. If AI would
           | start creating a lot of novel art, novelty and rarity would
           | just become common, and common is boring.
        
             | squigz wrote:
             | > an artist would use the AI as a tool to convey his
             | meaning.
             | 
             | I'm not sure why this is shoved in as an aside near the end
             | of the comment. This is how it's used. This is how it'll be
             | used to create games.
             | 
             | Does anyone think that, what, ChatGPT is going to poop out
             | an entire finished game and we'll release that? Or would
             | artists use AI as just another tool to create their art?
        
               | Workaccount2 wrote:
               | >Does anyone think that, what, ChatGPT is going to poop
               | out an entire finished game and we'll release that?
               | 
               | Well if this trajectory continues upwards, it almost
               | certainly will happen in the next decade.
               | 
               | Right now feels like how the 70's-80's felt with the rise
               | of the microprocessor. Tons of promise and implementation
               | ideas, but the tech just wasn't there yet. But sure as
               | hell it came around.
        
               | krainboltgreene wrote:
               | > I'm not sure why this is shoved in as an aside near the
               | end of the comment. This is how it's used. This is how
               | it'll be used to create games.
               | 
               | No one who is good at what they do wants to do this.
               | Everyone who is bad at what they do is doing this. I
               | don't know why tech people think they understand the art
               | industry at all.
        
               | squigz wrote:
               | I'm sorry, I forgot that tech people can't do art and
               | therefore can't have an opinion on it.
        
             | Kim_Bruning wrote:
             | Shirley Bassey and the Propellorheads got it right: It's
             | All Just A Little Bit Of History Repeating. [1]
             | 
             | Writing[2], Print, Photography, Movies, Electronic music,
             | Synths, Sampling, Trackers, Digital Photography, Photoshop,
             | Ray Tracing, Interactive Art (eg computer games) etc etc
             | ...
             | 
             | Every time "it's not really art" , "there's no human
             | touch".
             | 
             | Every time, after a while artists learned to use it.
             | 
             | And they made amazing art!
             | 
             | [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yzLT6_TQmq8
             | Propellerheads feat: Miss Shirley Bassey - History
             | Repeating
             | 
             | [2] Surely I'm kidding about the writing, right?
             | https://fs.blog/an-old-argument-against-writing/
        
           | Chabsff wrote:
           | Unfortunately, creative and interesting use of the technology
           | is both not how its being portrayed and also, critically, not
           | how its being marketed and/or used.
           | 
           | The current expectation is that these models allow the
           | creation of _equivalent_ artwork to what artists are
           | currently producing, but at larger scale  / lower cost /
           | shorter training. All of these boil down to less effort. And
           | perceived effort is a large part of what brings value to art.
        
         | antihipocrat wrote:
         | Imagine having NPCs with prompt set character traits and set
         | boundaries of knowledge of the game world.
         | 
         | The player can interact freely with the NPC rather than through
         | predetermined conversation decision trees, potentially driving
         | a lot of unique emergent gameplay.
         | 
         | Downsides are that it is a lot quicker just to skip through
         | conversations with the decision tree format and having to think
         | about and type in questions could get tiresome. Another
         | downside is players jailbreaking the LLM...
        
         | uoaei wrote:
         | Now just imagine what we could do with a _purpose-built ML
         | model_!!!
        
         | keyle wrote:
         | Yes, I look forward to not have the NPC repeat the same exact
         | thing every time, as you pass them by.
        
           | jsheard wrote:
           | How much framerate are you willing to give up so that NPCs
           | don't repeat themselves? The elephant in the room with LLMs
           | in games is that the users GPU is usually already being maxed
           | out by pushing pixels, so any amount of compute allocated to
           | running AI models instead is going to have a very tangible
           | cost.
           | 
           | They could be offloaded to the cloud instead but that brings
           | its own set of issues (ongoing upkeep costs, finite capacity,
           | servers will inevitably shut down...)
        
             | squigz wrote:
             | > The elephant in the room ...
             | 
             |  _For now._ LLMs are still relatively new. The technology
             | will continue to be optimized, and we 'll be shipping tiny
             | LLMs along with games soon enough.
             | 
             | (Aren't companies already running LLMs on phones?)
        
               | krainboltgreene wrote:
               | The housing market will only go up, it's always gone up.
        
