A lot of times companies will patent things that they don’t necessarily intend to ever produce. Sometimes to obscure the patents that they actually do want to produce. Sometimes to reserve it in the case that they do want to later. And sometimes so that no one else can.
This. Sony patented the stand up and say something to skip ads.
This was a decade ago, and it’s not a thing, and won’t be a thing.
Also, the OP article is an accessibility thing, sometimes people just can’t physically do stuff, fuck them for their disability I guess is what top level comment is saying.
As someone who does have a cognitive disability, there is a genuine difference between augmented input/level skip vs. what is effectively an integrated TAS.
Mario Kart 8 is a good example of accessibility that still empowers the player, as the player still needs to hold an input and retains control of the character - it’s just that massive errors that would result in loss (IE: falling off the track) are prevented by corrective steering taking control.
An automated TAS gives no empowerment to the player - it’s no different that running a lengthy macro script. If I wanted to watch the characters have an adventure without my ability to have influence in the journey, I’d just watch a movie instead.
Why are you assuming everyone will use it for the whole game? While that’s a possibility, those would be edge cases. The article specifically talks about it helping with CERTAIN parts. If you just ignore a major point of an article, of course you can embellish and look foolish.
Having a TAS to beat certain sections or a hard boss would be awesome, having it play the whole game? Well some people will have a benefit from it, but not for me.
Ai is not, and cannot be considered an accessibility feature. If anything it’ll just stifle any genuine attempts to create something accessible because why bother trying to make the game fun for everyone when the ai can just play the game for you when you’re stuck
Also, this isn’t possible with current or even next gen tech, unless they literally script the “AI” responses to all available situations which would be infeasible.
LLMs can’t reason or handle complex situations. They are text auto complete programs or image generation programs.
Game playing is not LLM. They’re game-specific reinforcement learning models. It’s not easy, but definitely doable with existing tech. Sony’s GT Sophy is a good demonstration on what they’re capable of.
Machine learning is not viable for anything other than simpler 2d games or small segments of more complex games. The training required to get good results on that is intense already.
It is expensive, but it does work. We’ve already seen things work to a limited extent on StarCraft 2, Dota, and Gran Turismo, and those are all multiplayer games. The article seems to be talking about single player games, which simplified things a lot.
Still, on the long list of shit we need to fix with America, fixing the patent system is a big one.
Large corps buy them like lotto tickets and try to patent anything and everything they can.
Look how long WB has sat on the Nemisis system because they got a patent a decade ago on it. It wasn’t really a unique idea, but thousands of games have been prevented from doing anything similar.
They patented a very specific algorithm for a very specific kind of game. You can still do knock-offs of the system in the same way you can make RTS games without asking Blizzard’s permission or platformers without asking Nintendo’s.
I would suspect that SoM’s system is complex enough that nobody’s been eager to try and replicate it. But they high level concept of randomized enemy generation isn’t something you can patent. Neither is randomizing story elements between NPCs.
Digital Extremes was going to do something somewhat similar with their nemesis system in Warframe but had to scrap it because of that patent. So now we have the mediocre Lich/Sister/Boyband systems in place instead.
The Lich system was pretty close to the mark. Possible that developers gave the underlying features of SoM a wide berth out of caution, but so much of this seems to boil down to “we don’t want to risk the possibility of a lawsuit” rather than “we can’t just do our thing and see if WB’s lawyers care enough”.
So long as you’re not directly ripping off the code from another system, patent courts have been pretty generous in interpreting overlapping abstract concepts.
But any kind of suit is scary, particularly for studios that aren’t geared up to fight them.
What is your problem with it? Just seems like an accessability feature to me. The one issue I see with it is folks who don’t need it using it in lieu of walkthroughs and wasting energy. I don’t expect that to be that big an issue though, generally people buy games because they want to play them.
Depends how they implement it. Older option was to use cheats to skip parts and maybe watch a video if you want to see what happened in the part you skipped.
You were supposed to quote a part that said either of those things, instead of simply asking if it counts as playing the game if the game is doing the playing for you.
