My take on Big Walk's AI disclosure (https://bigwalk.game/faq/#ai), because I love this game and that the team chose to make it. I disapprove but sympathise with them. My position on LLM use is clear - I hate what they're doing to the industry, and they're built entirely on stolen work - but I have asked myself this question: what if, near the end of development, I had some really horrid core engine problems I couldn't solve that were ruining the game? Could I resist asking a chatbot at last resort?
0 Boosts
0 Likes
@cuirass_entertainment @sinbad yes, but using an older version (and choosing not to take it's patches) is not an option really for devs releasing on consoles, as they must update to get the SDK changes needed to publish or patch the game on those platforms.
All releases out of unity in the year or so almost certainly include agentic programming, especially the maintenance patches, which is a much bigger transgression that what Big Walk talk about here.
@cuirass_entertainment @sinbad ah nice! Did you ship on that? And which patch version?
@mdiluz I think, given the mass adoption in the software industry, you can't really be held responsible for other people's choices, particularly after you've committed to a library (sometimes you can extract yourself from it, sometimes you can stick to earlier versions, but it's not always possible). Only your own
@sinbad also in a world where a google search may just decide to use an LLM to answer, we have to understand a baseline poisoning is already happening.
Big Walk is a Unity game, the engine itself is full of AI code at this point. Do we count that too?