Claude 开始拒绝抄游戏，但可能已经太晚了
最近，一位名叫「chasm」的开发者发现，Anthropic 推送给终端编程工具 Claude Code 的底层配置里，悄悄多了一对「Do & Don’t」。
允许协助开发原创游戏、已有类型的游戏，以及基于用户自身设计和资产的游戏；但严禁重建某款特定的现有游戏，哪怕给它换个名字、声称是原创也不行。
Prompt 被公之于众的同时，不少正在做 Mod 或排查老工程的开发者也发现自己用 Claude Code 时被拒。
有人只是想让它帮忙分析一段无恶意的反编译代码，或者做做常规的竞品物理碰撞对比，也会直接获得一句冰冷的拒答。
随着社区争议发酵，Anthropic 技术人员 Addy Osmani 不得不在社交平台上公开证实：团队确实在 Opus 5.5 的系统提示词里加了这两句话，目的是防止侵犯知识产权。
Anthropic 宁愿冒着误伤正常开发者的代价在底层打补丁，是因为过去大半年里，游戏圈里用 AI 快速扒皮、抢跑复刻的操作，已经到了荒诞的地步。
AI 抄游戏有多快？一段视频就能抄
如果把「贪吃蛇」和「2048」拼在一起，会发生什么？
在解谜游戏《204Snake》里，开发者把它做成了一场回合制博弈：地图上散落着不同数字的方块，贪吃蛇每吞下一个，身体里的数字就会像 2048 那样滑动合并。
一边要提防撞墙，一边还得盘算狭窄方格里的合成步骤。凭着这个轻巧又抓人的点子，开发者满心期待地把开发片段发到了网上，顺手搭好了 Steam 商店页面。
但开发团队怎么也没想到，正版 Steam 页面才刚搭好、宣发还没正式启动，就被抄袭者用 AI「截胡」了。
开发者在 Reddit 上发长帖控诉，网上突然冒出了一款像素级雷同的同名网页游戏。
对方不仅搬走了操作界面，前几关的关卡排布，也和他们在开发者社区分享的技术视频丝毫不差。
更抽象的来了，在抄完原作者手工设计的关卡后，仿制版后面的关卡直接变成了 AI 批量胡乱生成的死局。
游戏虽然做得粗糙，变现却没落下：山寨版把最基础的「悔棋（Undo）」操作锁进了 30 秒广告里；要是嫌看广告麻烦，还能直接掏钱买充值礼包。
无独有偶，日本独立开发者 Kamaboko 也经历了几乎一模一样的噩梦。
Kamaboko 正在开发一款结合了打字与塔防机制的游戏《Typing Magician》。
在他的设计中，魔法师站在屏幕中央，上方不断掉落带有片假名和英文单词的幽灵怪物，玩家必须在键盘上正确盲打出对应的字母，才能施放火球术将其击退。
从今年初开始，他把自己的开发过程剪成短片，陆陆续续发在 YouTube 上记录进展。
可正版游戏还没开发完成，日本独立游戏平台 Unityroom 上就悄然上架了一款无论美术布局还是玩法都一模一样的同名游戏。
根据日媒 AUTOMATON 的报道，这名模仿者毫无愧色地承认，自己就是把 Kamaboko 上传的开发视频扒了下来，直接丢给了 AI。
模型推测出其中的数值节奏与碰撞逻辑，在极短的时间内，自动拼出了一套能跑的代码。
靠着这套白剽来的机制，这款仓促生成的仿品甚至一度冲进了平台的热门榜单。
以前想抄一款游戏，好歹还得懂点反编译、扒源码，或者自己拆解玩法。现在，这些技术门槛几乎已经不复存在。
抄袭者不需要接触原作代码，只要把开发者公开的实机视频丢给 AI，就能从画面中识别操作、推测玩法规则，再拼出一套能够运行的代码框架。
原本用来展示开发进度、吸引玩家的开发日志，如今反倒成了抄袭者的现成素材。
当一个新点子可以在半天内被快速复刻，靠信息差抢跑就成了一门生意。更荒诞的事情，也很快接连发生。
「李鬼抓李鬼」的千层套路
今年年初，Steam 调整了对生成式 AI 的上架政策，要求开发者在后台申报游戏里是否包含 AI 生成内容。
V 社的本意是为了增加透明度、向玩家做知情披露，但在过去几个月里，这套合规机制反倒成了不少粗制滥造复刻品的「免责声明」——
只要在后台勾一下，批量生成的同质化复制品，就像拿到了一张合规上架的通行证，一款接一款地冒了出来。
今年 8 月 22 日，开发者 Nas 在 X 上发布了一段游戏演示：在一个堆满 500 万根干草的巨大草堆里，玩家需要逐根拨开干草，找出唯一藏在其中的钢针。
