Makes me remember the games where you “could do anything!”. Spoiler alert they sucked, because there was no “game” in them.
The only thing that will happen, at least in the beginning, is more cash grabs, from AAA to solo devs, good luck wading through thousands of new games a day, all terribly bad.
Ah, so you want to make your own game, for you? Spoiler alert 2, you actually have to know a lot of things to make a compelling game, but it could be an interesting learning experience I guess.
If people begin pumping even more more games out, the only way really to combat the shit is by increasing the fee to be marketed - It’s 100$ on steam today, but is given back if the game makes 1000$ in sales.
It would be bad for everyone, especially smaller devs from poorer countries if this fee were increased further. But it’s a pretty effective guardrail against bad and miniscule games
Well you’re not wrong, but I do think we’ll have a lot of people who do want to make good games but can’t today because it’s requires immense capital. Basically AI could become very good at generating “clones” of popular games, which is what most AAA games today do. But then these clones can be further tweaked to become more worthwhile.
What you are saying could only be true if generative AI can only ever make games worse. Basically if 1 person makes a game and uses generative AI anywhere, the game would always be less enjoyable to the player. Otherwise a “good game made by 1 person” could improve thanks to the generative AI approach I mentioned, and I wouldn’t be wrong.
You can nitpick logic, but if 1 game gets better but is flooded in bullshit games, it’s still a loss for us all.
I can be wrong of course, but I have 10 years of experience building professional games, so I might just have a bit of wisdom to share.
The gist IMO is that if you have the grit to make a game (which 99.99% of people who want to make a game don’t have) then AI isn’t something very noteworthy, and brings its own drawbacks.
If you imagine something like how the crew of the enterprise talk to the holodeck and create games via prompt engineering (e.g. in one episode Geordi and Data tell the computer “create an adventure game in the style of the novels of Sherlock Holmes”) - what would those drawbacks be? And why would that not be noteworthy?
Obviously it would be in a VR environment at best. And rather limited in flexibility at first. And balancing and game design would not become considerably easier. And yes, you’d still need grit and the luxury to at least work part time on it without getting paid. IMHO good games are already drowning in human sweatshop made slop that is controlled by publishers who have the capital.
I don’t exactly know what you are trying to convey, because it’s basically what I think too. Maybe AI can gain a buck here and there for big corp, but well that’s about it. Also something I thought about: if you want to do an indie game, there are loads of free material that’s not harder to use than AI generated stuff IMO.
We’ll see, maybe I’m wrong and we’ll have nice turnbased crpgs by the truckload 😁!
So if there was a software with the exact same capabilities as the holodeck, just in a VR headset, you’d just say “Nah. Take it away. That does not amuse us at all.” :D
This discussion basically comes down to a technical question about progress. How quick and how far we can move towards that goal (ignoring economic and environmental issues). Obviously we’re at 0% and it’s speculation about technical progress (and AI and hardware becoming good and cheap enough).
PS: I’m mostly curious because to an extend understand the irrational hate against AI, because there is justified bullshit going on. But what I don’t understand is how a trekie who knows all about the holodeck can look at genAI and not connect the two for VR and video games. Millions watched those examples of advanced prompt engineering and generative AI and thought it was cool. But now hate gen AI categorically.
I’m in the same boat, kinda. I know how it works, and it’s good, and incredible that it works IMO. A next step forward.
For games though, I think it’s a bit like art, maybe the comparison isn’t very good, but a real artwork must (IMO) have some human intent, you can only rehash old stuff with AI (today) so much. Games should not be made by gamers, but by some one who knows how to make games. Like make you work for that reward. If that makes sense 😅.
Makes me remember the games where you “could do anything!”. Spoiler alert they sucked, because there was no “game” in them.
The only thing that will happen, at least in the beginning, is more cash grabs, from AAA to solo devs, good luck wading through thousands of new games a day, all terribly bad.
Ah, so you want to make your own game, for you? Spoiler alert 2, you actually have to know a lot of things to make a compelling game, but it could be an interesting learning experience I guess.
If people begin pumping even more more games out, the only way really to combat the shit is by increasing the fee to be marketed - It’s 100$ on steam today, but is given back if the game makes 1000$ in sales.
It would be bad for everyone, especially smaller devs from poorer countries if this fee were increased further. But it’s a pretty effective guardrail against bad and miniscule games
That’s just weeding out indies IMO. Any scammer can put up 100€ if he thinks his 1000 shit games will get him more.
Well you’re not wrong, but I do think we’ll have a lot of people who do want to make good games but can’t today because it’s requires immense capital. Basically AI could become very good at generating “clones” of popular games, which is what most AAA games today do. But then these clones can be further tweaked to become more worthwhile.
That’s where IMO you are wrong, and confound lots of 3D assets with a good game.
There are good games made by 1 person already.
What you are saying could only be true if generative AI can only ever make games worse. Basically if 1 person makes a game and uses generative AI anywhere, the game would always be less enjoyable to the player. Otherwise a “good game made by 1 person” could improve thanks to the generative AI approach I mentioned, and I wouldn’t be wrong.
You can nitpick logic, but if 1 game gets better but is flooded in bullshit games, it’s still a loss for us all.
I can be wrong of course, but I have 10 years of experience building professional games, so I might just have a bit of wisdom to share.
The gist IMO is that if you have the grit to make a game (which 99.99% of people who want to make a game don’t have) then AI isn’t something very noteworthy, and brings its own drawbacks.
If you imagine something like how the crew of the enterprise talk to the holodeck and create games via prompt engineering (e.g. in one episode Geordi and Data tell the computer “create an adventure game in the style of the novels of Sherlock Holmes”) - what would those drawbacks be? And why would that not be noteworthy?
Obviously it would be in a VR environment at best. And rather limited in flexibility at first. And balancing and game design would not become considerably easier. And yes, you’d still need grit and the luxury to at least work part time on it without getting paid. IMHO good games are already drowning in human sweatshop made slop that is controlled by publishers who have the capital.
I don’t exactly know what you are trying to convey, because it’s basically what I think too. Maybe AI can gain a buck here and there for big corp, but well that’s about it. Also something I thought about: if you want to do an indie game, there are loads of free material that’s not harder to use than AI generated stuff IMO.
We’ll see, maybe I’m wrong and we’ll have nice turnbased crpgs by the truckload 😁!
So if there was a software with the exact same capabilities as the holodeck, just in a VR headset, you’d just say “Nah. Take it away. That does not amuse us at all.” :D
This discussion basically comes down to a technical question about progress. How quick and how far we can move towards that goal (ignoring economic and environmental issues). Obviously we’re at 0% and it’s speculation about technical progress (and AI and hardware becoming good and cheap enough).
PS: I’m mostly curious because to an extend understand the irrational hate against AI, because there is justified bullshit going on. But what I don’t understand is how a trekie who knows all about the holodeck can look at genAI and not connect the two for VR and video games. Millions watched those examples of advanced prompt engineering and generative AI and thought it was cool. But now hate gen AI categorically.
I’m in the same boat, kinda. I know how it works, and it’s good, and incredible that it works IMO. A next step forward.
For games though, I think it’s a bit like art, maybe the comparison isn’t very good, but a real artwork must (IMO) have some human intent, you can only rehash old stuff with AI (today) so much. Games should not be made by gamers, but by some one who knows how to make games. Like make you work for that reward. If that makes sense 😅.
Anyway, interesting times ahead!