3 ms·
I see two issues with this. First is the lack of internal consistency. Games are an artform, even though most studios put out slop right now, and that means th
by samrus 1y ago
I see two issues with this.
First is the lack of internal consistency. Games are an artform, even though most studios put out slop right now, and that means they need to say something. This will allow us to interact with environments at a shallow level but will it maintain those environments in a logically consistant level? Will it be able to recreate something like Skyrim or New Vegas, where the whole point is the expansive and context heavy world and how you interact with it? It might even do that because of technological advancements (that i dont think are trivial like the agi-bulls seem to think) but then will it mamange to have the self referencial artistic vision behind it that something like DDLC or Undertale have? That self reference requires actual mechanics that mess with your filesystem. This thing wont do things like that because thats just not part of its world system. And making a whole new world system to facilitate that doesnt seem feasible for some indie games
Second is the classic radioactive steel problem of data. If this becomes used more and more, then itll canibalize its own training data. Its not producing a utility, its producing art/entertainment. People might e joy the things it produces initially, but eventually they'll get bored and demand will plummet, at which point novel nad original games wil be needed. Which this wont be able to produce. This phenomenon happened recently with the rise of battle royales. Brendan Greene was inspired to make a game out of the 90s japanese film, but will this AI? and if it cant, then will it flodding the gaming market with slop make it so real game dev knowledge isnt even prevalent enough that someone could have an idea and just implement it?