People love watching sports, they aren’t playing are they?
That’s… exactly the point?
you merely interact with the screen.
In a point and click game if you are pointing and clicking it sounds like you are playing the game?
You don’t need an AI to skip, bypass, or cinematic your way through a difficult section. That’s a game design issue, not a patentable AI issue. This does not support disabled people, this will be used to ignore disabled people during game design and fire people who are actually competent at supporting disabled people.
This doesn’t prevent the other from happening. Why are you assuming that? Both can work hand in hand to deal with different issues
Of course, if you just want to come in and see a company as evil, you won’t ever see the other side.
Sony is pretty good with their accessibility program, I don’t see why things would suddenly turn 180. Unless you just want to I guess. But that’s not reality.
Because I work in software development and I see first-hand exactly what executives are currently doing with AI. That’s what they’re doing. That’s the reality. What other side is there? That we’re going to get more games at lower prices thanks to AI? Sure, if you believe that I’ve got a real nice bridge to sell you too, get out your wallet and just hand it to me.
If given all the evidence of the entire fucking economy of the world you think companies aren’t focused exclusively on short-term, short-sighted profits by minimizing costs and maximizing revenue, you’re so delusional you must be smoking capitalism like a drug.
Wow that’s depressing. I guess the main solace is that if Sony patents this then we’re unlikely to see this practice on other systems.
A lot of times companies will patent things that they don’t necessarily intend to ever produce. Sometimes to obscure the patents that they actually do want to produce. Sometimes to reserve it in the case that they do want to later. And sometimes so that no one else can.
This. Sony patented the stand up and say something to skip ads.
This was a decade ago, and it’s not a thing, and won’t be a thing.
Also, the OP article is an accessibility thing, sometimes people just can’t physically do stuff, fuck them for their disability I guess is what top level comment is saying.
I love that patent. Whoever made it was really trolling.
As someone who does have a cognitive disability, there is a genuine difference between augmented input/level skip vs. what is effectively an integrated TAS.
Mario Kart 8 is a good example of accessibility that still empowers the player, as the player still needs to hold an input and retains control of the character - it’s just that massive errors that would result in loss (IE: falling off the track) are prevented by corrective steering taking control.
An automated TAS gives no empowerment to the player - it’s no different that running a lengthy macro script. If I wanted to watch the characters have an adventure without my ability to have influence in the journey, I’d just watch a movie instead.
Why are you assuming everyone will use it for the whole game? While that’s a possibility, those would be edge cases. The article specifically talks about it helping with CERTAIN parts. If you just ignore a major point of an article, of course you can embellish and look foolish.
Having a TAS to beat certain sections or a hard boss would be awesome, having it play the whole game? Well some people will have a benefit from it, but not for me.
And physical disabilities exist too!
Ai is not, and cannot be considered an accessibility feature. If anything it’ll just stifle any genuine attempts to create something accessible because why bother trying to make the game fun for everyone when the ai can just play the game for you when you’re stuck
What a horrible take.
I get “screw ai” but this doesn’t even need to use ai to work.
But go off I guess, people like you are just the worse. Decrying Ai, doubly so when it’s not even relevant to the story.
Also, this isn’t possible with current or even next gen tech, unless they literally script the “AI” responses to all available situations which would be infeasible.
LLMs can’t reason or handle complex situations. They are text auto complete programs or image generation programs.
Game playing is not LLM. They’re game-specific reinforcement learning models. It’s not easy, but definitely doable with existing tech. Sony’s GT Sophy is a good demonstration on what they’re capable of.
Machine learning is not viable for anything other than simpler 2d games or small segments of more complex games. The training required to get good results on that is intense already.
It is expensive, but it does work. We’ve already seen things work to a limited extent on StarCraft 2, Dota, and Gran Turismo, and those are all multiplayer games. The article seems to be talking about single player games, which simplified things a lot.
Still, on the long list of shit we need to fix with America, fixing the patent system is a big one.
Large corps buy them like lotto tickets and try to patent anything and everything they can.
