Microsoft just dropped a playable, browser-based demo of Quake II, generated entirely by AI. As a longtime fan of classic shooters and someone deeply curious about AI’s role in the future of gaming, I had to try it—and I have thoughts.
This tech demo is powered by Microsoft’s Copilot platform, specifically the Muse family of AI models. But let’s be real: while the concept is undeniably cool, the execution leaves a lot to be desired. Here’s what went right, what didn’t, and why this experiment matters anyway.
Playable AI Models: The Concept Behind Muse
According to Microsoft, the Muse models allow users to interact with an AI by moving through a simulated game world—using a keyboard or controller to trigger real-time responses. That’s a major step forward in AI interactivity.
For this demo, Microsoft trained the model on a level of Quake II, a game it owns thanks to its acquisition of ZeniMax. The result? A rough-around-the-edges recreation where you can shoot, jump, crouch, and explore.
They even describe it as “playing the model” rather than playing the game—an important distinction that sets expectations appropriately.
AI Limitations: What’s Missing from the Experience
Let’s talk shortcomings. Microsoft was upfront about the demo’s limitations. Here's what I noticed during my playthrough:
- Enemies are blurry or inconsistent.
- Health and damage systems don’t feel reliable.
- The model forgets objects if they’re out of view for more than 0.9 seconds.
Weird gameplay quirks like teleporting by looking at the sky.
This last one might sound fun, but it highlights a key issue: the AI lacks object permanence. That’s a massive red flag for any game engine aiming to replicate authentic gameplay. It breaks immersion in a way that’s hard to ignore.
Is This Preservation or Simulation?
Phil Spencer, Microsoft’s Gaming CEO, recently claimed AI could help “preserve” classic games by making them portable across platforms. I see what he’s aiming for, but this demo proves we’re nowhere near that goal.
Game designer Austin Walker pointed out the same thing—arguing that AI recreations lose the unique, often unpredictable interactions that make classic games special. And honestly, he’s right.
It’s not enough to simulate the surface of a game. You need the underlying code, systems, and quirks that give it soul.
A Glimpse at the Future of AI in Gaming
Despite the issues, this project still excites me. It’s an important milestone in the merging paths of AI and gaming. We’re watching AI go from being a tool for character dialogue and NPC behavior to becoming a world-simulation engine.
That said, we’re not at the stage where AI can take over level design or faithfully replicate beloved classics. The future is promising—but we need to keep our expectations in check.
I love that Microsoft is pushing boundaries with Copilot and Muse. But as both a gamer and someone who values originality in design, I can’t help but feel this demo is more proof-of-concept than playable fun.
Still, if you’re curious and have a few minutes to spare, it’s worth checking out—just don’t expect a polished Quake II experience.
Post a Comment