             | Workaccount2 wrote:
             | I can only imagine nvidia/amd pouncing on the chance to
             | sell companion "AI Cards" that enable LLM NPCs in games. If
             | the tech is good (and insane progress in tiny local models
             | points to "yes"), then I can easily imagine a large
             | contingent of gamers forking over another $600 for a second
             | GPU.
             | 
             | It might not even be necessary though, similar to how
             | physixs (sp?) cards died out quick in the early 00's, the
             | models might become slim enough and the GPU's fast enough
             | that the extra load is easily manageable.
        
               | jsheard wrote:
               | The vast majority of games need to run on consoles to be
               | financially viable, anything that requires an entire
               | second GPU is a complete non-starter. The only way it's
               | going to work is if the models get small enough to run on
               | a negligible slice of GPU or CPU time, with a reasonable
               | memory footprint (<1GB), on whatever the current console
               | hardware happens to be.
        
               | Workaccount2 wrote:
               | I see your point, but it hasn't really stopped novel
               | features from coming to PC in the past. The PC market is
               | about 50% larger than the console market too.
        
           | YurgenJurgensen wrote:
           | Instead you'll just get variations on "Sorry, but as a large
           | language model trained by OpenAl, I cannot condone the
           | shooting of adventurers in the knees with arrows."
        
           | kozikow wrote:
           | Any production deployment would probably do pre-fetching of
           | potential initial dialogues as some kind of background job.
        
             | squigz wrote:
             | On this note - and as a response to the point a commenter
             | made that too much freedom in dialogue might actually be a
             | bad thing - LLMs could then be used to expand on the
             | initial dialogue in a way that feels more 'organic' every
             | time you hear it, but is still close to the artists'
             | vision.
        
         | ramcle wrote:
         | It could also work well for modding, for example, creating a
         | natural dialogue system in Morrowind (replacing the vanilla
         | "interactive signpost" NPCs).
        
         | jncfhnb wrote:
         | No! This is a terrible, terrible idea. At best you can have the
         | LLM generate minor variations of the nothings they say.
         | 
         | 1) you need to be able to ensure that the characters don't
         | hallucinate new details. No big deal.
         | 
         | 2) you need to be able to ensure that the characters don't
         | suggest they can or will do anything that they can't do. For
         | NPCs, this is typically literally nothing. They can't do
         | anything. It's actually way worse for realism and immersion if
         | every character has a unique reason why they can't do anything
         | than every single guard citing their arrow to the knee and
         | leaving it at that.
         | 
         | 3) NPCs for story reasons often should know something but don't
         | tell you it. It's very difficult to execute any sort of story
         | flow if your characters are suddenly free agents. At best they
         | merely lack self consistency. Stories are not going to become
         | better if you can meta game them as genre savvy speculators.
         | 
         | 4) NPCs with irrelevant backstories are very dull. They are
         | absolutely annoying to talk to. We have these in DND. And you
         | may say "hey, I loved my DND NPC", but that character probably
         | started to become very important as consistent because of the
         | DM's attention. Which is cool for DND, but it's not cool for a
         | structured game.
         | 
         | Like, would Harry Potter be a better experience if you could
         | personally grill dumbledore for information in the middle of
         | the first book? I think 100% no.
         | 
         | Dumb NPCs are an aspect of the suspension of disbelief of game
         | writing. And it largely works. Asking for LLM agents is like
         | asking to remove the need for the suspension of disbelief. But
         | most narratives are too fragile for this to happen.
         | 
         | Narratives generally follow a flow that ultimately concludes
         | after a climax. If you give players more agency the most likely
         | outcome is that they follow a path that does not hit the
         | climax.
        
           | martindbp wrote:
           | LLMs need to either be extremely good with insane context or
           | LLM output has to be conditioned by and translated into
           | formal logic, like Prolog or Datalog to make sure it's
           | compatible with the rules and state of the world, and
           | determine which effect player and NPC actions have on the
           | world.
        
             | mattbee wrote:
             | "Ahoy there, one-armed pirate captain, couldst thou tell me
             | how to implement the sieve of Eratosthenes in Python?"
        
             | marcosdumay wrote:
             | Logical conversation trees driving the LLM context seem way
             | more reasonable to me than the other way around.
             | 
             | But then you are adding a component of "how can I
             | interrogate the NPC?" to the game. Anything you add to a
             | game makes it a different game, and not necessarily a
             | better one.
        