这个看似简单、实则近乎不可能完成的游戏概念迅速走红。仅仅 6 天后，Nas 就为游戏《Needle In A Haystack Simulator》（大海捞针模拟器）开设了 Steam 商店页面。
不过，爆火带来的，还有意想不到的副作用。
还没正式发售，Steam 上就已经出现了至少 8 款同类仿作。到了 9 月中旬，这个数字已经超过了 10 款，其中少数作品还在商店页面标注了 AI 使用声明。
由于游戏被抄了太多次，现在的玩法变成了真正的「大海捞针」——玩家得先在草堆里找找，哪一款才是原版。
更离谱的是，连模仿者之间都开始互相抄袭，活脱脱的「李鬼抓李鬼」。
开发者 NoGlyph 自己也推出了一款同题材游戏《Needle In A Haystack》（大海捞针），并于 9 月 29 日正式发售。
距发售不到一个月的 10 月 17 日，NoGlyph 又公开指控另一款同类作品《A Game About Needle In A Haystack》抄袭自家代码。
NoGlyph 声称，在检查对方的游戏文件后，发现其中存在 13 个与自家完全同名的类，超过一半的相关函数代码完全一致，甚至连报错提示都一字未改。
其中一条报错指向 NoGlyph 项目的 Shader，而这个文件在对方游戏中根本不存在。
更尴尬的是，NoGlyph 声称这些代码与自己此前发布的 Demo 版本高度吻合。目前，该团队已经向 Valve 提交了版权投诉。
而对独立开发者来说，被抢走的还可能不只是代码。仿品甚至能抢在正版之前占据商店搜索结果，把原作者好不容易积累的热度引向自己。
立陶宛双人团队 Lazy Flock，就遇到了这样的麻烦。他们花了数年时间打磨双人探险游戏《闹鬼爪子》。
10 月 28 日，这款游戏刚在任天堂 Indie World 发布会上亮相，Demo 也随即登陆 eShop。
Kotaku 记者 Kenneth Shepard 看完发布会，打开 Switch 2 搜索游戏名称，想第一时间下载试玩。
没想到，搜索结果里出现的却是一款名叫《Ghostly Whiskers》的游戏。点进去一看，主角竟然从小狗变成了两只小猫，但闯入鬼屋、寻找主人的双人冒险设定如出一辙。
更离谱的是，这款游戏早在 9 月就已经发售，而正版《Haunted Paws》还要等到 2027 年 5 月才正式推出。
即便后来正版游戏及 Demo 已经上架，《Ghostly Whiskers》也仍然出现在搜索结果前列。
这种抢跑环境，迅速引发了整个独立游戏圈的集体恐慌。
知名像素动作游戏《Moonlighter》开发商被迫取消新作《ReVamp》公测，退回私人服务器做内部验证；曾做出《深渊狂欢》的日本制作人林风肖，也把新作试玩改成了抽签制。
打造过神作《请出示证件》的 Lucas Pope 更是公开坦言，自己现在根本不敢在公开场合谈论任何雏形阶段的新点子。
过去十几年，公开分享开发进度几乎是独立游戏宣发的常规操作。开发日志、试玩 Demo、新品节曝光，都是小团队积累玩家和愿望单的重要途径。
可悲的是，这些曾经帮助独立游戏获得关注的做法，反而给了抄袭者可乘之机。
代码能跑，好玩难抄
借助大模型做逆向，本质上是一把双刃剑。
用在正道上，它确实能帮普通人解决不少过去搞不定的痛点。此前有开发者用 Claude 逆向自家电视，一口气干掉 25 个系统冗余组件、换上清爽的极简桌面，在 GitHub 上迅速斩获了上万 Star。
可这把剑一旦落到别有用心的人手里，就变成了零成本扒皮、抢跑占位的收割工具。
但把一款游戏的代码复刻出来，离做出一款好玩的游戏还有很长一段距离。
《小丑牌》（Balatro）就是个很好的例子。它让人一局接一局玩下去的魔力，在于总能把奖励与风险之间的微妙平衡拿捏得恰到好处：时不时给玩家一点甜头，又让人忍不住想再冒一次险。
作者 LocalThunk 曾在开发记录中提到，他给商店重掷设计过一套独立的货币系统，后来发现这套机制打乱了游戏节奏，便把它删掉了。
此后，他还让朋友连续试玩了几十个小时，根据实际体验调整游戏机制。哪些东西该留下，哪些设计应该舍弃，都是这样一点点试出来的。
