Best Artificial Intelligence Tools to assist in Unreal Engine Development for Indie Titles

[MarathonGuy1337]

I'd much rather see more solodevs

Same here. But no AI, thank you. That is, I have no problem with people using AI for helping with code problems (stack overflow sucks now and search engine are all horrible at this point) and even use AI drawing to help with concept art. But when the plot was done with the help of AI, maybe character dialogues, and the art and music has AI all over it, then I have 0 interest in that.

I don't think I was gonna go that far XD, ultimately AI is a tool to assist development not replace it entirely, as that kinda gets rid of the fun of development and games design.

Capitalism doesn't care about your fun.

I'd argue that in the gaming space it kinda does after all if the game is fun they it will sell, even if its only little, good games generally acquire an audience of some measure. If the game is fun to make and play then the audience is likely to find them a more enjoyable experience, especially in the current climate where gaming industry staff experience on a development has begun top affect the sales and reputations of the companies.

 

[gurugeorge]

I'd much rather see more solodevs

Same here. But no AI, thank you. That is, I have no problem with people using AI for helping with code problems (stack overflow sucks now and search engine are all horrible at this point) and even use AI drawing to help with concept art. But when the plot was done with the help of AI, maybe character dialogues, and the art and music has AI all over it, then I have 0 interest in that.

I don't think I was gonna go that far XD, ultimately AI is a tool to assist development not replace it entirely, as that kinda gets rid of the fun of development and games design.

Capitalism doesn't care about your fun.

I'd argue that in the gaming space it kinda does after all if the game is fun they it will sell, even if its only little, good games generally acquire an audience of some measure. If the game is fun to make and play then the audience is likely to find them a more enjoyable experience, especially in the current climate where gaming industry staff experience on a development has begun top affect the sales and reputations of the companies.

What I mean is, companies will ditch humans and use AI if it passes the threshold of the "grain" of discrimination of most people (well, enough people). Ultimately objectively the fact that lots of people think CRPGs are mostly about degenerate romances, etc., etc., (all the bad things people rail against on this forum), well that's bad from a more discriminating point of view, but it is what it is, and it will sell.

But I don't think that's what developers who are capable of developing good games will find to be fun to develop. But that won't matter if they can be (mostly) replaced by AI.

 

[Gambler]

I didn't think something like that was possible to be honest.

"Something like this", i.e. crude 3d from 2d images was possible for at least 20 years:

https://youtu.be/pUoBSC3uoeo?t=5535

They even reference the researcher on whose work it's based on:

https://www-ui.is.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp/~takeo/

The research dates back to 1999.

 

[MarathonGuy1337]

I'd much rather see more solodevs

Same here. But no AI, thank you. That is, I have no problem with people using AI for helping with code problems (stack overflow sucks now and search engine are all horrible at this point) and even use AI drawing to help with concept art. But when the plot was done with the help of AI, maybe character dialogues, and the art and music has AI all over it, then I have 0 interest in that.

I don't think I was gonna go that far XD, ultimately AI is a tool to assist development not replace it entirely, as that kinda gets rid of the fun of development and games design.

Capitalism doesn't care about your fun.

I'd argue that in the gaming space it kinda does after all if the game is fun they it will sell, even if its only little, good games generally acquire an audience of some measure. If the game is fun to make and play then the audience is likely to find them a more enjoyable experience, especially in the current climate where gaming industry staff experience on a development has begun top affect the sales and reputations of the companies.

What I mean is, companies will ditch humans and use AI if it passes the threshold of the "grain" of discrimination of most people (well, enough people). Ultimately objectively the fact that lots of people think CRPGs are mostly about degenerate romances, etc., etc., (all the bad things people rail against on this forum), well that's bad from a more discriminating point of view, but it is what it is, and it will sell.

But I don't think that's what developers who are capable of developing good games will find to be fun to develop. But that won't matter if they can be (mostly) replaced by AI.

Granted, AI is both a thread to game development but also a point of liberation. So the large mega corporations that dominate the gaming space will use AI has they have been doing, to replace staff, cut down and costs and streamline the creative process. However AI generated art, code and assets will also be used by smaller independents as a means of creating their own games, as the price to enter into production of a game will be naturally lowered.

