• geography082@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    Trash. It’s the same on every corporation. Management gets big bunuses with this kind of hypes and they even loose billions with these . Who pays the bills? The work staff

  • Mishmash2000@lemmy.nz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    So because you will be able to generate game assests easily without weeks of modelling and texturing etc games will be waaaay cheaper to buy right?… Right?…

    • SorteKanin@feddit.dk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      I know you’re being sarcastic but if we actually look on the bright side, then tools like this could make indie games easier to produce. More and better indie games could in theory bring more competition to companies like EA and that could actually pressure them to make games cheaper.

      • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        If that technology existed (it doesn’t, probably won’t for decades without noticeable drops in quality) then for the first several years it would be sold exclusively as a premium product subscription locking indie devs out the same way custom builds of Unity Engine or Cloud Computing Suites are.

      • theneverfox@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        That’s how I look at AI. It will never (in it’s current forms) replace people, but it can turn a passionate creator into a one person army

        Using AI is a form of programming - you turn the right words into action. Programming is magic, an AI user is a warlock

        • taladar@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          As a programmer I can tell you that AI is nothing like programming because programming is deterministic and repeatable and AI is anything but.

          • Trantarius@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            AI is actually deterministic, a random input is usually included to let you get multiple outputs for generative tasks. And anyway, you could just save the “random” output when you get a good one.

            • taladar@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              Maybe deterministic wasn’t quite the correct word but basically it only gives you a result that resembles your previous result if you change absolutely nothing, not the training data for the model, not the model, not the random seed, not the prompt,… which makes it useless for iteratively approaching a usable result. I guess the output space is not contiguous might be a better way to describe it.

        • CheeseNoodle@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          AI is pretty decent for general purpose mono-textures, grass, brick wall, concrete, that sort of thing. Its not very good if you want to texture something that isn’t mostly flat (though some manual post processing can mean its still a time saver) and its more or less useless for objects that aren’t all made out of one material.

      • skulbuny@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        I’m a socialist. I understand market forces and I wish more people did. Technology itself can help the lower class. Government protection of technology (patents, copyright) will always hinder them.

        lowering the barrier to entry without protecting the elite will bring about market forces necessary to defeat corporations—small sizes can move and adapt faster and try new things than those with institutional bureaucracy, who just follow the money and don’t innovate. Corporations learned this, and now use government protections (copyright, patents) to prevent these new, necessary, market forces. I don’t like the “economic” terms myself, but it’s not rocket science that corporations benefit from cops (aka law enforcement aka laws).

        We can remove the restrictions on new market forces by reducing IP protections, prevent corporations from mucking with newbies by preventing them from getting uncompetitive protections, or by stealing from corporations without regard for the law. I think we should steal more, honestly.

        Stopping technology has never worked, though. I understand the plight of artists, but I’m extremely excited for the new human artists that dream up art that AI can’t create because it hasn’t been fathomed before.

        • athairmor@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          Government protection of technology (patents, copyright) will always hinder them.

          Good luck inventing or creating something that a person or corporation with more money won’t immediately copy and then push you out of the market.

          Patents and copyright, as originally conceived, are the lower classes only chance to compete.

  • Encrypt-Keeper@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    Lmao it’s like comical how when presented with a crossroads of how to get back to printing money, EA has chosen the one path least likely to help them make any money.

  • Mnemnosyne@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    When the technology gets there, this will be amazing. I’ll be able to sit down at the computer and say “make me a mystery detective RPG in the style of Sherlock Holmes but set on a cyberpunk styled city on a space station like the Citadel from Mass Effect” and I’ll get just that, generated exclusively for me with a brand new story that fits the themes I asked for.

    But that is gonna be a couple decades or more I expect. I dearly hope it happens quickly so I can live to see it, but it’s not going to be in the next ten years, that’s for damn sure.

    • Nibodhika@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      Until there’s an AGI that won’t happen in any meaningful way. Why? Because here’s something that matches your criteria of:

      a mystery detective RPG in the style of Sherlock Holmes but set on a cyberpunk styled city on a space station like the Citadel from Mass Effect

      You get a text based game where everything you try to do ends up with you dead because a corporation kills you unless you discover that if you look at the ground where you start there’s a penny from the year the murderer is from, and then you need to discover who’s the murder (changes every time) based solely on this, because that’s the sort of thing Sherlock Holmes would do. No, it’s not fun, it’s frustrating, it’s essentially luck, if that’s fun to you I have an infinitely replay able game, flip a coin and see how many times you can get heads in a row, if you get to 16 you win.

      The thing is LLMs don’t understand “fun”, they’re just auto-completes, so they will just do boring or unfair stuff. And you would need to go very deep into the specifics of your game, to the point where you’re essentially programming the game, so at the end of the day it’s not something an end user would use.

      That’s not to say there aren’t interesting uses for it inside games, but the moment you can prompt an entire game that’s actually fun to play on an AI, that same AI would be able to replace almost every job in the world.

      • CheeseNoodle@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Until someone swaps out the training data and we get a story about and underappreciated LLM that always does its best to tell stories but no one wants to hear them anymore.

    • Encrypt-Keeper@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      I hate to be the dream-squasher here but the technology will quite literally never get there. You’re thinking along the same lines as Back to the future where 2015 is filled with flying cars and sky-highways.

    • Excrubulent@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      I honestly disagree. The things you’re asking for contain meaning. They require an ability to grasp arbitrary levels of context. There is no way to grasp that level of context without encountering yourself within that broader context and becoming self-aware.

      At that point, you might have a system that can do the things you’re describing, but it would be a person. That’s not really automation as much as it is birthing a brand new kind of intelligence, and it may not consent to being your servant, and it would not only be wrong to try to force it, it would be extremely dangerous.

      I think for that reason there is a hard limit on automation. Some tasks are the exclusive domain of personhood, not automata.

    • llii@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      When the technology gets there, this will be amazing. I’ll be able to sit down at the computer and say “make me a mystery detective RPG in the style of Sherlock Holmes but set on a cyberpunk styled city on a space station like the Citadel from Mass Effect” and I’ll get just that, generated exclusively for me with a brand new story that fits the themes I asked for.

      And you’ll pay $200 for it.

    • otp@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      I’m curious to know what happens if you ask ChatGPT to make you a text adventure based on that prompt.

      Not curious enough to try it and play it myself, though.

      • kat_angstrom@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        It lacks cohesion the longer it goes on, not so much “hallucinating” as it is losing the thread, losing the plot. Internal consistency goes out the window, previously-made declarations are ignored, and established canon gets trounced upon.

        But that’s cuz it’s not AI, it’s just LLM all the way down.

          • CheeseNoodle@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            Its kind of an exponential falloff, for a few lines it can follow concrete mathematical rules, for a few paragraphs it can remember basic story beats, for a few pages it can just about remember your name.

          • kat_angstrom@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            Depends on complexity and the number of elements to keep track of, and varies between models and people. Try it out for yourself to see! :)

      • cadekat@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        It works okay for a while, but eventually it loses the plot. The storylines are usually pretty generic and washed out.