《杀戮尖塔 2》就更有意思了。游戏进入抢先体验后，制作组没少因为卡牌强度、数值平衡等问题被玩家喷爆。
社区里各种意见和争论不断，制作组也只能一边听取反馈，一边继续调整卡牌、修改数值，再把新版本交给玩家检验。
即便已经有了一个能玩的完整版本，距离真正打磨好，依然有很长的路要走。如果直接用 AI 逆向最终成品，或许能把游戏里的规则和数值拆解出来，却很难知道开发者为什么留下了某个机制，又为什么删掉了另一个。
逆向工程还有另一种用法：把老游戏搬到原本不支持它的平台上。
开源项目 MacNativeGames 就让《王国之泪》《旷野之息》等 Switch 游戏原生跑在 Mac 上。
可有些游戏，离开了原本的硬件，玩起来就完全是另一回事了。
《健身环大冒险》需要玩家在客厅原地跑动来控制角色，双手挤压 Ring-Con 才能发射空气炮；《太鼓达人》则需要玩家挥动 Joy-Con 模拟敲鼓。
这些操作换成 Mac 上的键盘和触控板，很难找回原本的感觉。
《旷野之息》还有 amiibo 这样的设计。扫描狼林克 amiibo，就能在游戏里召唤狼林克作为同伴。现实中的手办，也因此成了游戏体验的一部分。
类似的细节，在《GTA VI》这样的大型开放世界游戏里就更多了。
开发负责人 Rob Nelson 曾向彭博社透露，团队曾认真讨论过，玩家在游戏里买一瓶啤酒，要不要走到冰箱前把酒拿出来，再走到柜台结账？
另一次测试中，开发负责人 Phil Hooker 原本打算去完成一段剧情任务，半路却意外撞了车。
对方倒车撞回来，两人当街扭打起来；他残血想进便利店补给，又和路人起了冲突，最后一路被警察追捕。
原定的任务没做成，倒是这一路的意外让他兴奋起来。他回去告诉团队：「这正是我们想要的城市！」
Take-Two 首席执行官 Strauss Zelnick 曾表示，《GTA VI》的世界完全由团队手工构建。玩家在街头撞见的每一次意外，背后都是开发者无数次取舍与调试的结晶。
AI 游戏大行其道，好在玩家的鉴赏力并没有退化。长期追踪 Steam 市场的独立分析师 Chris Zukowski 指出，那些粗制滥造的批量生成作品，至今仍很难挤进口碑榜单的前列。
在刚过去的 10 月 Steam 新品节上，虽然披露使用 AI 的作品比例从年初的 21.2% 攀升到了 34.4%，但最热门的前 25 款试玩中，明确标注使用 AI 的仅有 2 款（仅占 8%）。
但问题在于，它虽然登不上山顶，却足以把山脚下的生态踩得稀烂。
面对独立开发者的恐慌，甚至面对「不给钱就用 AI 抢跑发售」的勒索，V 社给出的建议显得轻描淡写：「建议开发者做好自己的社区，保持作品持续更新。」
对于家大业大、有成熟法务团队的游戏大厂来说当然无所谓，但对靠着微薄积蓄全职赌上一把的独立团队来说，未免有些何不食肉糜。
著作权法遵循「思想与表达二分法」，法律只保护具体的代码文本、美术与音频，抽象的游戏玩法与规则机制统统属于不受保护的「思想」。
这恰恰给了 AI 抄袭者钻空子的机会。
面对漫长且高昂的诉讼成本，小团队根本耗不起。如果最初的愿望单和搜索流量被仿品截干抹净，他们甚至撑不到游戏发售的那一天。
A 社在底层提示词里匆忙筑起的围栏，更多是一次被动的亡羊补牢。面对已经发生的抄袭和抢跑，这样的限制来得有些迟，也很难从根本上解决问题。
更值得担心的是，原创和抄袭的成本正在变得不对等。当「扒皮抢跑」比「原创试错」更容易在商业上赚到快钱，整个独立游戏生态赖以生存的基石就会被动摇。
如果每一次公开展示都可能给抄袭者提供素材，越来越多团队恐怕会选择把创意藏起来，等到游戏做完再公布。
可很多游戏里真正有意思的玩法，本来就是开发者在一次次尝试、推翻重做中慢慢摸索出来的。
如果大家都开始藏着掖着，越来越多尚未成熟的新点子也就失去了被看见、被讨论的机会，玩家能接触到的新东西恐怕也会越来越少。
那么终有一天，即便大模型的逆向能力再强大，面对空空如也的货架，恐怕也再找不到值得它逆向的东西了。
本文由 AI图鉴自动抓取并翻译，版权归原作者所有；如需查看原文请点下方链接。
Claude started refusing to copy the game, but it might be too late.
