Comment

Comment on Procreate takes a stand against generative AI, vows to never incorporate the tech into its products | TechCrunch

<- View Parent

MossyFeathers@pawb.social ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

Honestly, I think that…

AI is going to revolutionize the game industry.
AI is going to kill the game industry as it currently exists.
Generative AI will lead to a lot of real-time effects and mechanics that are currently impossible, like endless quests that don’t feel hollow, realistic procedural generation that can convincingly create everything from random clutter to entire galaxies, true photorealistic graphics (look up gaussian splatting, it’s pretty cool), convincing real-time art filters (imagine a 3d game that looks like an animated Van Gogh painting), and so on.
Generative AI is going to result in a hell of a lot of layoffs and will likely ruin people’s lives.
Generative AI will eventually open the door to small groups of devs being able to compete with AAA releases on all metrics.
Generative AI will make studios with thousands of employees obsolete. This is a double-edged sword. Fewer employees means fewer ideas; but on the other side, you get a more accurate vision of what the director originally intended. Fewer employees also will also mean that you will likely have to be a genuinely creative person to get ahead, instead of someone who knows how to use Maya or Photoshop but is otherwise creatively bankrupt. Your contribution matters far more in a studio of <50 than it does in a studio of >5,000; as such, your creative skill will matter more.
A lot of people will have to be retrained because they will no longer be creative enough to make a living off of making games.

Tbh, I think game development is one of the few places that generative AI will actually have a significant benefit; however I also think it will completely scramble the industry once it starts being widely adopted, and it’ll be a long time before the dust settles.

source

Sort:hotnew top

mke@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago
I’ve no idea where you’re getting these predictions from. I think some of them are fundamentally flawed if not outright incorrect, and don’t reflect real life trends of generative AI development and applications.

Gonna finish this comment in a few, please wait.

source
- MossyFeathers@pawb.social ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago
  I think the big difference is that you seem to think that AI has peaked or is near its peak potential, while I think AI is still just getting started. Will generative AI ever progress beyond being a gimmick? I don’t know, but I suspect it will eventually.
  
  For example, indies do not have the budget to license expensive actors (e.g. Call of Duty, Cyberpunk 2077), brands (e.g. racing games), and so on. GenAI will not change this. Hell, GenAI will certainly not pay for global advertising.
  
  Admittedly I had not thought about the licensing and advertising aspect. That’s a bit of a blind spot for me because it’s not something I tend to care about. You’re correct there.
  
  If hiring them is no longer advantageous due to financial incentives to adopt AI, that’s not their fault for being insufficiently creative.
  
  I mean, maybe I could have phrased it better, but what else are you gonna do? They have to make a living somehow and if they can’t get hired in the game industry anymore, you gotta help them find somewhere else they can work.
  
  source
  - mke@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago
    
    I think the big difference is that you seem to think that AI has peaked or is near its peak potential, while I think AI is still just getting started.
    
    That’s a fair assessment. I’m still not sure if AI development is on an exponential or a sigmoid curve. Note that the industry at large is starting to believe the latter, though, and it’s not a good look. If you’ve got time and are willing, please check the linked article by Ed (burst damage).
    
    I mean, maybe I could have phrased it better, but what else are you gonna do?
    
    My bad, I try to trim down the fat while editing, but I accidentally removed things I shouldn’t. As I said, it’s a nitpick, and I understand the importance of helping those who find themselves unhirable. Maybe it’s just me, but I thought it came across a little mean, even if it wasn’t your intent. I try to gently “poke” folks when I see stuff like this because artists get enough undeserved crap already.
    
    source
  - Eccitaze@yiffit.net ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago
    What evidence is there that gen AI hasn’t peaked? They’ve already scraped most of the public Internet to get what we have right now, what else is there to feed it? The AI companies are also running out of time–VCs are only willing to throw money at them for so long, and given the rate of expenditure on AI so far outpaces pretty much every other major project in human history, they’re going to want a return on investment sooner rather than later. If they were making significant progress on a model that could do the things you were saying, they would be talking about it so that they could buy time and funding from VCs. Instead, we’re getting vague platitudes about “AGI” and meaningless AI sentience charts.
    
    source