I tend to think of AI as the same as the Internet or the Printing Press, the Internet was the democratization of information, the Printing Press was similar with the additive it also lead to a higher educated masses public, that was due to the fact it lead to easily accessible and affordable reading products.

AI is similar as it will be a similar effect though in this case its sought of a "democratization of the arts" in the sense it has evened the playing field, no longer do you have to have higher education or be the most capable artists or programmer, a game made with code from ChatGPT can be competitive with a Game made by 300+ employees.

As with all things though the audience is the deciding factor, if audiences at large by the next big consumer product that the big corporations make then the industry will probably get smaller in terms of staffing and likely also make more money (which they probably will).

We can only hope that the audience also support smaller independents, that at least will keep the industry more creative on the whole. Unfortunately like the Internet, AI is here and it is here to stay. The only thing that can change what becomes of it is how the audience reacts.

 

[gurugeorge]

I'd much rather see more solodevs

Same here. But no AI, thank you. That is, I have no problem with people using AI for helping with code problems (stack overflow sucks now and search engine are all horrible at this point) and even use AI drawing to help with concept art. But when the plot was done with the help of AI, maybe character dialogues, and the art and music has AI all over it, then I have 0 interest in that.

I don't think I was gonna go that far XD, ultimately AI is a tool to assist development not replace it entirely, as that kinda gets rid of the fun of development and games design.

Capitalism doesn't care about your fun.

I'd argue that in the gaming space it kinda does after all if the game is fun they it will sell, even if its only little, good games generally acquire an audience of some measure. If the game is fun to make and play then the audience is likely to find them a more enjoyable experience, especially in the current climate where gaming industry staff experience on a development has begun top affect the sales and reputations of the companies.

What I mean is, companies will ditch humans and use AI if it passes the threshold of the "grain" of discrimination of most people (well, enough people). Ultimately objectively the fact that lots of people think CRPGs are mostly about degenerate romances, etc., etc., (all the bad things people rail against on this forum), well that's bad from a more discriminating point of view, but it is what it is, and it will sell.

But I don't think that's what developers who are capable of developing good games will find to be fun to develop. But that won't matter if they can be (mostly) replaced by AI.

Granted, AI is both a thread to game development but also a point of liberation. So the large mega corporations that dominate the gaming space will use AI has they have been doing, to replace staff, cut down and costs and streamline the creative process. However AI generated art, code and assets will also be used by smaller independents as a means of creating their own games, as the price to enter into production of a game will be naturally lowered.

I tend to think of AI as the same as the Internet or the Printing Press, the Internet was the democratization of information, the Printing Press was similar with the additive it also lead to a higher educated masses public, that was due to the fact it lead to easily accessible and affordable reading products.

AI is similar as it will be a similar effect though in this case its sought of a "democratization of the arts" in the sense it has evened the playing field, no longer do you have to have higher education or be the most capable artists or programmer, a game made with code from ChatGPT can be competitive with a Game made by 300+ employees.

As with all things though the audience is the deciding factor, if audiences at large by the next big consumer product that the big corporations make then the industry will probably get smaller in terms of staffing and likely also make more money (which they probably will).

We can only hope that the audience also support smaller independents, that at least will keep the industry more creative on the whole. Unfortunately like the Internet, AI is here and it is here to stay. The only thing that can change what becomes of it is how the audience reacts.

I think the "democratization of the arts" just leads to shit art. I mean, I used to believe that line of argument, but I don't any more. Especially in the context of capitalism's planned obsolescence, the need to stimulate consumer demand with minor variations on themes, etc. ("consume product, get excited for next product")

Essentially, the market is a giant primitive AI, and I see its systemic incentives turning our world into a horrible machine civilization crossed with Mouse Utopia, little different from the inane "paperclip maximizer" horror of AI pessimists. In the end everything becomes a cargo cult version of the real thing, with the superficial trappings, but none of the human engine. Eventually, you have to ask, what's it for?

 

[Viata]

Would you niggas stop quoting me, thank you.

 

[Viata]

Also, AI doesn't democratize art. Literally, instead of paying/asking X to draw something, you are asking a computer to do so. Youtube, books and whatnot having free resource to teach art was already "democratization of the arts".

