News
'Games made by soulless machines': Tech sparks debate over AI stories in video games
A screenshot from Nvidia and Convai’s recent demonstration video of AI in video games.
Screenshot by NPR
hide caption
toggle caption
Screenshot by NPR
A screenshot from Nvidia and Convai’s recent demonstration video of AI in video games.
Screenshot by NPR
Is the future of artificial intelligence in video games playing out in a cyberpunk ramen bar? Tech companies would like you to think so, but game writers aren’t so sure.
In a recent demo from the tech company Nvidia, a human player talked to two video game characters using a microphone — and the characters responded in real time using generative AI.
Nvidia is promising a new kind of storytelling made possible by Generative AI technology.
YouTube
In a press release, Nvidia said the technology offered the chance to turn “generic non-playable characters (NPCs)” into “dynamic, interactive characters capable of striking up a conversation, or providing game knowledge to aid players in their quests.”
Nvidia had partnered with the tech start-up Convai for the demo, but they aren’t the only ones pushing the new technology. At this year’s Game Developers Conference in San Francisco on March 18-22, new video games powered by generative AI technology are expected to be announced.
And the companies at the forefront of AI are not just promising to do the work that human writers are already doing; they are promising to completely change the way video game stories are told.
It’s a claim that, across the industry, is being met with skepticism and hesitation.
Pushing the boundaries
In truth, the change is already happening.
The tech is already being used widely in game development. In a survey of more than 3,000 developers conducted by the Game Developers Conference, nearly a third say they already use AI in their workplace. Employees in business and marketing were most likely to use it, while those in narrative were among the least likely.
But it’s in storytelling that the promise and perils are being most closely watched.
Games often have hundreds of characters who, together, help build a bigger story and more immersive experience. Until now, their dialogue has always been written by humans.
Yet Kylan Gibbs, who develops AI at his company Inworld AI, says the generative technology can create a new relationship between author and creator.
“It means that every person ends up with something that — while still beheld to the story and narrative allure of the world — they’re able to look at from different angles,” he said.
Not everyone is so sure. Or, at least, not so willing to begin using AI in their own games.
Josh Sawyer is the studio design director at Obsidian Entertainment, which made narratively acclaimed games like Pentiment, and Fallout: New Vegas, and he isn’t sold by the recent run of AI.
“A lot of the demos, I’m not going to lie, they seem impressive for a chat bot,” he said, adding it was not something he would use in his games.
Fallout: New Vegas is a science-fiction role playing game beloved for its story and characters.
YouTube
In a game like Fallout: New Vegas, which follows the remaining denizens of Earth living in the wake of a nuclear apocalypse, it’s the smaller interactions with the world’s many characters — and their carefully crafted responses — that make for a good story.
“The appeal for our players is the characters feel very specific,” Sawyer said. “I’m not looking to make a lot of generic dialogue.”
Xalavier Nelson Jr., who leads the independent studio Strange Scaffold, has similar concerns. He says everything in a game needs to be filtered through a layer of intent.
“When I hear about building NPCs that make for better or equivalent game experiences while being driven by AI responses, the first thing I have to ask is … how much does that create a cohesive experience for the player?”
“Even if an NPC interacts in a million different ways … if it doesn’t add up to a wider message, you end up with what we call in games ‘oatmeal’ — a sludge which functionally means or performs nothing outside of a sheer amount of stuff that’s put into the world.”
A question of ethics
Joon Sung Park, an AI researcher at Stanford, doesn’t think generative AI will take the place of human writers who come up with high-concept, compelling storylines.
Instead, he sees AI making a game’s many small characters more complex, more dynamic, and more spontaneous.
“Where these agents are good at is creating believable micro-moments,” he said. “But they’re likely not going to be able to create individual, really fun stories.”
Still, today it’s human writers who craft a lot of the one-liners and small talk that side characters say in a video game. If AI does that instead, it might put some writers out of work, according to Nelson Jr.
“When we eliminate positions for juniors, that means they don’t become mid level. Which means they don’t become seniors. Which means they don’t become the vibrant creative voices and directors of tomorrow,” he said.
Despite the fact that generative AI is already being used across the industry, 87% of game developers surveyed by the Game Developers Conference say they are at least somewhat concerned with how this tech will impact the game industry.
That’s why for many it’s not a question of whether AI can write a good story — it’s whether it should.
“Ten years from now, the AI might become so good at what it does that it’s indistinguishable from the best human writers,” says Eric Barone, who wrote and designed the hit game Stardew Valley entirely by himself.
“I feel like we have to turn to a spiritual element here. I want to play games by human beings, not games made by soulless machines.”
It’s an ethical question writers are confronting now. But players will face it soon, and they’ll have to decide whether games written by artificial intelligence are the game they want to play.
News
Supreme Court blocks redrawing of New York congressional map, dealing a win for GOP
The Supreme Court
Win McNamee/Getty Images
hide caption
toggle caption
Win McNamee/Getty Images
The Supreme Court on Monday intervened in New York’s redistricting process, blocking a lower court decision that would likely have flipped a Republican congressional district into a Democratic district.
At issue is the midterm redrawing of New York’s 11th congressional district, including Staten Island and a small part of Brooklyn. The district is currently held by a Republican, but on Jan. 21, a state Supreme Court judge ruled that the current district dilutes the power of Black and Latino voters in violation of the state constitution.
GOP Rep. Nicole Malliotakis, who represents the district, and the Republican co-chair of the state Board of Elections promptly appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, asking the justices to block the redrawing as an unconstitutional “racial gerrymander.” New York’s congressional election cycle was set to officially begin Feb. 24, the opening day for candidates to seek placement on the ballot.
