EA Partners With Company Behind Stable Diffusion To Make Games With AI
- Reference: 0179866522
- News link: https://games.slashdot.org/story/25/10/25/0132252/ea-partners-with-company-behind-stable-diffusion-to-make-games-with-ai
- Source link:
> To start, the "smarter paintbrushes" EA and Stability AI are building are concentrated on generating textures and in-game assets. EA hopes to create "Physically Based Rendering materials" with new tools "that generate 2D textures that maintain exact color and light accuracy across any environment." The company also describes using AI to "pre-visualize entire 3D environments from a series of intentional prompts, allowing artists to creatively direct the generation of game content."
[1] https://www.ea.com/news/ea-partners-with-stability-ai
[2] https://www.engadget.com/gaming/ea-partners-with-the-company-behind-stable-diffusion-to-make-games-with-ai-222253069.html
Wanton self-sabotage. (Score:2)
EA have been turned into a tax write-off; there's no other explanation why they would self-sabotage harder than the British with Brexit.
Re: (Score:1)
You know, there are even now Brits that think Brexit was just a great idea. Human stupidity is truly unlimited.
Garbage (Score:3)
> "I use the term smarter paintbrushes," Steve Kestell, Head of Technical Art for EA SPORTS
Funny, I use the term "Paintbrushes of greed."
Seriously, what's the point of using AI to generate details that even bleeding edge hardware can't run at a decent framerate (most top out at 25~FPS, the newest ones top out around ~30-45 FPS) without resorting to another AI to fake frames to pad out the FPS drops with? The players will never see the original details most of the time due to hardware limitations. So why spend the money to make them?
Of course, the real reason is to fire workers and threaten others while imposing more crunch time. EA has a crap ton of debt thanks to the leveraged acquisition, and that means firings all around. AI is just a convenient excuse for it. Even if long term that AI is probably going to cost EA more than the workers it replaced. No-one is going to want to pay for AI slop at AAA prices. Especially at the $80.00 price point that is becoming more common lately. The output only going to become more noticeable and similar to other studios as more and more of these studios start using AI, and that's going to make the games made with AI feel cheap to consumers regardless as to the sticker price. (Never mind that the industry has been having problems making fun games that people want to play for awhile now. Too much monetization slop and not enough polish on a "finished" product.)
EA is just circling the drain at this point.
Re: (Score:3)
> Seriously, what's the point of using AI to generate details that even bleeding edge hardware can't run at a decent framerate
I don't know what you're talking about. This is as far as I can tell about the process of creating game assets in the first place - not about generating them in realtime. It doesn't have any impact on performance.
I've used AI model generators (mainly image-to-model), and for game-type assets, they're usually good enough, though you still of course want a human to exert control over th
Re: (Score:3)
> This is as far as I can tell about the process of creating game assets in the first place - not about generating them in realtime. It doesn't have any impact on performance.
That 4k texture, or way too detailed model with moving hair strands, has to be made by something, but the amount of time you have to make it does not equal the amount of time you have to render it. The more complex the scene, the longer it takes to render. What increases scene complexity? Higher quality models and textures.
Most of the benefits of an AI for asset creation are that you can have them do the grunt work. Like creating random background models for various trees, or set pieces for a copy pasted
So modern graphics cards can use algorithms (Score:2)
To generate fake frames interpolated between the real ones. You use it to increase your frame rate above what your graphics card is really capable of rendering.
Computationally it's much cheaper to fake a frame than it is to render the entire frame. The problem is of course that the fake frame is just a slightly different version of the frame that preceded it. It's not actual movement in game so although it makes it look smoother to your eyes it's perceived as input lag as you're playing because your inp
Re: (Score:2)
> EA is just circling the drain at this point.
Clearly. Same principle as Broadcom and VmWare.
Re: (Score:2)
You don't need to generate things in real-time. Let's say you create your character and the clothes have a generated texture. You generate the texture once. The game may enhance it five times to fit all configurations of the clothes. Then it just applies it like any other texture and renders the game in real-time.
Re: (Score:2)
> Seriously, what's the point of using AI to generate details that even bleeding edge hardware can't run at a decent framerate (most top out at 25~FPS, the newest ones top out around ~30-45 FPS) without resorting to another AI to fake frames to pad out the FPS drops with?
There's not a single game that requires you to use AI to get decent framerates. You just need to question whether you should be running the game at 4K with all visual eye-candy turned on or not. In virtually every title on the market the requirement for AI frame scaling and AI frame generation is almost inseparably linked with someone trying ray tracing, or attaching a super fancy screen to hardware which just can't keep up.
If you got a GPU purchased sometime int he past 4 years, turning raytracing off will
Seems fair actually (Score:3)
Most of the stuff "AI" is heavily marketed for is stuff that it cannot actually do properly, but this seems like an area where it can actually be useful. Things like textures in a game are not the focus of the creative effort, they mostly don't really need to express human creativity, they just need to be there and to be good enough. You don't normally gaze at a wall hoping it will inspire you or make you feel something whilst playing a game.
Re: (Score:2)
AI is also good for testing. Just let thousands of agents run lose in a map and see what they come up with.
Can not be copyrighted? (Score:3)
If EA makes games from content that is a mash-up of copies from other people's artwork and meshes, then I'd take it that EA won't mind if I copy their games in return ...
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think you completely understand licensing.
Look at the list of third-party licenses of a larger product. You probably find a lot of libraries under MIT and BSDL licenses, which allow free copying and modifications under the condition you name the developers and license (that's why you find it in the list of third-party licenses). That does not imply that the program itself must be MIT, because the license is not GPL.
The same is true for stuff without any copyright. Just because you use public domain
Re: (Score:2)
Other people's artwork? How dare you! They use their own thankyou very much. Every year. Again and again and again. The same thing sold to you for $70.
With consumers this dumb you don't even need to steal artwork from others.
And the enshittification continues (Score:2)
I guess future EA games will not even be worth a look.
Re: (Score:2)
Funnily enough, you can't spell E nshittific A tion without EA. /s
You mean... (Score:2)
That I can now get even SHITTIER games? With even LESS real work put into them? Pre Alpha Alpha you say? TAKE MY MONEY! ;-D
Integration more interesting (Score:1)
I think what would be more interesting than using AI to do the game development (which is already happening and not news) - would be to integrate AI into the games themselves. People are already experimenting with having AI control NPCs (think in a world-of-warcraft style open world game where you can have a real conversation and develop a relationship with the NPCs). LLMs are actually very well-suited for that sort of thing (Chatbots, like ChatGPT, are actually just fictional NPCs written by the foundati
"The company behind stable diffusion"? (Score:2)
Per google: "Stable Diffusion was created through a collaboration between researchers at the University of Munich and Stability AI... Stability AI, founded by Emad Mostaque, sponsored the project and provided resources for its development and release in 2022. "
So no, that AI company did not originate stable diffusion, it sponsored the work at Munich university, and then three of the researchers joined that AI company.
Sign Me Up! (Score:3)
Where can I pre-order this inevitable AAA-class game? In fact, let me purchase copies.