• QuantumTickle@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    89
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 hours ago

    If “everyone will be using AI” and it’s not a bad thing, then these big companies should wear it as a badge of honor. The rest of us will buy accordingly.

    • Devial@discuss.online
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 hours ago

      If “everyone will be using AI”, AI will turn to shit.

      They can’t create originality, they’re only recycling and recontextualising existing information. But if you recycle and recontextualise the same information over and over again, it keeps degrading more and more.

      It’s ironic that the very people who advocate for AI everywhere, fail to realise just how dependent the quality of AI content is on having real, human generated content to input to train the model.

      • 4am@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        17 minutes ago

        “The people who advocate for AI” are literally running around claiming that AI is Jesus and it is sacrilege to stand against it.

        And by literally, I mean Peter Thiel is giving talks actually claiming this. This is not an exaggeration, this is not hyperbole.

        They are trying to recruit techno-cultists.

  • Rooster326@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 hour ago

    What exactly is “Used AI” though?

    Most developers are going to have some form of auto complete - AI powered or not.

    Is it just assets I assume?

  • Aurenkin@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    31
    ·
    edit-2
    3 hours ago

    The ethics and utility (or lack thereof) of AI is an important discussion in it’s own right. In terms of Steam though, I really don’t think it’s relevant. Players want the disclosures, that’s it, that’s all that should really matter. Am I missing some nuance here?

    • borth@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 hour ago

      The nuance is that Tim doesn’t give a shit what players want, him and his cronies don’t want it because it’s harder to convince someone to play AI slop when they know it’s AI slop before they even try it 😂

    • WanderingThoughts@europe.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      2 hours ago

      It might make players demand lower prices if some cheap AI slop is used in the game. That’s the thing publishers want to avoid. They want to sell cheap slop for full price and pocket the difference. That’s what it’s about in the end.

      • Red_October@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 minutes ago

        I haven’t really seen demands for lower prices on AI slop, but I’ve seen a lot of outright refusal to buy at any price, and returns when the disclosure came later.

    • Darkcoffee@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      4 hours ago

      They want it? I don’t know, the review score of Black Ops 7 begs to differ.

      Personally I’ll give money to a hard working indie dev that may use AI to help in their work spiradically over a big company shoving AI in everything to replace workers.

  • twinnie@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    104
    ·
    5 hours ago

    They don’t need to court developers, they need to court consumers. The games will be sold wherever people are buying.

    • CosmoNova@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      57
      ·
      4 hours ago

      Consumers have already decided mobile gambling slop is the most successful investment in the gaming industry. I don‘t trust consumers to know what‘s best for them.

      • Katana314@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        31
        ·
        edit-2
        3 hours ago

        I think the studies showing how certain minds can be targeted and manipulated by dark gambling patterns made me think differently about gambling. I’m less likely to blame the victims now - in many ways it can be difficult or near-impossible for them to control those impulses. I’d at least like lootbox gambling slop to be regulated the same as casinos.

        Look how popular fantasy sports is now. It’s basically just the casino industry seeking out new avenues to cheat the definition of “Playing odds to win cash”.

      • Oxysis/Oxy@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        3 hours ago

        Well yeah gambling is addicting, the mobile slop companies know that so they try to get people addicted to it. It’s really sad what’s happened to the mobile gaming space, as it’s so heavily dominated by gambling. Hell the entire world is being run over by gambling companies now. It’s a major problem that will have to be addressed at some point soon.

    • rtxn@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      31
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      5 hours ago

      consumers

      This is very much a pet peeve, but be careful about how you use “consumer” versus “customer”. They each imply completely different power dynamics.

        • rtxn@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          edit-2
          3 hours ago

          Maybe some people, who are an ocean away from me, have been gaslit into thinking they can’t be anything other than consumers. I know it can be difficult to grasp the concept, but you can refuse a service if the terms are unacceptable. It is possible to go into a transaction with open eyes and full knowledge of the rights granted to you by law and responsibilities demanded of you by the contract.

          That’s why I say “customer”. It’s a reminder to myself that I should demand equitable treatment, even if the chances are slim unless the courts get involved. You don’t have to jump into the meat grinder willingly.

      • warm@kbin.earth
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        5 hours ago

        It’s very much consumer these days, people buy literally anything marketed to them.

          • warm@kbin.earth
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 hour ago

            I like to think I hold myself to a higher standard or at least just a standard. General consumption, I’m not sure, but for video games, people standards have dropped significantly, the masses accept a lot of bullshit and even defend it.

  • megopie@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    44
    ·
    5 hours ago

    The reality is, that it’s often stated that generative AI is an inevitability, that regardless of how people feel about it, it’s going to happen and become ubiquitous in every facet of our lives.