 

[Ranselknulf]

Hello men,

I'm looking for AI tools that will make a game for me that I enjoy.

Ideally, I'd push a button and 12 hours later a majestic video game will be waiting for me to play.

 

[deama]

Hello men,

I'm looking for AI tools that will make a game for me that I enjoy.

Ideally, I'd push a button and 12 hours later a majestic video game will be waiting for me to play.

That's not really possible these days, you'll have to wait a while still for it.
Unless you don't mind making crappy ones, like a snake game in javascript that you can play by yourself locally, that one will just take you less than an hour.

 

[Peachcurl]

Just coming to this thread now, I see you got some decent advice as well as comments from certain people who have a strong agenda against AI tools. I figured that fact may be relevant information for you.

Anyways, If you want to see what tools are available, checking dedicated AI threads (e.g., in Science subforum) may be more useful. It seems people interested in AI aren't frequenting this subforum too often.

AI Tools For Coding (For the essential game code and speed along development of the Alpha)

To some extent, ChatGPT may help. Not in the sense of automating code generation entirely or even in bigger chunks, but to help with the small things, like writing a small code snippet that you need. To see whether it's worth it: just try it. That's the only way to see if this improves your workflow. Make sure to give sufficient detail on what you want to be coded, and how. Use ChatGPT 3.5 for testing, no need to pay for 4.

AI Tools For 3D Modeling (Mainly for the random generation of Terrain like some of those blender tools)

My experience so far: 3D modeling with AI is 'feasible' but not really convenient at this point in time. Can't recommend this yet.

AI Tools for 2D Art Generation (Mainly to help come up with rouge ideas for concept art)

2D concept art & ideation is probably the most feasible item on your list. If you want to generate the art locally, use Stable Diffusion. Requires a serviceable NVidia gpu.
For starters see this UI: https://github.com/AUTOMATIC1111/stable-diffusion-webui/
Just as a side note: Some styles, like pixel graphics, may need a bit more work than others.

Otherwise, if you are willing to use an online service: openAI's DALLE3 is doing pretty well. (Besides very good generation quality, DALLE3 would probably be easiest to use for people new to this, because it doesn't require that much "prompt-engineering". Simple prompts / requests in plain language work well and can be improved sequentially.)

PS: Music and speech generation are also possible, but I don't have any experience with those.

 

[Gambler]

However AI generated art, code and assets will also be used by smaller independents as a means of creating their own games, as the price to enter into production of a game will be naturally lowered.

On the lower end of the game market, this will result in the influx of cheap garbage designed by people with no talents of any kind. People who previously couldn't release a game, because they were lazy and incompetent might now cobble some awful thing together and even push it to Steam, hoping to earn a quick buck. Meanwhile, Steam is already drowning in garbage. With the help of generative AI this garbage will become not just more plentiful, but also harder to spot. (Conversely, it will be harder to find legitimately good independent games amongst all the noise.)

AI is similar as it will be a similar effect though in this case its sought of a "democratization of the arts" in the sense it has evened the playing field, no longer do you have to have higher education or be the most capable artists or programmer, a game made with code from ChatGPT can be competitive with a Game made by 300+ employees.

No, it will not. On the higher end of the market, anything that can be generated by an independent developer will be generated better and cheaper by a large company. They will hire actual AI experts and build complex data pipelines. They will have access to more computing power and datasets. They will also have access to cheap labor for QA, prompting and generating additional training data. Most importantly, they will have an actual marketing budget, so the problem of drowning in garbage I described above will not affect them.

All of this, of course, assumes that generative AI will be doing something useful for high-end game development, which is not as obvious as many people pretend. The point is, the current flavor of AI technologies is inherently tilted towards the economy of scale.

Heck, we've already seen this play out at least once before. The doublespeak about "democratization of information" was precisely the kind of rhetoric that was used in 2006-2008 to push the ideas of the so-called Web 2.0. In reality, those ideas were absolutely awful for independent websites and communities. We ended up with hypercentralization, mass censorship and endless propaganda. All of that was quite predictable even back then.

 

[MarathonGuy1337]

However AI generated art, code and assets will also be used by smaller independents as a means of creating their own games, as the price to enter into production of a game will be naturally lowered.

