Neil Druckmann is not qualified to promote generative AI

News about Neil Druckmann's recent comments has come and gone, but I'm still angry about it. In an interview published by Sony, Druckmann allegedly made some controversial comments, including that Naughty Dog's new game could “redefine mainstream perception of gaming” and that AI will “revolutionize how content is created” and help “lower costs and technological hurdles.”

Is it odd that I would use the word “allegedly” about an interview where I should be using Druckmann's own words? Yes, but it turns out he never said the former statement at all, and Sony misquoted him, unintentionally sparking a firestorm of controversy due to its poor phrasing and, in some cases, outright fabrication.

Because of this, we are also unsure if his statements about AI were his own words, but given that he did not take to social media to clarify these statements as he has done with other misquotes, we will assume that this was not a misrepresentation.

Assuming that is true, I have to say: you, Druckman?

This is not uncommon for executives…

This isn't the first time people in the video game industry have spoken about generative AI being the future of game development: In November 2023, Xbox partnered with Inworld to “build AI game dialogue and narrative tools” with the aim of bringing “cutting-edge AI tools to game developers of all sizes.” Bobby Kotick wants to use generative AI to spearhead a new Guitar Hero.

Ubisoft went big on the technology when they introduced the first generative AI NPCs, but it was so bad everyone hated it. EA's CEO said that 60% of the company's “development process” could be affected by generative AI tools, a week after EA laid off 5% of its employees. The list goes on.

…But it’s awful for Druckmann to say this.

Druckmann seems to believe that generative AI can “generate more nuanced dialogue and characters, expanding creative possibilities,” but only if people “manage these tools precisely to achieve the intended results.” He briefly mentioned “ethical issues” but didn't elaborate, instead spending most of the interview praising AI for revolutionizing the development process and “empowering creators to realize their vision.”

Maybe I'm being cold and cynical, but I didn't expect Neil Druckmann to join a company pushing generative AI. The Last of Us and its sequels are famous for their story and writing, which is why they gained cultural influence and recognition as the best games of each generation.

These films tell very human stories, crafted in collaboration with talented writers and directors, that are often overlooked in favor of the cult of personality surrounding the “auteur.” “Precise direction” is not the same as having personal creative input from multiple passionate writers. Also, imagine what would happen if Druckmann tackled something original. The Last of Us would have been misogynistic.

Fun fact: there are no auteurs in AAA games. Games are tightly collaborative projects and one person cannot and should not control every aspect of a game of that scale.

I'm especially interested to see how other developers, fans, and industry professionals have responded. Dragon Age setting creator David Gaider said that Druckmann seems to think “the only thing stopping the AI ​​from being better than Naughty Dog's writers is the ability to give it nuanced direction,” and that his comments ignore the value of collaboration. YouTuber and writer Jacob Geller said that “Naughty Dog is diving into AI because they can't find human workers to dig in the dirt anymore.” Fallout 76 and Pentiment director Josh Sawyer simply posted this:

It's incredibly bleak to see a company like Naughty Dog claim that AI can “enhance storytelling” and essentially do a better job than human writers, especially when you consider that current generative AI has no such capabilities whatsoever. Perhaps in a few years Druckmann's claims will be proven correct and he'll finally be freed from the shackles of dealing with human employees unwilling to criticize his ideas and say they're problematic. Who knows?