    That’s only true if it turns out to be worth it. If the cost of using it is lower than the alternative, and the market willing to buy it is the same. If the current cloud hosted tools cease to be massively subsidized, and consumers choose to avoid it, then it’s inevitably a historical footnote, like turbine powered cars, Web 3.0, and laser disk.

    Those heavily invested in it, ether literally through shares of Nvidia, or figuratively through the potential to deskill and shift power away from skilled workers at their companies don’t want that to be a possibility, they need to prevent consumers from having a choice.

    If it was an inevitability in it’s own right, if it was just as good and easily substitutable, why would they care about consumers knowing before they payed for it?

    • Katana314@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      4 hours ago

      Don’t forget, “Turns out it was a losing bet to back DEI and Trans people”.

      This is something scared, pathetic, loser, feral, spineless, sociopathic, moronic fascists come up with to try to win a crowd larger than an elevator; Assume the outcome as a foregone conclusion and try to talk around it, or claim it’s already happened.

      Respond directly. “What? That’s ridiculous. I’ve never even seen ANY AI that I liked. Who told you it was going to pervade everything?”

    • U7826391786239@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      31
      ·
      4 hours ago

      relevant article https://www.theringer.com/2025/11/04/tech/ai-bubble-burst-popping-explained-collapse-or-not-chatgpt

      AI storytelling is an amalgam of several different narratives, including:

      Inevitability: AI is the future; its eventual supremacy is both imminent and certain, and therefore anyone who doesn’t want to be left behind had better embrace the technology. See Jensen Huang, the CEO of Nvidia, insisting earlier this year that every job in the world will be impacted by AI “immediately.”

      Functionality: AI performs miracles, and the AI products that have been released to the public wildly outperform the products they aim to replace. To believe this requires us to ignore the evidence obtained with our own eyes and ears, which tells us in many cases that the products barely work at all, but it’s the premise of every TV ad you watch out of the corner of your eye during a sports telecast.

      Grandiosity: The world will never be the same; AI will change everything. This is the biggest and most important story AI companies tell, and as with the other two narratives, big tech seems determined to repeat it so insistently that we come to believe it without looking for any evidence that it’s true.

      As far as I can make out, the scheme is essentially: Keep the ship floating for as long as possible, keep inhaling as much capital as possible, and maybe the tech will get somewhere that justifies the absurd valuations, or maybe we’ll worm our way so far into the government that it’ll have to bail us out, or maybe some other paradigm-altering development will fall from the sky. And the way to keep the ship floating is to keep peddling the vision and to seem more confident that the dream is inevitable the less it appears to be coming true.

      speaking for myself, MS can thank AI for being the thing that made me finally completely ditch windows after using it 30+ years

    • WanderingThoughts@europe.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      3 hours ago

      That reminds me how McDonald’s and other gaat food chains are struggling. People figure it’s too expensive for what you get after prices going up and quality going down for years. They forgot that people buy if the price and quality are good. Same with AI. It’s all fun if it’s free or dirt cheap, but people don’t buy expensive slop.

    • Riskable@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 hour ago

      If the cost of using it is lower than the alternative, and the market willing to buy it is the same. If the current cloud hosted tools cease to be massively subsidized, and consumers choose to avoid it, then it’s inevitably a historical footnote, like turbine powered cars, Web 3.0, and laser disk.

      There’s another scenario: Turns out that if Big AI doesn’t buy up all the available stock of DRAM and GPUs, running local AI models on your own PC will become more realistic.

      I run local AI stuff all the time from image generation to code assistance. My GPU fans spin up for a bit as the power consumed by my PC increases but other than that, it’s not much of an impact on anything.

      I believe this is the future: Local AI models will eventually take over just like PCs took over from mainframes. There’s a few thresholds that need to be met for that to happen but it seems inevitable. It’s already happening for image generation where the local AI tools are so vastly superior to the cloud stuff there’s no contest.

  • FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 hours ago

    I heard the new Game of Thrones game is using LLM’s to generate some of its content. Pisses me off.

    • Catoblepas@piefed.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 minutes ago

      If that’s true that takes my interest in it into the negatives. ASOIAF has about a million moving parts and very distinct characters with complex backstories, there’s not even a small chance an LLM could come close to imitating that.

    • nutsack@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 hours ago

      lots of big companies are using them to generate code. i agree with what I think is your point of view, but where do you draw the line

      • FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        3 hours ago

        I don’t buy a lot of the big company games anyway, but if this becomes commonplace, what’ll happen is I’ll buy my big-company games second-hand so the benefit to the perpetrators is lessened.