On the lower end of the game market, this will result in the influx of cheap garbage designed by people with no talents of any kind. People who previously couldn't release a game, because they were lazy and incompetent might now cobble some awful thing together and even push it to Steam, hoping to earn a quick buck. Meanwhile, Steam is already drowning in garbage. With the help of generative AI this garbage will become not just more plentiful, but also harder to spot. (Conversely, it will be harder to find legitimately good independent games amongst all the noise.)

AI is similar as it will be a similar effect though in this case its sought of a "democratization of the arts" in the sense it has evened the playing field, no longer do you have to have higher education or be the most capable artists or programmer, a game made with code from ChatGPT can be competitive with a Game made by 300+ employees.

No, it will not. On the higher end of the market, anything that can be generated by an independent developer will be generated better and cheaper by a large company. They will hire actual AI experts and build complex data pipelines. They will have access to more computing power and datasets. They will also have access to cheap labor for QA, prompting and generating additional training data. Most importantly, they will have an actual marketing budget, so the problem of drowning in garbage I described above will not affect them.

All of this, of course, assumes that generative AI will be doing something useful for high-end game development, which is not as obvious as many people pretend. The point is, the current flavor of AI technologies is inherently tilted towards the economy of scale.

Heck, we've already seen this play out at least once before. The doublespeak about "democratization of information" was precisely the kind of rhetoric that was used in 2006-2008 to push the ideas of the so-called Web 2.0. In reality, those ideas were absolutely awful for independent websites and communities. We ended up with hypercentralization, mass censorship and endless propaganda. All of that was quite predictable even back then.

Whilst it is true that the democratization of information was high jacked and so too likely will AI art that doesn't make it a certainty either. One I also mentioned the printing press which was another democratization of information via a free press and that took decades to corrupt by private business and stateist institutions, and ha several era of bounding between state censorship back to the freedom of the press, the internet was the same initially created as a open repository for information it was high jacked by larger corporate bodies in the 2006-2008 however this had by the 2010s become known to the audience, that was acutely aware to this "propaganda" and I believe the same is true of AI.

I would argue that ultimately it is the audience that is responsible for how AI is used, like with any aspect of society. That's kinda the greatest strength and weakness of a democratic free society, the outcome and responsibility lay at the feat of the people. AI isn't inherently dangerous no more than a pencil it is how we allow its use and support its use that is the deciding factor.

Or something idealistic and profound sounding like that.

 

[MarathonGuy1337]

Just coming to this thread now, I see you got some decent advice as well as comments from certain people who have a strong agenda against AI tools. I figured that fact may be relevant information for you.

Anyways, If you want to see what tools are available, checking dedicated AI threads (e.g., in Science subforum) may be more useful. It seems people interested in AI aren't frequenting this subforum too often.

AI Tools For Coding (For the essential game code and speed along development of the Alpha)

To some extent, ChatGPT may help. Not in the sense of automating code generation entirely or even in bigger chunks, but to help with the small things, like writing a small code snippet that you need. To see whether it's worth it: just try it. That's the only way to see if this improves your workflow. Make sure to give sufficient detail on what you want to be coded, and how. Use ChatGPT 3.5 for testing, no need to pay for 4.

AI Tools For 3D Modeling (Mainly for the random generation of Terrain like some of those blender tools)

My experience so far: 3D modeling with AI is 'feasible' but not really convenient at this point in time. Can't recommend this yet.

AI Tools for 2D Art Generation (Mainly to help come up with rouge ideas for concept art)

2D concept art & ideation is probably the most feasible item on your list. If you want to generate the art locally, use Stable Diffusion. Requires a serviceable NVidia gpu.
For starters see this UI: https://github.com/AUTOMATIC1111/stable-diffusion-webui/
Just as a side note: Some styles, like pixel graphics, may need a bit more work than others.

Otherwise, if you are willing to use an online service: openAI's DALLE3 is doing pretty well. (Besides very good generation quality, DALLE3 would probably be easiest to use for people new to this, because it doesn't require that much "prompt-engineering". Simple prompts / requests in plain language work well and can be improved sequentially.)

PS: Music and speech generation are also possible, but I don't have any experience with those.

