HetareKing

@HetareKing@piefed.social

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Gaming market melts down after Google reveals new AI game design tool — Project Genie crashes stocks. (A.K.A . Investors panic because they don't understand what "real" videogames are)⁩ ⁨⁨13⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago⁩:

  I see a couple of major practical reasons why game (engine) devs are under no threat from this even if it gets better in the future:

  1. Scale. Like all things AI, this is not going to scale well. This doesn’t generate code, 3D models and textures, both making games and playing them requires running the model. So if you want a game to have a persistent environment where the world behind you doesn’t get regenerated into something different after taking 8 steps, the context window is going to get real large real fast. And unlike programmed games, you can’t make choices about what’s worth remembering and what isn’t, what can be kept on persistent storage and is only loaded when it becomes relevant etc., because it’s all one big, opaque blob of context, generated by a black box; you either have it remember everything or it becomes amnesiac in a way that makes it useless. Memory availability also isn’t increasing at a rate where this becomes a non-issue any time soon.

  2. Control. Manipulating the world though a text prompt gives a lot of control, but it’s also very course. It’s easy enough to tell it that you want a character that can run and jump, but how fast does it run? Does it accelerate and decelerate or start and stop instantly? Does it jump in a fixed arc or based on the running speed and duration of the jump button being pressed? How far and how high? You’re going to run in the limits both of what you can convey and what the language model will understand pretty quickly. And even when you can get it to do exactly what you want, it would have been faster and more practical to manipulate values directly or use a gizmo place things. But there’s no way to extract and manipulate those values, because again: big, opaque blob of context.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Nazis Have the Dumbest Star Trek Opinions | Jessie Gender⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  …? We’re not the producers of the shows, how is that any of our concern? They’ve got plenty of bean counters at Paramount, if a show isn’t hitting their financial goals, they’ll either cancel or retool it. All we can do is watch the shows that get made and express and discuss our opinions about it, there’s no point in the fans engaging in bean-counting themselves.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Nazis Have the Dumbest Star Trek Opinions | Jessie Gender⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  MAGA is an American thing, but there are plenty of people sharing their dumb opinions outside of the US.

  Also, MAGA nutters aren’t actually less intelligent than anyone else, just cowardly and resentful. They don’t want to think about what’s causing the problems in the world, because then they might have to reconsider parts of their worldview and that’s scary. So they want someone to just swoop in and fix the problems without fundamentally changing anything, or failing that, gives them the feeling they have permission from society to lash out against anything they consider “abnormal” and is therefore a potential cause of the problems. And so they’ll resent anyone who criticises them for that or tries to undermine that feeling of societal permission they want or already have.

  But not wanting to think about certain things is not the same as being unable to, and any intellectual capacity not spent on actually thinking about real problems and how to solve them can then be spent on how to create the impression that their opinion is dominant and therefore they’re not doing anything wrong.

  Anyway, the point is that while there are definitely legitimate criticisms to be had about the newer Star Trek shows, your metric isn’t very useful for demonstrating that. To begin with, why hide behind numbers at all? It just makes it look like you’re trying convince people that your criticisms carry more weight because the world agrees with you.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Github Banned a Ton of Adult Game Developers and Won’t Explain Why⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  “But the plans were on display…”
  “On display? I eventually had to go down to the cellar to find them.”
  “That’s the display department.”
  “With a flashlight.”
  “Ah, well, the lights had probably gone.”
  “So had the stairs.”
  “But look, you found the notice, didn’t you?”
  “Yes,” said Arthur, “yes I did. It was on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying ‘Beware of the Leopard.”

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Nvidia GeForce Now’s Time Limit Will Stop Gamers After 100 Hours Each Month⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  I’m not sure I entirely buy that. For cloud gaming to be any good at all, you need a high-speed, low-latency internet connection. Yes, nowadays having an internet connection is pretty much a requirement in the industrialised world and even someone of lesser means will probably have one good enough to watch streaming video at a decent enough quality (unless they live in the middle of nowhere), but that’s not good enough. So with the expensive internet connection and the monthly subscription, cloud gaming doesn’t strike me as a very economical.

  We’ve also been living in a period of diminishing returns when it comes to visual fidelity improving as hardware power does for a while now, so you can buy older, more affordable hardware and still have games look great on them. Meanwhile, I don’t think someone who insists on being able to see the surroundings accurately reflected in every window and puddle is going to accept the compression artifacts and latency of cloud gaming.