My submission for the RPG blog carnaval. This month's topic is Good morning, Dave: AI and gaming.
There is a nice little comparison between two organisational structures made in the infamous first chapter of A thousand plateaus by Guattari and Deleuze. They use a lot of examples to illustrate this difference, the most famous one being that between tree-like and rhizome-like organisations. However, for the purposes of my argument I prefer the image of the difference between the fixed point and the line.
Fixed points are goals, it is result oriented, and it is the way around which a big part of our life is structured. One needs to get specific grades to get a specific degree to get a specific job, make a specific amount of money, get a house, a spouse, etc. And the idea is that, once you have all of this, achieved these goal, got the desired result, that you are successful and thus should be happy.
I suffer from this mode of thinking a lot. Though money isn't high on my priority list, I value my actions based almost completely on the result I achieved. The performance was fun because the singer managed to hit the note they didn't during rehearsal, the tournament was fun because I fought competently, a game was fun because the players told me they liked it and I didn't notice any skrewups I made while running it.
Lines in comparison are, mathematically, unending. Lines are not so much the journey - as this still implies a starting point and goal, two fixed points we just happen to be at some point in between - but a directional movement we can follow. Experimentation is a nice concrete example of a line organisation, as there is change without some predefined goal this change is directed towards.
I wish I could think more in this line-like way, which ironically is a very point-like way to frame that desire. Children are great at lines. They can start drawing, not something in particular, just drawing. Or playing. Or singing. But from a young age only my achievements were celebrated, only my failures punished, there was only ever attention for points, good or bad. Insecurity made me at an realy age begin to cling to the point and abandon the line.
And I don't think I am alone.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------One of the coolest things about DIY rpgs is that the production quality of a lot of these projects are higher than the market leaders once they finally get released. There is better lay-out, writing and art in something like Electric Bastionland than the 5e 2014 Players Handbook. Which feels really unique to the hobby. Though I often don't love big budget movies or video games, their bigger budgets are often reflected in the production quality of the product. Good looking CGI and graphics and what not.
These great works of the hobby, often made by just a few people, righfully get a lot of praise and attention. They are milestone achievements, points to strive towards for anyone aspiring to make and share somerhing themselves.
Blogs have since I started undergone a similar development. The great posts are nominated for awards, published in nicely layed out booklets, or even get hardcovers dedicated to the best work of a single author. More goals to work towards.
As a point thinker it felt like the bar for quality content in DIY rpgs was higher than it was for homebrew 5e stuff, and the longer I have hung around here the more that bar seems to have been raised. Or at least that is how it feels to me.
And I don't think I am alone.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Imagine, if you will, someone who thinks they have a good idea. They think others might think it is a good idea as well, so they want to share this result that they are proud of. But looking at the field in which they would like to share this idea they see things that look way better than anything they are able to make or commission.
There might be some frustration here. This person might lament their lack of skill at designing or art, or their lack of capital both material and social. It might even feel unfair. Those with artistic skill have a leg up in the same way those with money and connections do. If only the playing field could be evened.
I've seen this person. They exist. And they aren't alone.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This, I feel, is the context in which to place generative AI in rpgs. So often have I seen this technology be praised as the democratisation of creativity. Skill is no longer necessary, ideas will reign supreme.
It seems to me that these people think they are creative, after all it is still their ideas the program is working from. Arguing about whether or not this counts as creativity or if the product is art is about as useful as discussions about when something counts as cooking and what is or isn't a sandwich.
To me the main problem isn't with the tool itself, nor with the products created with it (though there are other reasons to critique the way most llms currently function as well as the impact mass produced slop has on our daily lives). The main problem I am interested in is the context, the obsession with points and the increasing unachievability of them that drives some to use tools such as these.
If I had to give this problem a snappy name I would call it 'the fall of amateurism'. Amateuristic work is something that seems to be no longer tolerated. Even in more casual groups I see more and more that instead of a shitty picture of a character, people use something generated that looks 'better' than they can make themselves.
But interestingly, in using generative tools like this while chasing these points, amateurism is also rising. Though work is less visibly amateuristic and, assuming these generative tools continue to improve, amateuristic work might become indistinguishable from genuine craft, outsourcing these skills makes one even less proficient in them. We can get an image or a piece of text that looks nicer than what we could have made without the use of generative AI, but we have no idea how it came about. The result is complete alienation from the product we 'made' this way.
Bernard Stiegler call this loss of knowledge and skill through alienation of the product we make 'proleterasiation'. So lets say, with some tongue in cheek, that it is peasant amateurism that has fallen, but proletarian amateurism has risen through the increased use of generative AI.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now I think this broader contextual issue with the use of AI is a shame. Alienation is miserable and performing labour while alienated from the product of that labour is unfulfilling. In our working lives we might necessarily have to expose ourselves to such conditions merely to survive, but it feels like such a waste to willingly endure that feeling during what should be a leisure activity.
Though I have never used generative AI for rpg stuff (or much at all in general) I am very much a point thinker who fetishizes the greats. So I hope I will be able to stop chasing and celebrating points as much and instead try to enjoy the hobby as amateuristic craft: unabashedly shitty experiments, following a line to see where it goes.
Posts my mind assocites with this topic:
This post from Dwiz about the OSR as DIY rpgs.
This post from Retired Adventurer, specifically the bit concerning the effect of expectations about what a game should be.
No comments:
Post a Comment