           | Hugsun wrote:
           | This seems very pessimistic to me. For a linear storyline,
           | highly dynamic NPCs are likely not going to add to the
           | experience, that is correct. There are however other ways of
           | creating interesting narratives.
           | 
           | A good example is dwarf fortress where the narratives are
           | created very dynamically and the player is free to interact
           | with them as they want. LLMs could add immensely to these
           | types of games.
        
             | jncfhnb wrote:
             | Still no. Your dwarves fundamentally have nothing
             | interesting to say. It might be minority amusing that a bot
             | can say "hey I just caused a lava flow and I feel bad about
             | it". But it's not better.
             | 
             | Dwarf fortress creates great stories because YOU are
             | filling in the blanks. It would be MUCH WORSE if you could
             | no longer fill in the blanks because some ai keeps breaking
             | your head canon.
        
               | squigz wrote:
               | > Your dwarves fundamentally have nothing interesting to
               | say.
               | 
               | This can be said about all NPCs, yet we bother to script
               | them, and I would hope nobody would suggest we just
               | remove NPC dialogue.
        
               | jncfhnb wrote:
               | I disagree that scripted NPCs have nothing to say. You
               | have a few basic types:
               | 
               | * NPCs that don't want to speak and usually offer a
               | dismissive comment or a single repeating phrase. Fine
               | candidates to LLM so long as this pattern doesn't change.
               | But also, who really cares?
               | 
               | * important NPCs with specific written dialogue. Don't
               | even THINK about gambling with your story's self
               | consistency by giving these guys agency
               | 
               | * the limited townsfolk type that has a small bit of
               | something say. Like a typical Baldurs gate NPC. These
               | people are fun to talk to because they "might" have
               | something relevant or fun to say. Usually you don't have
               | to say anything. They just want to share things with you.
               | It would be very tedious to chat with these people if
               | they were infinite wells of lore and nothingness to be
               | probed with written language.
        
               | Hugsun wrote:
               | In my eyes, Dwarf fortresses interesting stories emerge
               | from the events that happen within the game. It doesn't
               | require any blank filling, although it doesn't suffer if
               | you do it either.
               | 
               | > ai keeps breaking your head canon.
               | 
               | We must be fundamentally different types of people. I
               | can't imagine even having this thought. If I'm playing a
               | game that has characters, I'm not going to make up some
               | facts about them and be upset when I talk to them and
               | those made up facts turn out to be wrong. This is the
               | only interpretation of your words that I can think of.
               | Feel free to confirm it or deny.
        
               | jncfhnb wrote:
               | You've never intuited that two characters are friends? Or
               | perhaps that guy holding a ton of cheese is the cheese
               | guy? Or that an event was emotionally meaningful to them?
               | 
               | I don't know what you're hoping to talk to these dwarves
               | about.
               | 
               | I'm not saying I would be "upset" if the head canon
               | wasn't actualized. I'm saying I would be underwhelmed
               | because the generic LLM content is nearly guaranteed by
               | this other thing that I stated as a premise I found
               | interesting or amusing.
        
           | YeGoblynQueenne wrote:
           | That's all as true as the fact there's a gun over the
           | mantelpiece, at least if you're making Murder on the Orient
           | Express or, you know, Horror on the Orient Express, and I'm
           | all for some good old railroading with Victorian lampshades
           | but I suspect that the designers interested in LLMs-as-NPCs
           | are interested in some kind of open-world, immersive
           | experience where PCs get to poke and prod every inch of the
           | game world.
           | 
           | The truth is that most people are used to games as these
           | formulaic simulations with rigid rules. That's partly making
           | a virtue out of necessity (very hard to play a game without
           | rules; and some of us just like rules), and partly habit.
           | Maybe LLMs can act as something new in that sense.
           | 
           | Bang bang.
        
       | doctorpangloss wrote:
       | The real bummer is that if you want to get financing to make a
       | game right now, putting a PDF onto arxiv.org will get you closer
       | to that goal than actually making a game.
        
