Recent submissions

Comment · 9 months ago
I know, but it's a bit of an unstoppable force vs immovable object situation unless something changed. If they do it, I hope it'll be better than Copilot integrations :)
Comment · 9 months ago
Yeah, there's a toggle to type you can switch at any time, it actually lowers latency.
Comment · 9 months ago
Yes, but every language is going to be a "port", not something contracted out like traditional localization. I haven't decided how exactly but language conversion will land somewhere between these two extremes: 1. (expensive) pick a suite of "native" models (eg. models from China), TTS, ASR. Rewrite all the prompts in the target language. Revalidate all characters by hand 2. (cheap) slap a translation model around input and output and let the game run in English internally. My gut feeling is that this could have very poor results though and increase latency.

It's definitely a research project, this has never been done before.

Comment · 9 months ago
Fair reaction tbh. Right now there's a time watchdog + I'm entirely disabling all I/O and import, But going forward I want to replace it with a proper sandboxing tech... things I looked into are V8 isolates, compilation to WASM, implementing our own gutted python interpreter, spinning up a locked down process, and others. I'm definitely aware of the risk here. The good news is that unless we get pwned, LLMs are very unlikely to write malicious code for the user.
Comment · 9 months ago
Thanks :)
Comment · 9 months ago
Hah from my knowledge of traditional AAA, there is 0 chance any AAA in development right now uses LLMs. A lot of them don't even use it for coding and gamedevs' mood about AI is abysmal.
Comment · 9 months ago
Yeah, I researched this and I absolutely missed this whole part. To my defense I looked into this in 2023 which is ages ago :) Looks like local models are getting much more mature.
Comment · 9 months ago
Comment · 9 months ago
Oh, I can't believe I missed that! That makes whisper.cpp and llama.cpp valid options if the user has Nvidia, thanks.
Comment · 9 months ago
Our initial plan was to simply ask enough for the game that the price would cover the costs on average... but that means that we're basically encouraged to have people play the game as little as possible? We're looking into some kind of subscription now, it sounds weird but I do think it's a better incentive in this case. Plus we can actually ask for less upfront.
Comment · 9 months ago
Thanks :) If you want I'm on the discord linked on our landing page, it's fun stuff to talk about!
Comment · 9 months ago
GGML still runs on llama.cpp, and that still requires CUDA to be installed, unfortunately. I saw a PR for DirectML, but I'm not really holding my breath.
Comment · 9 months ago
Unfortunately, they are close because some of them ARE tiktok AI voices you heard! I'm working on hiring VAs to make custom datasets, though. We'll have our own unique voices by 1.0 for sure.
Comment · 9 months ago
Thanks :) It may sound insane but we convert actions to Python functions then ask the LLM to write a python script that actually runs in IronPython inside the game. Then we have a visual Behavior Tree system to let our designer define the actions. So yeah, they got a bunch of general actions like walk, talk, follow, interact etc.

PS: I think MCP/Tool Calls are a boondoggle and LLMs yearn to just run code. It's crazy how much better this works than JSON schema etc.

Comment · 9 months ago
Yeah it's extremely difficult right now, especially for a Windows game that can't have players install Pytorch and the Cuda Toolkit!

ONNX and DirectML seem sort of promising right now, but it's all super raw. Even if that worked, local models are bottlenecked by VRAM and that's never been more expensive. And we need to fit 6gb of game in there as well. Even if _that_ worked, we'd need to timeslice the compute inside the frame so that the game doesn't hang for 1 second. And then we'd get to fight every driver in existence :) Basically it's just not possible unless you have a full-time expert dedicated to this IMO. Maybe it'll change!

About the voxel visibility: yeah that was awesome, I remember :) Long story short MC is CPU-bound and the frustum clippings' CPU cost didn't get paid off by the reduced overdraw, so it wasn't worth it. Then a guy called Jonathan Hoof rewrote the entire thing to be separated in a 360° scan done on another thread when you changed chunk + a in-frustum walk that worked completely differently, and I don't remember the details but it did fix the ravine issue entirely!

Live from the official Hacker News API

A modern reader for Hacker News · SvelteKit + Skeleton