Look how long WB has sat on the Nemisis system because they got a patent a decade ago on it. It wasn’t really a unique idea, but thousands of games have been prevented from doing anything similar.
TIL, and also ☹️
https://www.eurogamer.net/shadow-of-mordors-brilliant-nemesis-system-is-locked-away-by-a-warner-bros-patent-until-2036-despite-studio-shutdown
They patented a very specific algorithm for a very specific kind of game. You can still do knock-offs of the system in the same way you can make RTS games without asking Blizzard’s permission or platformers without asking Nintendo’s.
I would suspect that SoM’s system is complex enough that nobody’s been eager to try and replicate it. But they high level concept of randomized enemy generation isn’t something you can patent. Neither is randomizing story elements between NPCs.
Digital Extremes was going to do something somewhat similar with their nemesis system in Warframe but had to scrap it because of that patent. So now we have the mediocre Lich/Sister/Boyband systems in place instead.
The Lich system was pretty close to the mark. Possible that developers gave the underlying features of SoM a wide berth out of caution, but so much of this seems to boil down to “we don’t want to risk the possibility of a lawsuit” rather than “we can’t just do our thing and see if WB’s lawyers care enough”.
So long as you’re not directly ripping off the code from another system, patent courts have been pretty generous in interpreting overlapping abstract concepts.
But any kind of suit is scary, particularly for studios that aren’t geared up to fight them.
It wasn’t complex at all. It’s incredibly simple
What is your problem with it? Just seems like an accessability feature to me. The one issue I see with it is folks who don’t need it using it in lieu of walkthroughs and wasting energy. I don’t expect that to be that big an issue though, generally people buy games because they want to play them.
Just screw disabled people eh?
Somethings aren’t possible for people to do, this would allow them to enjoy playing games still.
Are you really playing the game if the game is just playing itself?
Can’t I use this to skip the unwanted sections? MJ missions in Spider-Man, for example.
Depends how they implement it. Older option was to use cheats to skip parts and maybe watch a video if you want to see what happened in the part you skipped.
Just certain sections. You could get it to do the whole thing I guess.
You would still be experiencing the story as it’s meant to be told. Why do you think you have to “play” to fully enjoy something?
Why do you think “let’s play” videos exist? Now instead, they can support the devs by buying the game and experiencing it themselves.
Where do you think I said or even implied this?
Entertainment
Your previous comment says exactly that. Your own words.
So now they can support the dev and actually participate! Even better! Except for according to you.
Please go ahead and quote where you think it says either of those things.
People enjoy different things, and you don’t need to play something to enjoy it. Your words.
People love watching sports, they aren’t playing are they?
Hell even point and click games exist, and those “play themselves” while you merely interact with the screen.
You were supposed to quote a part that said either of those things, instead of simply asking if it counts as playing the game if the game is doing the playing for you.
That’s… exactly the point?
In a point and click game if you are pointing and clicking it sounds like you are playing the game?
You don’t need an AI to skip, bypass, or cinematic your way through a difficult section. That’s a game design issue, not a patentable AI issue. This does not support disabled people, this will be used to ignore disabled people during game design and fire people who are actually competent at supporting disabled people.
This doesn’t prevent the other from happening. Why are you assuming that? Both can work hand in hand to deal with different issues
Of course, if you just want to come in and see a company as evil, you won’t ever see the other side.
Sony is pretty good with their accessibility program, I don’t see why things would suddenly turn 180. Unless you just want to I guess. But that’s not reality.
Because I work in software development and I see first-hand exactly what executives are currently doing with AI. That’s what they’re doing. That’s the reality. What other side is there? That we’re going to get more games at lower prices thanks to AI? Sure, if you believe that I’ve got a real nice bridge to sell you too, get out your wallet and just hand it to me.
If given all the evidence of the entire fucking economy of the world you think companies aren’t focused exclusively on short-term, short-sighted profits by minimizing costs and maximizing revenue, you’re so delusional you must be smoking capitalism like a drug.