Do you remember the music from the last Marvel film you watched? I don't. Quality isn't directly correlated to success. Buy a modern pair of Nikes or... Go to McDonalds, play a modern mobile game. I love when industry insiders think they're so untouchable that a budget cut wouldn't have them in the chopping block. You're defensive because its your ass on the line, not because its true. People gargle shit products and pay for them willingly all day long. You're just insulated from it, for now.

I love when regular folks act like they understand things better than inustry insiders near the top of their respective field. It's genuinely amusing. Let me ask you a simple question: do YOU want to play a game with mediocre, lowest-common-denominator-generated AI audio? Or do you want something crafted by a human with feelings (a thing an AI model does not have) and the ability to create unique design crafted specifically to create emotional resonance with you (and thing an AI has exactly zero intuition for)? Answers on a postcard, thanks. The market agrees with me as well. And no, I have not seen my industry decimated by AI. Talk to any experienced AAA game dev on LinkedIn, it's not really a thing. There still is and always will be a huge demand for art specifically created by humans and for humans for the exact reasons listed above. What has ACTUALLY decimated my industry is the overvaluation and inflation of everything in the economy, and now the low-interest rates put in place to counter it, which is leading to layoffs once giant games don't generate the insane profit targets suits have, which is likely what you are ereoneously attributing to AI displacement.

When it's other people's work, well, people need a nuanced opinion about this nascent technological breakthrough. When it's your specific area of expertise, it's "the plagiarism machine." You are Knoll's law personified.

There's a difference between LLMs making games and LLMs trained to play characters in a game.

Any time I’ve enabled this, the game looked worse to me. YMMV, etc.

At least the DLSS I've seen looks terrible. I've tried it in a bunch of games, and it produces visible artifacts that are worse than TAA. Cyberpunk 2077 is a great example. Newer versions are supposedly better, but I haven't seen them yet.

AAA dev here. Carmack is correct. I expect to be dogpiled by uninformed disagreements, though, because on social media all AI = Bad and no nuance is allowed.

Ok, but... You know there's a person operating that AI right? You seem to be separating the tool from the user. Which is not rare, but it _is_ weird.

Hold on, in this scenario you're mad at the *user* of the AI app, not at the *maker* of it? As in, you're fine with the tools being trained and made as long as people use them right? I don't think you're aligned with the zeitgeist there.

Please do me a favor and quote the part of that comment where I claimed I'm fine with the way AI is made.

You said "there's a person operating the AI" and you referred to separating "the tool from the user". Please do me a favor and quote the part of that comment that refers to the way the AI is made at all. The point you were parroting was pointing out that the "AI good/bad debate" isn't a judgement of value of the technology underlying the applications, it's an assessment of what the companies making apps with this technology are doing with it on each individual application. I never brought up the user in this. The user is pretty much neutral. The "person operating the AI" isn't a factor here, it's some constant outside the debate where we assume some amount of people will use the tools provided for them in the way the tools are designed.

> The point you were parroting And again with words in my mouth. That wasn't even close to my point! My point was that you were unnecessarily sarcastic in a rude way to someone. Beyond that, your comment made absolutely no sense because you were telling them that they were mad at the tool instead of the way the people are using the tool. Which, if you go back and read their comments, is what they were actually upset about. They didn't make much, if any comment about AI itself, but rather the way people are using it.

Demonstrating some crazy idea always confuses people who expect a finished product. The fact this works *at all* is sci-fi witchcraft. Video generators offer rendering without models, levels, textures, shaders-- anything. And they'll do shocking photorealism as easily as cartoons. This one runs at interactive speeds. That's fucking crazy! It's only doing one part of one game that'd run on a potato, and it's not doing it especially well, but holy shit, it's doing it. Even if the context length stayed laughably short - this is an FMV you can walk around in. This is something artists could feed and prune and get real fuckin' weird with, until it's an inescapable dream sequence that looks like nothing we know how to render. > The most realistic near-term application of generative AI technology remains as coding assistants and perhaps rapid prototyping tools for developers, rather than a drop-in replacement for traditional game development pipelines. Sure, let's pretend text is all it can generate. Not textures, models, character designs, et very cetera. What possible use could people have for an army of robots if they only do a half-assed job?

It's fundamentally a make-shit-up device. It's like pulling words out of a hat. You cannot get mad at the hat for giving you poetry when you asked for nonfiction. Get mad at the company which bolted the hat to your keyboard and promised you it was psychic.

There’s what AI could’ve been (collaborative and awesome), and then there’s what the billionaire class is pushing today (exploitative shit that they hit everyone over the head with until they say they like it). But the folks frothing at the mouth over it are unwilling to listen to why so many people are against the AI we’ve had forced upon us today.

When it's other people's work, well, people need a nuanced opinion about this nascent technological breakthrough. When it's your specific area of expertise, it's "the plagiarism machine." You are Knoll's law personified.

> What has ACTUALLY decimated my industry is the overvaluation and inflation of everything in the economy The real answer, like every creative industry over the past 200+ years, is oversaturation. Artists starve because of oversaturation. There is too much art and not enough buyers. Musicians starve because of oversaturation. And music is now easier than ever to create. Supply is everywhere, and demand pales in comparison. I have hundreds of CC BY-SA 4.0 artists in a file that I can choose for use in my videos, because the supply is everywhere. Video games are incredibly oversaturated. Throw a stick at Steam, and it'll land on a thousand games. There's plenty of random low-effort slop out there, but there's also a lot of passionate indie creators trying to make their mark, and failing, because the marketing is not there. Millions of people shouting in the wind, trying to make their voices heard, and somehow become more noticed than the rest of the noise. It's a near-impossible task, and it's about 98% luck. Yet the 2% of people who actually "make it" practice survivorship bias on a daily basis, preaching that hard work and good ideas will allow you to be just like them. It's all bullshit, of course. We don't live in a meritocracy.

AAAA dev here. Carmack is incorrect.