GTA 6 publisher believes AI could make NPCs "interesting and fun"

RedshiftMJC said:Doesn't need to be mandatory. Everything you do in any game is literally a "job". Fetch x, kill y and we keep playing video games.

Based on my (admittedly not wholly extensive) experience with LLMs, this sounds very cringe

FiteTalk YT said:No worries, I know what you mean and don't think you're trying to start an argument. It is a point I've heard before, and one I don't personally find very compelling (especially as an amateur artist), but I get it. Still, if I do my best to recreate my favorite song or painting or story, the end result is intended to be something new that I, a human person, created and put into the world. AI, in its current capacity (which isn't even AI haha), is just an algorithm being used to slap together the most convenient version of some Frankenstein's monster of existing art. Even setting aside the very bleak and grim uses it clearly intends in the name of "convenience" (for example, Strauss is only into this idea because the hope is that it will cost less long term than paying and keeping real human artists alive), all this will ever give you, at best, is some bolted together variation of a real thing. For me, it feels as soulless as it is.

Appreciate the responses! Makes me think for sure. I can't say you're wrong at all.

SethMode said:Well said!!

FiteTalk YT said:That's what I think, healthy, friendly discussions are here for. They're always appreciated and rare, especially on the internet, so thanks!

Clearly the next one in the chapter is GTA Doncaster.

Cool now I can find out what led the prostitute to be out on the streets trying to make a living before I beat her with a baseball bat and get my money back!

By the time GTA 6 comes out AI will be assimilated into robot bodies that can work on the game in the R* offices.

RedshiftMJC said:Tbf I'm an idiot and play Sports games for the Sim aspect. I love the idea of being a General Manager but won't ever do that IRL.

Very interesting topic and opinions

DeathHunts#9248 said:As I understand it, Zelnick is not an authority on video game revolutionary technology. He’s a financial guy whose investment fund arranged for a takeover of Take-Two. Take-Two is the publisher of GTA VI only insofar as Take-Two owns the Rockstar label who will do the actual publishing.

Be that as it may, Take-Two or its Rockstar publishing label a pundit on revolutionary technology? Give me a break! Rockstar used to be one of the best. But it hasn’t released anything cutting edge in over 5 years.

Today, Rockstar is just a storefront to run its scam to peddle shark cards—while resting on its laurels putting a fresh coat of paint onto its old properties hoping it will hide the new bugs. In short, Rockstar has become a caricature of the sleazy racketeers it satirized in Grand Theft Auto V.

The bottom line is Zelnick ducked the questions about stuff we’re really interested in. The fundamental issue is not whether hypothetical NPCs can be interesting and fun but whether or not GTA 6 will be interesting & fun.

so how long until AI develops a Blue Shirt Guy that goes on a rampage against human players? Bonus points to the AI if it does look like Ryan Reynolds.

A lot of people here seem to have the opinion that just because a HUMAN created something, it's automatically art, while a machine would be unable to do that ("soulless", "empty", "meaningless" were just some of the adjectives to describe art created by AI).

I do realize that the discussion around what art is is centuries old, but we do forget sometimes that art has no worth in itself. Just because a human creates something, doesn't mean it's worth something, I would actually say that 99.99% of all movies, songs, poems, prose, paintings etc etc created to today are lacking an artistic vision and are simply products (aka "bad art"). Art is the process of translating a notion about the human condition into another language than language, and most creators today are simply interested in entertaining us.

So no, I would have absolutely no problem with AI coming up with assets (pictures, dialogue, whatever) in a video game, if anything it would bring an element of surprise to games, something that is sorely needed these days

I mean considering I've seen videos of a npc woman not knowing what to do when arriving in a empty parking lot then struggling to back out with so many degrees of a turn only to then finally leave, I wouldn't get my hopes up

For all I know, I am an AI in a video game simulation

SethMode said:Yeah, dude, just keep not reading the post, lol

MR MITT3NS said:You're not or I would have completed you by now. 😂

Allgorhythm said:Niko it’s your cousin! Want to buy some shark cards? I can see it now…

Aren't the NPCs he's talking about randoms in shops stores and on the streets, not main character NPCs that drive the story and quests? I wouldn't expect (but who knows) to have major NPC characters like Lamar or Lester, or even supporting characters like Martin Madrazo, to be AI generated.


I'd expect something like pedestrians on the street to be AI'd
e.g. When the driver is going fast a pedestrian says “Slow down, man!”. This could be expanded to be more variable and life like.

Watch all of AI Seinfeld, Rockstar,

And then get back to us if you still believe AI characters are interesting and fun.

Spoiler: They are not.