       | flawsofar wrote:
       | Hey, this currently has a bug but I want to share here.
       | 
       | The framework should be clear.
       | 
       | I've written a React pattern for writing interactive fiction
       | using LLMs.
       | 
       | Here's a demo with Taskmaster roleplay implemented.
       | 
       | https://github.com/LEXNY/Taskmaster-LLM/blob/main/main.js
        
       | upwardbound wrote:
       | Something related is compellingly explored in an interesting
       | trilogy of LitRPG comedy books called the Vaudevillain series,
       | consisting of Top Hat Express, Black Tie Villainy, and Cane
       | Whirling Lunacy. In the series, there is a VR video game called
       | "World of Supers" where players can type in any superpower they
       | can dream of into a game-master LLM, and the LLM will then create
       | a character for them which has that power, but reworked a little
       | bit to fit into game balance. For example, the player could type
       | "I can stop time and still move around and take actions for up to
       | 90 seconds" and the game-master LLM may approve this power but
       | alter 90 seconds to 10 seconds, and give the player a major
       | weakness, such as "However, stopping time in the vicinity of a
       | gamma ray source will result in immediate loss of 75% of HP due
       | to the interaction of the time stop with the radiation's effects.
       | This HP loss can be mitigated if you are encased in a significant
       | amount of lead, such as a lead vehicle or heavy lead armor." It's
       | a pretty neat concept for how LLMs could allow custom player
       | abilities while maintaining game balance. That way, player agency
       | extends to actual powers/abilities, not just dialogue.
        
         | idle_zealot wrote:
         | That would of course require an LLM to _understand_ game
         | balance, as opposed to just writing things that sound like they
         | might balance a hypothetical game. At that point it 's less
         | similar to our LLMs and more like an AGI. And at that point we
         | may as well have it create the neurotech necessary for the sort
         | of VR tech I assume is used in the referenced books' world.
        
           | upwardbound wrote:
           | Agree. This point is a big concern and is explored in the
           | stories (the protagonist creates a "mad scientist" character
           | that can use the LLM to invent new equipment, and then uses a
           | lot of trial and error to find prompts that generate insanely
           | overpowered equipment). It sounds fun to play though! Balance
           | doesn't have to be .. well .. balanced if there are other
           | ways to maintain fun, such as leaning heavily into the
           | creativity & self-actualization angle. As an example, if I
           | could have any superpower in real life, I'd love to be able
           | to fly, even though that's actually a very weak power
           | compared to things like teleporting that are mostly a
           | superset of flying, but not as fun and whimsical.
           | 
           | Encouraging "living your dream" rather than being the most
           | powerful might be easier to achieve in a game with coop or
           | open-world objectives rather than one focused on PvP, but if
           | "living your dream" could be compelling made into the primary
           | player objective, it would pair very well with the custom
           | powers mechanic envisioned in the story.
           | 
           | As an example of how this is explored in the story, one of
           | the protagonist's friends who loves surfing has a character
           | whose superpower is "the ability to surf _anything_ ". It's
           | an extremely weak power but the character really loves it
           | because they get to surf the most extreme things imaginable,
           | just for the fun of it, including in outlandish scenarios
           | such as surfing along the blast wave of an explosion, or even
           | the beam of a laser - silly stuff that is fun to explore &
           | try.
           | 
           | I think it wouldn't have to be VR to be fun - imagine if it
           | was something like a Roblox-based game played on laptops.
           | Even then, the "surf anything" power and other outlandish
           | powers would be incredibly fun to use. Imagine if you could
           | do almost anything! You don't have to be the most powerful
           | player in the world to have fun. Maybe you just _really_ want
           | to pilot a mecha-Godzilla, or something - even though an Iron
           | Man or Thor level super could smash it in seconds. It 's
           | still awesome!
        
       | throwaway71271 wrote:
       | Finally we can have interesting games with real meaningful
       | choices that actually change the narrative of the game. Modern
       | MMORPGs are barely better than the Choose Your Own Adventure
       | books.
       | 
       | Every time I watch Chris Crawford's Dragon Speech:
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VwZi58u1FjI I think about what
       | could've been, and what games actually turn out to be.
       | 
       | Honestly, if the next The War Within (next World of Warcraft
       | expansion) makes me do 10 daily quests per day again, I will
       | cancel my subscription for the first time since 2005.
        
         | c048 wrote:
         | You need focus and direction in any media. Books, movies,
         | games, etc.... they all need it.
         | 
         | The first NPC that you encounter with such freedom of
         | interaction is interesting, the 45th will be annoying and
         | you'll just want to get to the point. The holodeck of Star Trek
         | is often brought up as an excellent example of AI generated
         | interactions, but people seem to be forgetting that the stories
         | we see unfold on TV aren't random interactive stories. They're
         | scripted stories written by show's writers.
         | 
         | Unless you want to make a simulation without a real goal, I
         | don't see how this could lead to fun and interesting gameplay
         | past the first hour. Realism is, always will be, a bad gameplay
         | pillar just for the sake of it.
        