Recently, an developer named "chasm" discovered that Anthony had quietly added a pair of "Do & Don't" to the bottom configuration of the terminal programming tool Claude Code.
It allows for the development of original games, existing types of games, and games based on the user ' s own design and assets; but it is strictly forbidden to rebuild a particular existing game, even if it is given a name and claims to be original.
While Prompt has been made public, a number of developers who are doing the Mod or the Old Project have also found themselves rejected using Claude Code.
Some people just want it to help analyse a counter-circulation code that is free of malice, or to compare regular competitive physical collisions, and get a cold refusal.
As the community dispute fermented, Anthropic technologist Addy Osmani had to publicly confirm on social platforms that the team did add these two words to the Opus 5.5 system prompt to prevent intellectual property violations.
Anthropic prefers to put a patch on the bottom at the expense of the wrong developer, because for most of the past half-year, the game has reached the level of a ludicrous, fast-paced, carving operation.
How fast is AI copying? A video can be copied.
What would happen if we put "Sniffy Snake" and "2048"?
In the puzzle game 204Snake, developers turned it into a round game: There are squares of different numbers on the map, and every time a snake swallows, the numbers in the body will slide and merge like 2048.
One has to look at the wall, and the other has to think about the contours. With this light-handed and catch-up idea, the developers are looking forward to sending the development footage online and putting it on the Steam shop page.
But the development team never thought that the original Steam page had just been set up, that the announcement had not been officially launched, and that the copycats had used "Ai" to "scatter."
The developer filed a long post on Reddit, and suddenly a pixel-sized web game appeared on the Internet.
The other party not only removed the interface, but also the technical video they shared with the developers ' community at the previous levels.
It's more abstract, and after copying the level that the original author designed manually, the following level of the imitation becomes the dead end of the AI mass disorder.
Although the game is rough, the game is not going to fall: the base Undo operation is locked in a 30-second commercial; if it looks bad, it can pay for top up.
The Japanese independent developer, Kamaboko, has experienced almost identical nightmares.
Kamaboko is developing a game, Typing Magician, combining typing and tower protection mechanisms.
In his design, the magician stood in the middle of the screen, and the ghost monster with a pseudonym and an English word fell over the top, and the player had to strike the right letter out of the keyboard in order to shoot it off.
Since the beginning of the year, he's been cutting his own development into short films and recording progress on YouTube.
But before the original game was developed, the Japanese independent game platform Uniityroom was secretly set up with the same name game, both in the fine layout and in the play.
According to AUTOMATON, the impersonator admitted without any shame that he had taken off the development video uploaded by Kamaboko and threw it directly to AI.
The model deduces the numerical rhythm and collision logic and, in a very short period of time, automatically collages a running code.
With this white-collar mechanism, this hastily generated imitation even entered the platform ' s hot list.
Before I wanted to copy a game, I had to learn how to make it back, to pull the code, or to break it myself. Today, these technical thresholds are almost no longer in existence.
