AI in game development is a sensitive issue, but beyond the outrage over the use of AI-created art in games like Crimson Desert, some developers are using it in innovative ways. Brave New Wonders from indie studio City From Naught is one such game. This is a factory automation strategy simulation game featuring AI-powered automatons that use text prompts to explore ruins, fight enemies, build factories, automate production lines, and build wonders.
“The idea came to us while we were raising money,” said Shara Chen, co-founder and CEO of Canadian developer City from Note. “One of our investors asked, ‘What if we combined gaming and AI?'” That question sparked the beginning of Brave New Wonders. We started looking into the factory automation game. We love that genre. It’s very indie-friendly and has a strong and engaged community. ”
“That’s when it clicked for us,” she says. “This is exactly where large-scale language models can help. Language models are great at understanding player intent and generating instructions, so we decided to integrate LLM into the game to bridge that gap and make the experience more intuitive and accessible.”
CB: Is AI a tool or co-author of Brave New Wonders?
SC: The AI command system is a core part of the game, understanding the player’s intentions and helping them accomplish what they want. Rather than just using AI to streamline development, we wanted it to be a key gameplay feature that enables experiences that are only possible with AI.
In traditional automation games, there is no easy way to create new routines. No matter how long the feature list is, it is limited to what the automaton or factory is designed to do. In Brave New Wonders, you can input whatever you want to command the automaton. It’s also true that other games have a lot more complex setups, whether it’s reacting to signals or communicating with other buildings.
We’ve also made it easy to reuse and edit existing commands, and designed detailed tutorials and tasks to help players become familiar with the system. Once they get the hang of it, they tend to spend hours experimenting and creating all sorts of interesting and creative instructions.
CB: Did you have to set boundaries early on to only use AI for certain aspects?
SC: yes. We were clear from the beginning that we would only use AI in gameplay to understand player intent and generate instructions for the automaton.
we do that do not have Create in-game assets using AI. We believe strongly in the role human artists have played and continue to play in our industry. We do not support the use of generative AI to exploit artists by denying them fair compensation or diminishing the value of their work.
CB: How do you stop procedural systems from eroding your carefully crafted visual identity?
SC: Since we don’t use any procedural system to generate visuals in-game, we don’t really have these concerns. It’s just not part of our pipeline. All visuals are created by our artists. The AI system is only used to interpret the player’s intentions and translate them into automaton actions. It doesn’t affect the visual aspect at all.
CB: When an AI drives actions and world events, who actually has authorship: the player, the designer, or the machine?
SC: Player. The AI system simply interprets the player’s intentions and translates them into automaton actions. It only does what the player wants. The person giving the command is the author.
CB: Can unpredictability sit comfortably within strong art direction? How can you make the AI’s choices seem intentional?
SC: For us, this is not a big concern. The AI system only exists in the gameplay layer and does not affect art elements. All visual direction is fully controlled by the artist, so AI-driven behavior doesn’t interfere with the game’s visual identity.
CB: Has AI changed the daily activities of artists?
SC: No, we are clear that we only use AI in gameplay to understand player intent and generate instructions for the automaton. We do not use AI to create in-game assets. As always, our artists are solely responsible for creating all visual content.
CB: Should players feel the presence of the AI in the game, or should it disappear into the experience?
SC: In our case, AI exists in gameplay, not art, so it’s not going away. It is meant to be felt and interacted with.
Since starting the demo, players have found the AI command system to be very exciting. It’s powerful and flexible, allowing you to get creative and come up with all sorts of wild commands. Without it, Brave New Wonders would just be a traditional factory game. It’ll still be fun, but it won’t be as noticeable.
Based on that feedback, we adjusted the game’s opening to introduce the AI command system sooner, and even made it mandatory, so players don’t miss out on what’s special about the game.
CB: What is the biggest misconception about AI in game development today?
SC: The biggest misconception about Brave New Wonders in particular is that people assume the game’s art was created by AI, simply because it looks so good. When something is “too good” for an indie studio, people assume it must have been generated by AI.
Five years ago, people would have just said it’s beautiful art. It’s true that some large studios are using AI as a cost-cutting tool and cutting jobs. However, AI was still just a tool, and it also helped individual developers create things they couldn’t accomplish on their own.
I don’t think players hate AI art per se. They react to whether something looks good or not. In our case, we don’t use AI-generated art simply because it doesn’t reach the level of quality we want compared to work created by human artists.
CB: Where does today’s AI still lack creativity in terms of nuance, emotion, and visual subtlety?
SC: An AI’s creativity is essentially a broad average of all the arts it has learned. Strong models can be very subtle and subtle, but still lack true emotional expression. That’s why we value human artists so much. That emotional touch simply cannot be replaced by AI.
CB: Did using AI in this way to drive gameplay add any unintended complexity?
SC: In fact, it was more fun than I expected. It was easier to implement than I expected and more powerful than I expected. Large language models are very good at interpreting different languages, which naturally enables localization within the command system. Throughout the process of developing gameplay using AI, they continued to surprise us in good ways.
CB: Five years from now, will AI redefine the role of studios, or will it be quietly integrated into technology like other tools?
SC: AI is just a tool. It’s up to the person using it. I don’t think the role of studios will change much, but they will benefit from AI. The biggest impact occurs on repetitive and time-consuming tasks. AI is better at handling these things, allowing people to focus more on the creative aspects of their jobs.
It is much harder for AI to come up with truly innovative gameplay. Because this requires ideas that have never been seen before. Therefore, creativity cannot be replaced. Instead, people will leave the boring parts to AI and spend more time doing the things that actually matter creatively.