As in this year’s prior mid-decade redistricting fights — in Texas and California — the Trump administration backed the Republicans.
Voters and the State of New York contended it’s too soon for the Supreme Court to wade into this dispute. New York’s highest state court has not issued a final judgment, so the voters asserted that if the Supreme Court grants relief now “future stay applicants will see little purpose in waiting for state court rulings before coming to this Court” and “be rewarded for such gamesmanship.” The state argues this is an issue for “New York courts, not federal courts” to resolve, and there is sufficient time for the dispute to be resolved on the merits.
The court majority explained the decision to intervene in 101 words, which the three dissenting liberal justices summarized as “Rules for thee, but not for me.”
The unsigned majority order does not explain the Court’s rationale. It says only how long the stay will last, until the case moves through the New York State appeals courts. If, however, the losing party petitions and the court agrees to hear the challenge, the stay extends until the final opinion is announced.
Dissenting from the decision were Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson. Writing for the three, Sotomayor said that if nonfinal decisions of a state trial court can be brought to highest court, “then every decision from any court is now fair game.” More immediately, she noted, “By granting these applications, the Court thrusts itself into the middle of every election-law dispute around the country, even as many States redraw their congressional maps ahead of the 2026 election.”
Monday’s Supreme Court action deviates from the court’s hands-off pattern in these mid-term redistricting fights this year. In two previous cases — from Texas and California — the court refused to intervene, allowing newly drawn maps to stay in effect.
Requests for Supreme Court intervention on redistricting issues has been a recurring theme this term, a trend that is likely to grow. Earlier last month the high court allowed California to use a voter-approved, Democratic-friendly map. California’s redistricting came in response to a GOP-friendly redistricting plan in Texas that the Supreme Court also permitted to move forward. These redistricting efforts are expected to offset one another.
But the high court itself has yet to rule on a challenge to Louisiana’s voting map, which was drawn by the state legislature after the decennial census in order to create a second majority-Black district. Since the drawing of that second majority-black district, the state has backed away from that map, hoping to return to a plan that provides for only one majority-minority district.
The Supreme Court’s consideration of the Louisiana case has stretched across two terms. The justices failed to resolve the case last term and chose to order a second round of arguments this term adding a new question: Does the state’s intentional creation of a second majority-minority district violate the constitution’s Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments’ guarantee of the right to vote and the authority of Congress to enforce that mandate?
Following the addition of the new question, the state of Louisiana flipped positions to oppose the map it had just drawn and defended in court. Whether the Supreme Court follows suit remains to be seen. But the tone of the October argument suggested that the court’s conservative supermajority is likely to continue undercutting the 1965 Voting Rights Act.
News
Map: Earthquake Shakes Central California
Note: Map shows the area with a shake intensity of 3 or greater, which U.S.G.S. defines as “weak,” though the earthquake may be felt outside the areas shown. The New York Times
A minor earthquake with a preliminary magnitude of 3.5 struck in Central California on Monday, according to the United States Geological Survey.
The temblor happened at 7:17 a.m. Pacific time about 6 miles northwest of Pinnacles, Calif., data from the agency shows.
As seismologists review available data, they may revise the earthquake’s reported magnitude. Additional information collected about the earthquake may also prompt U.S.G.S. scientists to update the shake-severity map.
Source: United States Geological Survey | Notes: Shaking categories are based on the Modified Mercalli Intensity scale. When aftershock data is available, the corresponding maps and charts include earthquakes within 100 miles and seven days of the initial quake. All times above are Pacific time. Shake data is as of Monday, March 2 at 10:20 a.m. Eastern. Aftershocks data is as of Monday, March 2 at 11:18 a.m. Eastern.
News
US says Kuwait accidentally shot down 3 American jets
The U.S. and Israel have been conducting strikes against targets in Iran since Saturday morning, with the aim of toppling Tehran’s clerical regime. Iran has fired back, with retaliatory assaults featuring missiles and drones targeting several Gulf countries and American bases in the Middle East.
“All six aircrew ejected safely, have been safely recovered, and are in stable condition. Kuwait has acknowledged this incident, and we are grateful for the efforts of the Kuwaiti defense forces and their support in this ongoing operation,” Central Command said.
“The cause of the incident is under investigation. Additional information will be released as it becomes available,” it added.
In a separate statement later Monday, Central Command said that American forces had been killed during combat since the strikes began.
“As of 7:30 am ET, March 2, four U.S. service members have been killed in action. The fourth service member, who was seriously wounded during Iran’s initial attacks, eventually succumbed to their injuries,” it said.
Major combat operations continue and our response effort is ongoing. The identities of the fallen are being withheld until 24 hours after next of kin notification,” Central Command added.
This story has been updated.
-
World5 days agoExclusive: DeepSeek withholds latest AI model from US chipmakers including Nvidia, sources say
-
Massachusetts6 days agoMother and daughter injured in Taunton house explosion
-
Denver, CO6 days ago10 acres charred, 5 injured in Thornton grass fire, evacuation orders lifted
-
Louisiana1 week agoWildfire near Gum Swamp Road in Livingston Parish now under control; more than 200 acres burned
-
Technology1 week agoYouTube TV billing scam emails are hitting inboxes
-
Politics1 week agoOpenAI didn’t contact police despite employees flagging mass shooter’s concerning chatbot interactions: REPORT
-
Technology1 week agoStellantis is in a crisis of its own making
-
Oregon4 days ago2026 OSAA Oregon Wrestling State Championship Results And Brackets – FloWrestling