AI Pushes Into Schools, Game Engines and Rockstar's PC Plans

EFF's Rory Mir argues that Google's decision to tie AI features to Search in K-12 accounts handed schools an ultimatum: accept generative AI or leave Google. Gemini was switched on in August for 150 million students on Google Classroom, and a later control for turning it off would also have disabled Search. Google has since split the controls, so Gemini, Gemini notebook and Search each have their own switch and are off by default.

Mir says the episode still shows a company with about 90% of search traffic pushing AI on users who have no real alternative. He points to DuckDuckGo and Brave, which offer persistent AI settings, and calls tricks like adding -ai to a query unreliable substitutes for set-and-forget administrator controls. His conclusion is that whether to adopt AI is a decision for teachers and districts, not for a company he describes as an adjudicated monopolist. (DuckDuckGo is an EFF donor, which the piece discloses.)

CounterpointGoogle would say the walk-back already answers the complaint, since the tools are now off by default and separately controllable. Advocates of early AI literacy in schools, who see value in students meeting these tools under teacher supervision, would resist treating the integration as an imposition.

Previously: NYC Mayor Mamdani criticised Google for disabling search at schools that opt out of its AI tools. — Thursday November 5 edition.

Rob Fahey's opinion piece starts from the argument that elections barely touch a games business, since the people who bought a game yesterday are the same people who will buy tomorrow whoever takes office in Washington, Westminster or Tokyo. The headline shows where he lands: election outcomes signal cultural shifts that creative industries cannot dare to ignore. Only the opening of the piece was available, so the specifics of his case are not summarised here.

CounterpointPublishers that treat politics as outside their remit would argue that customer demographics and spending move slowly and that commenting on cultural shifts risks alienating part of their audience.

Jimmy Maher revisits Ion Storm's 2000 game and sets its mixed-to-glowing launch reviews against its reputation today as a prophetic masterpiece. Computer Gaming World's Thierry Nguyen loved it in the abstract but cited performance problems, weak enemy AI and contrived environments, while Australia's PC Powerplay called it the best game ever. Maher says many modern claims for the game lack grounding in the circumstances that produced it, and he tells the story of the name J.C. Denton, which Warren Spector revealed in 2017 came from a helpful, irritating friend named Denton rather than from any philosophy.

Maher treats the gameplay as the safer ground for praise, describing Deus Ex as the greatest game Looking Glass never made and tracing it to the studio's immersive-sim lineage, including System Shock. He says his pushback does not mean it isn't a fine and groundbreaking game, only that it should be judged as a concrete artifact and not as an aspirational ideal.

CounterpointFans and video essayists who credit the game with foreseeing surveillance, conspiracy and AI would say those themes are really in the script, and lead writer Sheldon Pacotti has himself spoken of its future still being possible.

Tyler Wilde reports on a row that started when free-asset artist Kenney told developers not to let billionaires convince them slop is the future. Epic CEO Tim Sweeney replied that the claim was bullshit, Elon Musk backed Sweeney, and one studio, Dead Teapot, cancelled its Epic Games Store release in support of Kenney. Sweeney describes anti-AI sentiment as a vocal minority and claims astroturfing, which PC Gamer says it has seen no evidence for. Epic, meanwhile, is going all-in on AI with its next Unreal Engine release.

Wilde lays out data that cuts both ways. Arc Raiders sold over 16 million copies despite a 2/5 Eurogamer review for its generative AI use, and a GameDiscoverCo survey found about 69% of Steam users neutral or fine with AI-disclosing games. But most respondents check the disclosures and over 55% want stricter rules, which Sweeney calls abhorrent.

CounterpointSweeney and Musk would say sales figures show the public does not share the objections, and that disclosure labels invite harassment campaigns against developers. Kenney's side would answer that the same surveys show strong demand for transparency and that over half of developers in the latest GDC survey think AI is bad for the industry.

Previously: Nexus Mods adopted AI disclosure rules without banning AI mods. — Thursday November 5 edition.

Obbe Vermeij, Rockstar North's technical director until 2009, tells Rock Paper Shotgun that Rockstar and Take-Two may shorten the gap between the PS5 launch on 19 November and a PC version. His reasoning is that generative AI tools could produce unofficial PC ports of the console build. He estimates such a port would take hours of machine time and tens of thousands of dollars in tokens, but thinks that for GTA people will try it.

Vermeij says he sees no technical way to prevent it, though Take-Two can use lawyers, and he believes AI ports would be worse than the official one. He is clear that he does not know the company's plans, and current rumour puts the PC release in early 2027.

CounterpointRecompilation developers, cited in the piece, say AI-driven ports produce illegible brute-force code and damage the community side of unofficial porting. Take-Two's legal record also suggests it could suppress clones without changing a release schedule that rumour already places in early 2027.

Previously: Estimates put pre-launch sales near 8 million copies. — Thursday November 5 edition.