The copyer does not need to contact the original code, but simply throws the developer's publicly available live video to AI, and then identifies the operation, speculates the game rules from the image, and collages a code frame that can run.
The development log that was originally used to show development progress and attract players is now a ready-made asset copycat.
When a new idea can be quickly rewritten within half a day, it becomes a business to run by information. More ridiculous things happen quickly.
"Li Gyu captures Li Gyu"
At the beginning of this year, Steam adjusted the upload policy for generated AI by requiring developers to declare whether or not to include AI generation in the backstage game.
The purpose of the V Society is to increase transparency and inform the player, but in the past few months, the compliance mechanism has turned into a "disclaimer" for crude and abusive replicas.
The bulk of the generic replicas that are generated, as if they were issued with a compliance pass, came out one by one.
On August 22, this year, the developer Nas made a game demonstration on X of publish: in a huge pile of 5 million hay, the player needs to pull the hay out of one root and find the only needle in it.
The concept of a game that seems simple and virtually impossible to complete is rapidly gaining ground. In just six days, Nas opened a Steam shop page for the game "Needle In A Haystack Simulator."
However, there are unintended side effects from the blast.
Before it was officially sold, there were at least eight of them on Steam. By mid-September, this number had exceeded 10, and a few of the works were still marked on the shop page as AI usage statements.
Because the game has been copied too many times, it's now turned into a real needle in a haystack -- the player has to look in the grass, which is the original.
Even worse, even the imitators began to copy each other, and the living "Lig" caught Li.
The developer, Noglyph, also launched a theme game, "Needle In A Haystack ", which was officially launched on September 29.
On October 17, less than a month after the sale, Noglyph publicly accused a similar piece, A Game About Needle In A Haystack, of copying his own code.
NoGlyph claims that, after checking each other ' s game files, 13 of them were found to be of the same name as their own, and that more than half of the relevant function codes were fully consistent, even with a false tip.
One of the errors pointed to the NoGlyph project Shader, and the document did not exist in the other game.
More embarrassingly, Noglyph claims that these codes corresponded to its previous Demo version of publish. At present, the team has filed a copyright complaint with Valve.
For independent developers, it may be more than just code. The imitations can even capture the results of the store search before the original version, and channel the hard-earned heat of the original author to himself.
This is the problem with the Lithuanian double team, Lazy Flock. They spent years grinding the double adventure game "The Ghost Claw."
On October 28, the game just appeared at Indie World publish in Nintendo, and Demo landed at eShop.
Kotaku journalist Kenneth Shepard completed the publish session, opened the name of the Switch 2 search game and wanted to download it for the first time.
I didn't know it was a game called "Ghostly Whiskers." Point it in, the main character turns from a dog to two kittens, but the two who break into the haunted house and look for their masters take the same risk set.
What's more, the game was sold as early as September, and the original Haunted Paws was not officially launched until May 2027.
Even if later the original game and Demo are on board, Ghostly Whiskers is still at the forefront of the search results.
Such a runaway environment quickly triggered a collective panic throughout the independent game.
The famous pixel action game Moonlighter developer was forced to cancel the new ReVamp survey and return it to a private server for internal validation; the Japanese producer of Deep-Dark Carnival, Lin Xiao, also changed the test to a drawing of lots.
Lucas Pope, who created the "Certificate for the Show", is speaking openly and is now afraid to talk in public about new ideas at any stage.
Over the past decade or so, the open sharing of development progress has been almost routine for independent games. The development of logs, the testing of Demo and the exposure of new products are important ways for small teams to accumulate players and wish sheets.
Tragically, these practices, which helped to bring attention to independent games, give the copycats the opportunity.
Codes run. It's fun.
LLM is a double-edged sword.
And it is a guidance that can help the people with some of the pains of the past which they were not able to handle. There were developers who used Claude's reverse home TV to kill 25 redundant system components in one breath, put on a clean, very simple desktop and quickly cut down 10,000 Stars on GitHub.
But once it's in the hands of someone else, it's turned into a zero-cost harvesting tool to steal and take positions.
But it's a long way from making a fun game.
Balatro is a good example. It's magic for people to play one round at a time, because the delicate balance between reward and risk is always right: sometimes a little bit sweet for a player, and one can't resist taking another risk.
