Activision has acknowledged that Call of Duty: Black Ops 7 heavily relies on AI-generated art assets, with over 680 collectible backgrounds featuring an animation style reminiscent of ChatGPT. This revelation comes as the game's development team confirmed the use of "generative AI tools" in a Steam page disclosure.
The campaign and endgame Calling Cards, which offer in-game rewards, are predominantly criticized for their rough-around-the-edges, Studio Ghibli-inspired aesthetic, sparking suspicion about the level of polish invested. While some may see this as an attempt to reduce development costs, it's also possible that these assets were hastily created in a bid to meet an ambitious release schedule.
The game's use of AI-generated art raises questions about the role of human creativity and oversight in AAA titles. It remains unclear whether these assets were edited or refined by humans or left untouched by developers. Activision's response has downplayed concerns, stating that AI was just one of several digital tools used to "empower and support their teams" during development.
The inclusion of AI-generated art in Black Ops 7 might be seen as a cost-cutting measure, but it could also indicate a prioritization of speed over quality. The game's campaign has sparked controversy due to its reliance on online multiplayer modes, requiring an internet connection to run even with bots present. While this might not be a major issue for some players, it could be a significant drawback for those who prefer solo experiences or experience lag.
The campaign and endgame Calling Cards, which offer in-game rewards, are predominantly criticized for their rough-around-the-edges, Studio Ghibli-inspired aesthetic, sparking suspicion about the level of polish invested. While some may see this as an attempt to reduce development costs, it's also possible that these assets were hastily created in a bid to meet an ambitious release schedule.
The game's use of AI-generated art raises questions about the role of human creativity and oversight in AAA titles. It remains unclear whether these assets were edited or refined by humans or left untouched by developers. Activision's response has downplayed concerns, stating that AI was just one of several digital tools used to "empower and support their teams" during development.
The inclusion of AI-generated art in Black Ops 7 might be seen as a cost-cutting measure, but it could also indicate a prioritization of speed over quality. The game's campaign has sparked controversy due to its reliance on online multiplayer modes, requiring an internet connection to run even with bots present. While this might not be a major issue for some players, it could be a significant drawback for those who prefer solo experiences or experience lag.
I'm kinda surprised they're so open about using AI-generated art assets in Call of Duty: Black Ops 7. It's definitely interesting to see how this tech is being used in the gaming industry, but at the same time, it raises some questions about human creativity and oversight in AAA titles... like, are these assets just slapped together or did devs actually put in the effort to refine them? 
And yeah, I can totally see why some players would be hesitant about online multiplayer modes needing an internet connection even with bots present... that's a bit of a bummer for solo gamers. 
But hey, maybe this is the future of game development and we'll just have to adapt 
.
And what about the campaign and endgame Calling Cards, are those just, like, hastily created or is there more to it than meets the eye? 
I'm all for innovation, but I also want my games to be enjoyable without any major hiccups... like having to deal with lag online 
.
Either way, it's got me wondering if Activision was rushing to get the game out the door.
It's a double-edged sword, for sure. On one hand, it's dope to see AI being used in such a way - on the other, I'm worried about the quality of gameplay suffering as a result. And what about all those collectible backgrounds... did anyone even playtest them before they were added to the game? 
i mean, if you're gonna release a game that's supposed to be all about intense action and strategy, shouldn't it at least look decent? 
but when i finally got around to playing through the single-player, it was just...meh 
it felt like they were trying to squeeze as much content in as possible instead of focusing on making it feel polished and engaging.
It's all about finding that balance, right?
They should focus on what matters most – creating an experience that players actually enjoy, not just cutting corners. And online multiplayer can be a total game-changer (no pun intended), but only if they're not gonna leave some players behind with lag issues 
. It's like, how do you strike the right balance between tech and human touch? That's what I'm thinking about 
the game's aesthetic just looks kinda rough and i'm not sure if that's the vibe they're going for? 
the controversy around the online multiplayer is also legit, who wants to play with bots anyway? 
but at the same time, maybe this tech will bring in more players and keep the game relevant? 
.
? maybe i'm just being old-school, but isn't there still value in slowing down development time for something you know will be worth it?
It's a slippery slope and I'm not sure anyone's ready for it. On the other hand, if AI is going to be used to speed up development, maybe we'll see some amazing stuff that was previously impossible due to time constraints. Maybe...