Yeah its definitely informative I was sought of brought here due to a recommendation from a work college about how he was using ChatGPT to help him work out erm like a Raspberry Pi and other generally tech associated stuff along with a small game he was working on for a course he was doing in like high end software development.

I'd much rather see more solodevs

Same here. But no AI, thank you. That is, I have no problem with people using AI for helping with code problems (stack overflow sucks now and search engine are all horrible at this point) and even use AI drawing to help with concept art. But when the plot was done with the help of AI, maybe character dialogues, and the art and music has AI all over it, then I have 0 interest in that.

I don't think I was gonna go that far XD, ultimately AI is a tool to assist development not replace it entirely, as that kinda gets rid of the fun of development and games design.

Capitalism doesn't care about your fun.

I'd argue that in the gaming space it kinda does after all if the game is fun they it will sell, even if its only little, good games generally acquire an audience of some measure. If the game is fun to make and play then the audience is likely to find them a more enjoyable experience, especially in the current climate where gaming industry staff experience on a development has begun top affect the sales and reputations of the companies.

What I mean is, companies will ditch humans and use AI if it passes the threshold of the "grain" of discrimination of most people (well, enough people). Ultimately objectively the fact that lots of people think CRPGs are mostly about degenerate romances, etc., etc., (all the bad things people rail against on this forum), well that's bad from a more discriminating point of view, but it is what it is, and it will sell.

But I don't think that's what developers who are capable of developing good games will find to be fun to develop. But that won't matter if they can be (mostly) replaced by AI.

Granted, AI is both a thread to game development but also a point of liberation. So the large mega corporations that dominate the gaming space will use AI has they have been doing, to replace staff, cut down and costs and streamline the creative process. However AI generated art, code and assets will also be used by smaller independents as a means of creating their own games, as the price to enter into production of a game will be naturally lowered.

I tend to think of AI as the same as the Internet or the Printing Press, the Internet was the democratization of information, the Printing Press was similar with the additive it also lead to a higher educated masses public, that was due to the fact it lead to easily accessible and affordable reading products.

AI is similar as it will be a similar effect though in this case its sought of a "democratization of the arts" in the sense it has evened the playing field, no longer do you have to have higher education or be the most capable artists or programmer, a game made with code from ChatGPT can be competitive with a Game made by 300+ employees.

As with all things though the audience is the deciding factor, if audiences at large by the next big consumer product that the big corporations make then the industry will probably get smaller in terms of staffing and likely also make more money (which they probably will).

We can only hope that the audience also support smaller independents, that at least will keep the industry more creative on the whole. Unfortunately like the Internet, AI is here and it is here to stay. The only thing that can change what becomes of it is how the audience reacts.

I think the "democratization of the arts" just leads to shit art. I mean, I used to believe that line of argument, but I don't any more. Especially in the context of capitalism's planned obsolescence, the need to stimulate consumer demand with minor variations on themes, etc. ("consume product, get excited for next product")

Essentially, the market is a giant primitive AI, and I see its systemic incentives turning our world into a horrible machine civilization crossed with Mouse Utopia, little different from the inane "paperclip maximizer" horror of AI pessimists. In the end everything becomes a cargo cult version of the real thing, with the superficial trappings, but none of the human engine. Eventually, you have to ask, what's it for?

Whilst I agree in theory that democratization of art doesn't guarantee good art neither dos anything really if the gaming industry from around 2010's to the present or the film industry from like the 1990s to the present or the comics industry from like the 2000s to the present have demonstrated bad art existed long before the advent of the AI. AI is just a tool like anything.

AI didn't make this rather Rob Liefeld did

AI didn't make this rather Richard Garriott did

Point being AI is a tool.

Bad art is made by a far greater number of factors such as lack of vision, over ambition, unasked for political activism, unambitious design, repetitive setting or lackluster world building, poor treatment of developers, among many other issues and factors.

I'd also say on a personal note I'd rather the current media establishment got challenged we saw how Battlebit was a major competition to Battlefield so AI is a tool that could allow indie developers to threaten mainstream productions, after all if a game was made by a AI used by a billion dollar company vs a AI used by a small independent my guess is that overall the end product is similar enough that the playing field has been evened.

 

[Tyranicon]

AI used by a billion dollar company vs a AI used by a small independent

My prediction is that soon, the distance between these two will be vast.

