- cross-posted to:
- pcgaming@lemmy.ca
- cross-posted to:
- pcgaming@lemmy.ca
So we are pretending. This is the truth, Rob. We as the industry are pretending we’re not using AI, but the reality is, it’s almost impossible to code now without using AI. Almost impossible. I mean, the efforts you have to go to extract AI from line completion stuff and from generative stuff is very challenging. So everyone, every title that’s come out in the last year has been using that, but we’re still able to not tick the AI box. AI is going to be, when it’s sorted out and not producing AI slop, it is the most… This is very controversial. It is the most, the biggest advance in creativity for smaller studios, for medium studios and bigger studios. The biggest step forward in creativity."
Uh huh. Sure there guy who keeps overhyping things and never releasing what was promised.
You must log in or register to comment.
Almost impossible for him? That I believe.
I have personally witnessed multiple coders who were once what I’d call proficient become shells of their former selves because they basically gave up thinking for years and can no longer just code like they once
I’m still not using AI, still able to code. Sorry to hear he and his employees have lost their ability, just like we said they would.
I’m imagining doing Advent of Code for these AI suckers. Would that be fun for them? Do they just paste in the problem text and say “generate the solution, no mistakes” and that’s fun for them? Where does it end? Bah.
With the power of AI Pete is gonna overhype and underdeliver to an extent not thought possible before
Suddenly everyone forgot how to program.
Ah, yes. The Jim Cramer of video games says to trust AI.
I’m pretty sure all “his” good ideas were stolen from someone like the first Fable and Black & White and all his original ideas are barely worth being described as garbage so fuck off Peter.
imagine someone explaining to you that it is inevitable tor life’s work must be stolen.
It’s never an actual engineer saying this, always the “dreamers.”
The engineers said this too. It’s not even controversial , AI is part of the workflow like source control is.
Not part of any of my workflows.
Which engineers? As one, I can say you do not speak for all sw engineers.
He can’t speak for all engineers, either. He can feel however he wants about how to approach game design. A game designer who decides they enjoy ‘turning graph paper into hex digits’ is not irrelevant, if the game they put out is fun, and the art is still valid.
Not everything in our lives needs to be about ‘efficiency’. We’re always being pushed to the point of burn-out as if it’s a virtue, and we should be damn sick of being made to feel guilty for not doing things the way ‘some rich exec’ says it should be.
Look, the discourse on LLMs is so charged on both side that I’d rather not engage, I’ll just say that you’re reading what you want in this tweet, he never wrote that you must push yourself harder, just that you could accomplish more, and that’s the goal of technological advancement in general. I should know, I’ve worked in industrial automation my whole life.
What’s ruining the LLM landscape is unbridled, malevolent capitalism, it’s not the technology itself.
The quote doesn’t actually say “its now impossible to program without AI”.
What it really is saying is “It’s impossible to make a product without AI somewhere in the supply chain”.
Which I still don’t exactly believe, but its much different than what people seem to have read.
When I read the article, I think he’s being disingenuous with his arguments here between the tools and DLSS 5 generative AI bullshit.
I mean, the efforts you have to go to extract AI from line completion stuff and from generative stuff is very challenging.
Now I think most of us who code can say that auto-complete or GIMP providing a smoothing feature is very much different than having generative AI spit out a whole game for you or producing music for you or producing yassified images for you and he’s trying to lump everything into just AI. These are two completely different use cases and a lot of us are very much against the generative AI and he’s trying to apply a false equivalency here against a simple predictive model like auto-complete. Also, not using the generative AI is not that challenging, I think that’s absolute bullshit.
I don’t think AI is powerful enough yet to trust it to produce the assets for the final quality of the game. But Rob, it will be. Yeah, it will be in less time than we can possibly imagine. Within a year, I predict that there will be AI so intimately bound to middleware like Unity and Unreal that it will be very hard for us to extract it. So at the moment we’ve got this ridiculous state where other industries, like the advertising industry, are embracing AI; it’s the savior. Whereas the games industry is trying to push it away."
and there we go, now the mask is off and that’s why he was generalizing AI, he’s saying that generative AI is inevitable and we should embrace it without a fight for human creativity, that’s his main argument, not that we can’t get away from AI in our tools. And maybe he’s right since our corporate overlords will always see human creativity as a cost account and will always embrace a technology that gets rid of a human that can only work 15 hours a day unlike that generative AI.
And that bolded line, do you think that the advertising industry has been saved by AI? Me, I don’t think so, when I see a AI generated ad, I find it all very not appealing at all, not that I like any advertisement nowadays, and I don’t think he’s correct on with a that assumption at all and here’s my citation to help me back up my assertion that Peter is wrong.
Honestly his whole interview is basically him, someone famously being high level manager type and not being very involved technically, is advocating for generative AI and that doesn’t sit right with me at all.
Isn’t this the guy who took like 9 years to come out with fable 2 and it turned out to be a pile of poo
Peter Molyneux is a known liar but I will not tolerate any slander of the best Fable game.
He’s one hundred percent correct. It’s just not popular to acknowledge reality.
Especially for coding, AI agents are a game changer. They allow you to express your ideas more thoroughly and iterate on a design more quickly, allowing you to create a more sophisticated end product. I still don’t like generative AI for art assets but that’s a separate discussion to be had. Programming just gets better with an agent.
There’s a huge difference between “It makes things a lot easier/better” and “Coding is impossible without it”… One of them you can argue is true. The other is an outright lie, and even he knows it.
Yeah of course it’s not impossible and I think we should keep developing personal coding skills because we need those to have proper judgement about what the clanker spat out. It’s just my 2c on the topic.
The main issue is. If companies enforce AI use (and many do), and/or they stop recruiting junior developers (a lot have), then we’re going down a road where soon (for values of soon) we just won’t have people with the skills to evaluate what they produce.
Worse than that, they can only improve if we provide the input for them to use to improve. Any future models are going to be consuming a mixture of human work, human curated AI work and AI slop, ever skewing towards the latter. I am not convinced the way these models work, they are able to tell the difference.
We might well have the best models we’ll ever have, right now.
Well yeah companies need a healthy mix of experienced and young employees and what they’re trying to save in expenses now will hit them straight back in their face a few years down the line. But CEOs don’t get paid to think about the future, the shareholders want their revenue right now. It’s stupid and it won’t change soon enough.
For training, I think you’re mistaken about how this works nowadays. Training doesn’t happen just from ingesting human written text anymore. For stuff like programming the models are trained by reinforcement learning with difficult tasks. This allows for much more targeted tuning without the need for a huge corpus of pre-written data.