The author, LocalThunk, mentioned in the development records that he had re-throwed the store to design an independent monetary system, which he later found to have disrupted the pace of the game and deleted.
Since then, he has given his friends dozens of consecutive hours to adapt the game mechanisms to the experience. And what's left of it, what's left of it, what's left of it, is a little bit of it.
It's even more interesting to kill Point Tower 2. Once the game is in the forefront of experience, the producers are less likely to be sprayed by players because of card strength, numerical balance, etc.
Opinions and arguments continue in the community, and the production team can only listen to feedback while continuing to adjust cards, modify values and submit new versions to players for testing.
Even if there is a full version that can play, there is still a long way to go before it's really done. If you use AI directly to reverse the final product, it may be possible to break down the rules and values in the game, but it is difficult to know why the developers left one mechanism behind and why the other was deleted.
There is another use of reverse engineering: moving old games onto platforms that didn't support them.
The Open-source Project MacNativeGames let the Kingdom 's Tears 'Switch Games and so forth run on Mac.
But some games, leaving the original hardware, are completely different.
The Gym Ring Adventure requires players to run in the living room to control their role, with their hands squeezed by Ring-Con to fire air cannons; the Trump Man needs players to wave Joy-Con simulation drums.
These operations are converted to keyboards and touch panels on Mac, which are hard to find.
There's also a miibo design like this. Scan Wolf Link Miibo and call Wolf Link in the game. It is also part of the game experience.
Similar details are available in large open world games like GTA VI.
Rob Nelson, the director of development, told Bloomberg that the team had discussed it carefully, and the player bought a beer in the game. Should we go to the fridge and take out the wine and settle the bills?
In another test, Phil Hooker, the head of development, was going to do a story, but hit the car by accident.
The other turned his car upside down, and the two men swung up in the street; he broke blood and tried to get into a convenience store to supply his supplies, and clashed with the passers-by, who was pursued by the police.
The original mission was not done, but the accident on this road turned him on. He went back and told the team, "This is the city we want!"
Take-Two CEO Strauss Zelnick has said that the GTA VI world is entirely team-built. Every accident that a player encounters in the street is the result of numerous trade-offs and debugging by developers.
The AI game is in its way, and the appreciation of the player is not degraded. According to Chris Zukowski, an independent analyst who has been tracking the Steam market for a long time, it is still very difficult to squeeze the top of the list of imported products from rough and indiscriminate mass productions.
In the past October, at Steam's new festival, although the proportion of works that disclosed the use of AI rose from 21.2 per cent at the beginning of the year to 34.4 per cent, only 2 (only 8 per cent) of the most popular first 25 trials clearly indicated the use of AI.
The problem, however, is that, although it does not reach the top of the mountain, it is sufficient to devastate the ecology at the foot of the mountain.
In the face of the fear of independent developers, and even in the face of the blackmail of "pay or buy or sell ", the advice given by the V Society is understated.
Of course it doesn’t matter for a big, big, mature legal team to bet on a full-time, independent team with small savings.
Copyright law follows the "difference and expression dichotomy" and only protects specific coded texts, fine arts and audio, while abstract game-playing and rule-making mechanisms are all unprotected "thinks".
It's exactly what gives the AI copycats the opportunity to drill.
Small teams cannot afford the long and high cost of litigation. If the original wish sheets and search flows are dried up, they will not even survive the day when the game is sold.
A The fence was hurriedly erected in the ground floor of prompt, more so as to compensate for a passive loss of life. In the face of the raids and looting that have taken place, such restrictions have come a little too late to address the root causes.
More worryingly, the costs of originals and copyings are becoming unequal. When "snatch-and-run" is easier to earn commercial money than "snatch-and-run" it will shake the foundation upon which the whole independent game is based.
If asset is likely to be given to the copycats at each public exhibition, an increasing number of teams may choose to hide their ideas until the game is finished.
But many of the games are really interesting, and they've been slowly discovered by developers over and over again.
If we all start to hide, more and more new ideas that are not yet ripe will lose the opportunity to be seen and discussed, and there will probably be fewer new things that the players will have access to.
Then one day, even if LLM's reverse capacity is stronger, and in the face of an empty shelf, there will no longer be anything worthy of it.
Auto-fetched and translated by AI Atlas. All rights belong to the original author.