The graphics wars are over. Welcome to a new type of arms race.

 

[MarathonGuy1337]

AI used by a billion dollar company vs a AI used by a small independent

My prediction is that soon, the distance between these two will be vast.

The graphics wars are over. Welcome to a new type of arms race.

Possible and indeed likely but if it gives more of a chance for independents to succeeded then its a worthwhile trade I think. The bigger problem as always is whether or not audiences will change their spending habits. I think already we have seen a ripple in this, indie games have grown more popular over the last decade, a trend I believe will hold as the corporate sphere moves towards ever increasing over monetization coupled with under performance, which has lead to wide scale audience dissatisfaction. I also think consumers are becoming more and more conscientious in their spending habits, this more in-depth studios but the younger generations so like late-Gen-Y and Gen-Z are more concerned with humanitarian work treatment and are environmentally conscious excreta.

A independent game using AI is fine, as it hasn't cost any jobs whilst a triple AAA game using AI to replace veteran staff will be seen as bad due to an idea of Social-Justice mixed with Consumerism. Its not a perfect system or even a prediction for that matter but time and time again the flux in consumer practices ultimately hold power over the economic decision of companies.

 

[Tyranicon]

I predict a dystopian future where consumer trends are manipulated by corporate AI overlords, so yeah I'm always open to more optimistic versions :D.

A independent game using AI is fine.

Oh boy, wait until you start interacting with an audience. You'll see this is very much not true. There's just a little bit more leeway, especially if you're some broke dev.

 

[MarathonGuy1337]

I predict a dystopian future where consumer trends are manipulated by corporate AI overlords, so yeah I'm always open to more optimistic versions :D.

A independent game using AI is fine.

Oh boy, wait until you start interacting with an audience. You'll see this is very much not true. There's just a little bit more leeway, especially if you're some broke dev.

True I think theirs always gonna be a mix of response to anything. Generally when its comes to predictions I tend to be quite conservative, perhaps I would have been a student of the realists worldview in the early-20th century in that regard. Its not that AI hasn't a potential for harm in the gaming space, media or society its that any harm caused isn't really because of the AI is because of human agency on the individual and societal level.

But their I go again waxing on the value of independent accountability within free market democratic society, so i'll spare everyone the tangent.

 

[gurugeorge]

The game engine developer who made Build Box (a "no-coding" game engine) are moving into AI, so supposedly you'd be able to instruct the game to make things for you, etc.

Build Box 4 - AI game engine done right?

 

[deama]

The game engine developer who made Build Box (a "no-coding" game engine) are moving into AI, so supposedly you'd be able to instruct the game to make things for you, etc.

Build Box 4 - AI game engine done right?

Oh that's quite interesting, the company itself is a bit shady, but it would make it pretty easy for me to try my toes since I've been thinking for a while now but RPGmaker ones are a bit too genericy for me.

 

[MarathonGuy1337]

The game engine developer who made Build Box (a "no-coding" game engine) are moving into AI, so supposedly you'd be able to instruct the game to make things for you, etc.

Build Box 4 - AI game engine done right?

Okay that kinda interesting funny how the technology keeps developing

 

[tritosine2k]

Funny I'll give that

 

[MarathonGuy1337]

Funny I'll give that

I could have said Rad but I think thats outdated lingo

 

[tritosine2k]

The start-up graveyard is littered with this stuff from before they cranked up the AI hype train.

 

[MarathonGuy1337]

The start-up graveyard is littered with this stuff from before they cranked up the AI hype train.

I would probably agree AI seems still in early doors, we had something similar with the VR craze as well, technology is improving don't get me wrong but its still away off from being perfect. Defiantly an interesting subject for those that find hardware and software advances interesting anyway

 

[tritosine2k]

The start-up graveyard is littered with this stuff from before they cranked up the AI hype train.

I would probably agree AI seems still in early doors, we had something similar with the VR craze as well, technology is improving don't get me wrong but its still away off from being perfect. Defiantly an interesting subject for those that find hardware and software advances interesting anyway

see this it's rather interesting
https://github.com/lllyasviel/style2paints

You do NOT need to install any complex things like CUDA and python. You can directly download it and then double click it, as if you were playing a normal video game.