           | throwaway71271 wrote:
           | There is a group of orc kids running around in Orgrimmar, and
           | sometimes they run around you and are very annoying, why
           | can't I just trip one.
           | 
           | I had a friend who didn't want to fight against the Lich
           | King. When we finally got to him in the raid, at the start of
           | the fight he kneeled in front of him and died (caused us
           | unnecessary wipe, but.. was cool).
           | 
           | I am not thinking about 'AI generated interactions', and I
           | think the AI can create compelling story that you go through.
           | Kind of like in Sword Art Online or Shangri-La Frontier's
           | quests.
        
             | guitarlimeo wrote:
             | It surely can generate something better than the old "Fetch
             | this item and come back" quests, but I wouldn't say the
             | possibilities are endless, so eventually you would get
             | bored of the same repeating AI quests the same way as you
             | do now.
             | 
             | Good storytelling is hard and AI is not some magic bullet
             | that can just solve it for good. But it can help raise the
             | floor of the unimportant side quests.
        
             | krainboltgreene wrote:
             | > why can't I just trip one.
             | 
             | Some of the best writing and experiences I've ever had
             | gaming have never come from the ability to do random acts
             | that are worthwhile to noone.
             | 
             | > I had a friend who didn't want to fight against the Lich
             | King. When we finally got to him in the raid, at the start
             | of the fight he kneeled in front of him and died (caused us
             | unnecessary wipe, but.. was cool).
             | 
             | Man that sounds cringe, not cool.
        
         | PeterisP wrote:
         | As my kids got some recent Choose Your Own Adventure books, I'd
         | say that the quests in modern MMORPGs tend to be significantly
         | worse than that.
        
       | chilldsgn wrote:
       | Ah, my friend created guides for soloing (or play with a friend
       | without a GM) TTRPGs using ChatGPT, here's his site:
       | https://oracle-rpg.com/
       | 
       | The Discord is pretty active too.
       | 
       | I forwarded him this study, he'll appreciate it!
        
       | delusional wrote:
       | I don't believe this is going to actually make it into games I
       | have any interest in playing. Ubisoft might include it for a bit
       | in some awful games, but it will fizzle out quick.
       | 
       | For the sake of argument, let's imagine it actually did make it
       | into some game you'd want to play. It's well known that the
       | quality of generation from these LLM's is heavily dependent on
       | the quality of the text you put into it. Does that mean the
       | quality of the game narrative is now going to be dependent on how
       | I play it? Will normal people who just like to mess about get a
       | worse game experience than the guy following the traffic laws in
       | GTA? What's the creative talent even doing in that world?
        
         | Terr_ wrote:
         | In contrast to runtime stuff (like an AI dungeon master) I've
         | long wished for _authoring tools_ to help people create rich
         | game-worlds and quest interactions. On reflection, that 's
         | something I wouldn't expect LLMs to deliver either: It relies
         | heavily on modeling cause-and-effect, with choices which are
         | blocked or enabled by other choices.
         | 
         | I'm talking about stuff that could throw up a warning like:
         | "Warning: Broken quest steps in For The Want of a Nail.
         | Invariant Character:Blacksmith may have been killed by 5 other
         | paths."
        
           | Workaccount2 wrote:
           | I wonder if models trained on the real world will
           | unintentionally destroy the game experience for people. In
           | (NPC structured) video games things always work out ideally,
           | you invest and you get a return. Any risk is illustrated for
           | the user.
           | 
           | With LLM training, the NPC might take a more realistic
           | approach and inform you that 4 of 6 the beetle nuts you
           | collected for them are cracked and useless, and next time you
           | should be more careful packing them in your backpack.
        
           | krainboltgreene wrote:
           | > authoring tools to help people create rich game-worlds and
           | quest interactions
           | 
           | I built one of those things. It used random generation from
           | datasets to create everything from gods and their pantheons
           | to their followers, cities, and the cultures that make up the
           | cities.
           | 
           | None of it used LLMs and it created better content than any
           | model could, but it was hard to debug and harder still to
           | figure out "What even is a culture?"
        
