A new study attempts to prove gamers aren't sold on AI, but I didn't think the effects were this significant
www.windowscentral.com
A new study from Game Oracle demonstrates the negative effects the use of AI can have on sales (and reputation). There's a lot to unpack here, but the main message is resounding: we're not yet ready for the future of gaming.

It’s a different story for the more established studios with an existing following and previous titles. Game Oracle found that the use of AI by these studios resulted in a significant 40% to 60% drop in sales.

That’s a huge difference. AI stigma seems to hit competent developers with a lot to lose the hardest, and I’m not sure that game studios are ready to accept it.

  • zedcell@lemmygrad.mlEnglish
    11·
    13 days ago

    But those things do have a precedent. We can’t create things that don’t have some basis in the reality we have processed with our sense organs. When we create a fictional character, they might be unlike any individual human we have met, but their traits are a composite of many different human experiences and traits that we have witnessed either externally to ourselves or internally.

    I can tell you for certain that LLMs can also create fictional characters in the same way given a small amount of direction. They are not merely remix machines and to say they are betrays a deep misunderstanding of how the technology even functions.

    • queermunist she/her@lemmy.mlEnglish
      2·
      12 days ago

      Nature can create things that never existed before. What makes you think we, as natural beings, can’t?

      That isn’t to say generative AI can never mimic nature’s ability to generate totally new things, but this current technology doesn’t even try. It only remixes the data in the training set, it never makes anything truly new.

      • zedcell@lemmygrad.mlEnglish
        11·
        12 days ago

        Nature can’t technically create, it can only re-arrange to make higher order creations out of smaller building blocks.

        I don’t think we’re coming at things from the same lens at all and I don’t think it’s worth continuing this discussion.

    • BimboChristmas [she/her]@hexbear.netEnglish
      1·
      13 days ago

      We can’t create things that don’t have some basis in the reality we have processed with our sense organs. When we create a fictional character, they might be unlike any individual human we have met, but their traits are a composite of many different human experiences and traits that we have witnessed either externally to ourselves or internally.

      Not saying you’re wrong at all, but I find it funny that this is sooo close to one of Descartes proofs of God’s existence in Meditations, that humans were able to conceive of “infinity” despite not being able to experience it directly.

      I think Descartes was silly and wrong so I’m not really going anywhere with this, just read your post and found myself back in that PHIL101 classroom.