4 ms·

I first got irritated a bit by this as well, but then the game Myst came to mind. So I'm willing to accept the limitation, and at this point we know that this

I first got irritated a bit by this as well, but then the game Myst came to mind. So I'm willing to accept the limitation, and at this point we know that this can only get better. Next I thought about the likelihood of Nvidia releasing an AI game engine, or more of a renderer, fully AI based. It should be happening within the next 10 years. Imagine creating a game by describing scenes, like the ones in the article, with a good morphing technology between scenes, so that the transitions between them are like auto-generated scenes which are just as playable. The effects shown in the article were very interesting, like the ripple, sonar or wave. The wave made me think about how trippy games could get in the future, more extreme versions of the Subnautica video [0] which was released last month. We could generate video games which would periodically slip into hallucinations, a thing that is barely doable today, akin to shader effects in Far Cry or other games when the player gets poisoned. Fiebertraum engine. [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AJaV92DXN0s&t=218s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AJaV92DXN0s&t=218s

dmarcos 2y ago
Yeah. That's the attitude! It's all about playing around the constraints. Tech has limitations? Yes, but also opens tons of new possibilities.
latexr 2y ago
You’re describing a pie in the sky. A vision. Not reality. We have been burned many times already, nothing in this field is a given. > at this point we know that this can only get better. We don’t know that. It will probably get better, but will it be better enough? No one knows. > It should be happening within the next 10 years. Every revolution in tech is always ten years away. By now that’s a meme. Saying something is ten years away is about as valuable as saying one has no idea how doable it is. > Imagine Yes, I understand the goal. Everyone does, it’s not complicated. We can all imagine Star Trek technology, we all know where the compass is pointed, that doesn’t make it a given. In fact, the one thing we can say for sure about imagining how everything will be great in ten years is that we routinely fail to predict the bad parts. We don’t live in fantasy land, advancements in tech are routinely used for detrimental reasons.
- qwertox 2y ago
  Genie 2: A large-scale foundation world model (deepmind.google) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42317903 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42317903
Jach 2y ago
It's "old news" I guess at this point, but the AI Minecraft demo (every frame generated from the previous frame, no traditional "engine") is still the most impressive thing to me in this space https://oasis.us.decart.ai/welcome https://oasis.us.decart.ai/welcome There are some interesting "speed runs" people have been doing like https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3UaVQ5_euw8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3UaVQ5_euw8 We might all be dead in 10 years, but with big tech companies making their plays, all the VC money flowing in to new startups, and nuclear plants being brought online to power the next base model training runs, there's room for a little mild entertainment like these sorts of gimmicks in the next 3 years or so. I doubt anything that comes of it will top even my top 15 video games list though.
- latexr 2y ago
  > We might all be dead in 10 years, but with big tech companies making their plays, all the VC money flowing in to new startups, and nuclear plants being brought online to power the next base model training runs, there's room for a little mild entertainment like these sorts of gimmicks in the next 3 years or so. I doubt anything that comes of it will top even my top 15 video games list though. That’s a contestant for the most depressing tradeoff ever. “Yeah, we’ll all die in agony way before our time, but at least we got to play with a neat but ultimately underwhelming tool for a bit”.
  - throawayonthe 2y ago
    [dead]
  - varelse 2y ago
    [dead]
lancesells 2y ago
> Imagine creating a game by describing scenes, like the ones in the article, with a good morphing technology between scenes, so that the transitions between them are like auto-generated scenes which are just as playable. Why do you think this game would be good? I'm not a game maker but the visual layer is not the reason people like or enjoy a game (ex: nintendo). There are teams of professionals making games today that range from awful to great. I get that there are indie games made by a single person that will benefit from generated graphics, but asset creation seems to be a really small part of it.

dmarcos 2y ago

Yeah. That's the attitude! It's all about playing around the constraints. Tech has limitations? Yes, but also opens tons of new possibilities.

latexr 2y ago

You’re describing a pie in the sky. A vision. Not reality. We have been burned many times already, nothing in this field is a given. > at this point we know that this can only get better. We don’t know that. It will probably get better, but will it be better enough? No one knows. > It should be happening within the next 10 years. Every revolution in tech is always ten years away. By now that’s a meme. Saying something is ten years away is about as valuable as saying one has no idea how doable it is. > Imagine Yes, I understand the goal. Everyone does, it’s not complicated. We can all imagine Star Trek technology, we all know where the compass is pointed, that doesn’t make it a given. In fact, the one thing we can say for sure about imagining how everything will be great in ten years is that we routinely fail to predict the bad parts. We don’t live in fantasy land, advancements in tech are routinely used for detrimental reasons.

qwertox 2y ago
Genie 2: A large-scale foundation world model (deepmind.google) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42317903 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42317903

Jach 2y ago

It's "old news" I guess at this point, but the AI Minecraft demo (every frame generated from the previous frame, no traditional "engine") is still the most impressive thing to me in this space https://oasis.us.decart.ai/welcome https://oasis.us.decart.ai/welcome There are some interesting "speed runs" people have been doing like https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3UaVQ5_euw8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3UaVQ5_euw8 We might all be dead in 10 years, but with big tech companies making their plays, all the VC money flowing in to new startups, and nuclear plants being brought online to power the next base model training runs, there's room for a little mild entertainment like these sorts of gimmicks in the next 3 years or so. I doubt anything that comes of it will top even my top 15 video games list though.

latexr 2y ago
> We might all be dead in 10 years, but with big tech companies making their plays, all the VC money flowing in to new startups, and nuclear plants being brought online to power the next base model training runs, there's room for a little mild entertainment like these sorts of gimmicks in the next 3 years or so. I doubt anything that comes of it will top even my top 15 video games list though. That’s a contestant for the most depressing tradeoff ever. “Yeah, we’ll all die in agony way before our time, but at least we got to play with a neat but ultimately underwhelming tool for a bit”.
- throawayonthe 2y ago
  [dead]
- varelse 2y ago
  [dead]

lancesells 2y ago

> Imagine creating a game by describing scenes, like the ones in the article, with a good morphing technology between scenes, so that the transitions between them are like auto-generated scenes which are just as playable. Why do you think this game would be good? I'm not a game maker but the visual layer is not the reason people like or enjoy a game (ex: nintendo). There are teams of professionals making games today that range from awful to great. I get that there are indie games made by a single person that will benefit from generated graphics, but asset creation seems to be a really small part of it.