> I guess if you just don't care about the details of what you're making then AI could lower the barrier to producing something mediocre, as it has with 2D imag

> I guess if you just don't care about the details of what you're making then AI could lower the barrier to producing something mediocre, as it has with 2D image generation, but that's damning with faint praise. To me this sounds a lot like how people complained in 80s(?) about compilers generating worse code than expert assembly programmers. Yes, it is true, but also quantity can trump quality. And allowing machine to do bulk work, even if mediocre, allows humans to focus on key parts; in code some hot kernels, in 3d modeling maybe some hero assets. Also like compilers have evolved lot in the past decades, I don't see reason why these ML models/NNs/etc could not improve on a similar trajectory. Note that I'm not saying that they inevitably will improve to superhuman levels, but just that at this point they don't seem something that can be completely dismissed. Furthermore I don't think it's faint praise if tool can enable non-experts to create compelling 3D experiences easily even if they are not perfect and photorealistic. Again I draw parallels to programming; lowering the skill level needed has allowed huge amount of valuable programs to be written even if the code behind them is complete crap