Fortnite’s New Chapter Sparks Debate Over AI-Generated Content
Fortnite Chapter 7 made its debut this past weekend, following a vibrant season that featured a unique blend of themes, including a nod to The Simpsons, a surprising crossover with Quentin Tarantino, and the iconic Marty McFly from the Back to the Future franchise. However, amidst the excitement, a cloud of concern has emerged regarding the potential use of generative AI in the game’s latest advertising content.
As players explore the new landscapes of Classified Canyon and Battlewood Boulevard in search of the newly introduced driveable Reboot Vans, they may encounter in-game advertisements that some players suspect exhibit characteristics of generative AI. While Epic Games has not officially confirmed the use of this technology, CEO Tim Sweeney’s recent remarks about AI disclosures have raised eyebrows. Sweeney suggested that platforms like Steam should eliminate the need for such disclosures, asserting that “AI will be involved in nearly all future production.” This perspective has sparked a lively debate within the gaming community.
Adding fuel to the fire, a developer from Valve engaged in the conversation on social media, advocating for transparency regarding generative AI and labeling it as “technology relying on cultural laundering, IP infringement, and slopification.” This dialogue appears to have heightened awareness among Fortnite players, leading to increased scrutiny of the game’s content.
Players have begun to identify peculiarities in the new chapter that they believe indicate the influence of generative AI. One notable example is an advertisement for jewelry displayed on an in-game billboard, which a user on Resetera described as having an “AI smudge look.” The situation becomes even more curious with a poster featuring a yeti or sasquatch-like creature lounging in a hammock. Observant players noted that one of the creature’s feet has five toes, while the other has only four—a discrepancy that raises questions about the accuracy of AI-generated imagery. Such inconsistencies in digit count are often cited as indicators of generative AI’s limitations, particularly in rendering human and animal anatomy accurately.
Interestingly, another item, the Marty McFly spray, was initially flagged as potentially AI-generated, but the artist has since verified that it was created by hand. Despite this clarification, the lack of a definitive statement from Epic regarding the use of generative AI has led to some backlash, with discussions on platforms like Reddit urging players to “say ‘no’ to AI slop.” The sentiment resonates with many who believe that a billion-dollar company should prioritize supporting genuine artists rather than relying on automated solutions.
The conversation around generative AI in gaming has gained momentum this year, with its presence noted in various titles, including Steam Next Fest demos and franchises like Call of Duty and Arc Raiders. However, the implications for Fortnite are particularly concerning, given that the game’s revenue model heavily relies on the sale of cosmetic items. Currently, generative AI appears to be limited to the free aspects of the game, but should Epic decide to monetize AI-generated skins, it could face significant backlash from its player base.
PCGamesN has reached out to Epic Games for further comment on this matter.