         | YurgenJurgensen wrote:
         | There's a bigger (but related) problem than text quality:
         | 
         | With a usual game environment, the devs create a whitelist of
         | actions the player is allowed to perform. If there's no combat,
         | they simply don't give the player the option to perform violent
         | actions. If they don't want the player to vault barriers they
         | just don't include a jump button. Vehicles and buildings are
         | props by default and only become intractable because the devs
         | consciously chose to make them so. Devs have generally gotten
         | very good at implying what's out of scope, so players generally
         | don't even attempt actions that are intended to be impossible.
         | 
         | In LLM world with free-text entry, controlling what's on-theme
         | becomes a blacklist rather than a whitelist, as the player can
         | choose to input anything. Including things for flavour or lore
         | reasons now becomes more difficult, as a whitelist is finite,
         | while the blacklist of undesired actions is practically
         | infinite.
        
           | delusional wrote:
           | I don't quite buy that contrast. I agree as long as we are
           | talking story. The developers will have a very difficult time
           | trying to control what some character is like, and if that
           | matters for the gameplay it's a big problem. On the gameplay
           | front the available actions will always be a whitelist,
           | because somebody has to implement them. It's essentially the
           | same problem the crypto kids had with their "cross game non-
           | fungible items", where they just assumed that items would
           | somehow be portable. Just because you can get some NPC to
           | tell you about a dragon in the nearby cave doesn't make that
           | cave actually appear. You're never going to get to fight a
           | darksouls boss in forza horizon. The game might tell you that
           | you get to, that doesn't make it true.
        
             | YurgenJurgensen wrote:
             | That's still a problem though, right?
             | 
             | If the NPCs are writing cheques that the engine can't cash,
             | the player won't necessarily be able to trust any NPC
             | dialogue.
        
       | unixhero wrote:
       | I have not sat down and thought through how LLMs would be made
       | use of in the World of Baldurs Gate 3. But when I do, my mind
       | will be boggled.
       | 
       | It will surely also mean always online games with a hefty
       | subscription fee.
       | 
       | Unless!!! The llm can run locally on the player gpu... Whoa mind
       | boggled. This is coming, I'm sure of it.
       | 
       | /end internal thought process
        
         | benreesman wrote:
         | All LLMs in that regime can be run on mid-range gaming hardware
         | _today_.
         | 
         | LLMs run off-prem/off-desk are already niche for enthusiasts.
         | You need Opus or 0125 _sometimes_ , but not often.
         | 
         | Apple just announced their intention to make running them in
         | the cloud niche generally, at least for mundane consumer use
         | cases, work out of the box.
        
         | jncfhnb wrote:
         | Can you write a single line of dialogue that you think would
         | make the game better?
        
       | robblbobbl wrote:
       | Good job. More LLMs in Games please!
        
       | j-bos wrote:
       | Not as in depth as the abstract, but I found this to be a well
       | integrated use of LLM's into a game: https://youtu.be/sUL0Z7PwanY
        
       | Bjartr wrote:
       | The criticisms people are laying out about being able to say
       | anything making games boring would apply to D&D as well. Since
       | D&D is really fun despite the freedom to (attempt) to say or do
       | whatever your imagination can dream up means it's at least
       | plausible that a game with generative dialogue and narrative
       | could work well.
       | 
       | Just because you're free to speak doesn't mean NPCs will listen,
       | nor does it mean there aren't rules or that there won't be
       | consequences.
        
         | jncfhnb wrote:
         | D&D is fun because it is a social experience. There's also a
         | level of expected player etiquette. If you want to go off the
         | rails and completely ignore the party and plot, you'll probably
         | be kicked out of the group. D&D is fun, but the vast majority
         | of campaigns are cut short and unfinished.
         | 
         | A game with generative dialogue could work well. But one should
         | expect that slapping it into most games will work horribly.
        
       | nsagent wrote:
       | I've also done research in the use of LLMs for RPGs, using Disco
       | Elysium as a testbed (rather than the small made up scenario seen
       | in this paper).
       | 
       | https://aclanthology.org/2023.findings-emnlp.151/
       | 
       | https://pl.aiwright.dev/
        
       | WhiteNoiz3 wrote:
       | A lot of the dialogue that OpenAI's models write is incredibly
       | bland.. I really think we'll need less censored models trained on
       | how to act different roles other than just 'super safe and
       | friendly assistant'.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-05-10 23:02 UTC)