Also, I'd rather lead a team of humans that I can interact and talk with in real life instead of a team of bots.

Highly doubt it.

Hm. Nowadays a lot of games look alike. They use some 3D-Engine and most of the work is in the 3D-modelling and writing some interesting scripts.

For modelling and scripting I think we're not far away. A lot of games just reused old historical stories or fiction and a lot of stories feel like cheap soap operas. As soon as an AI can separate the good from the bad scrips it'll be mostly done.

I'm sure AI will be used in asset generation but it'll be in deployed similarly as procedural generation of mass assets like trees and npcs.

I don't yet see it used for characters as they quickly become kind of generic / predictable.

Clearly you don't work in game development, this comment put a smile on my face. Although I expected a bit more from hacker news crowd

You overvalue the HN crowd (or undervalue the AI hype-machine) considering you're downvoted and GP is upvoted (Another gamedev here smiling at GP's comment).

Yet another classic unskilled but unaware of it from the hacker news crowd (another professional gamedev here).

It's not hard if you just imagine a slop re-skin of any other GTA of similar game.

Did you miss the sarcasm or has GTA6 become some sort of anomalous memetic agent that makes anyone who tries to work on it not be able to finish it regardless if it's human or AI?

Both probably, I don't usually understand sarcasm in written text unless it's explicitly stated.

someday we will have models that can resolve physics to such degree to predict the future with surgical accuracy and when someone says "maybe models will become advanced enough to create a whole other universe from scratch" you will be there saying "highly doubt it"

This reminds me of a boss I had 20 years ago that said devs were going to be replaced soon.

Maybe he was 20 years early or maybe it's not happening now too.

Please note that I did not imply devs won't exist in my contrived fantasy.

Who do you think will be operating those mythological tools?:)

Someday.

I'll believe it when I see it.

> There simply won't be jobs for them.

I simply don't agree with the doomer takes. Might be wrong. I'm kinda stupid yet here I am.

True, but not in the way you're thinking.

This is a thought I've had about genAI.

In case it all just comes from training data, "one shotting" a game would be more comparable to "git pull" and changing some assets than "generating code".

I'm not saying this is how it works, I'm trivializing LLMs with this statement, but when I see someone on linkedin excited about generating checkers and chess my first thought is "you could have done that with git pull for the past 20 years".

Yes, but the other N% of the country still might vote for the government you didn't want.

Had a "project" course in university for CS. Implemented a working SaaS app for hosting ML models (before AI).

Winner in our category had a powerpoint and a poster, no one even looked at the implementation. I learned something that day.

I had a similar experience in my undergrad software engineering course. One group literally took a JS facial recognition library and wrapped a halfway decent UI around it. That’s it, that was their entire project. But the grad student teaching the class and a lot of the other students were very impressed.

I've been told that my career is "cooked" since first Opus.

I'll believe it when I see it.

An egg in the pan takes a minute to cook, that's for sure.

At least they sent the application, that was effort. So it can't be 100% luck right?

I did not say it was all luck. I said if any part of the outcome depends on luck, effort is meaningless when it come to the result. This is not to say that doing nothing is better, I am just being realistic.

But even going with your examples, effort isn't "meaningless", it's insufficient.

I might have misunderstood as english is not my native language but the 100% doesn't sit right with me in the original sentence.

In general I feel people downplay the effects of luck by a lot. My thinking is that the effort is everything but meaningless, in fact it's probably the only thing you can control.

From a technology perspective LLMs are absolutely bonkers, blows my mind it works as well as it does.

From a programmer perspective, I'm starting to like it less and less. It's useful for sure, but doesn't really live up to the hype. In many ways it's the opposite, my bet is still that programmers will be in high demand in the not so distant future after all of this settles.

Might be wrong, time will tell.

I felt the same way, then I started with "I'll believe it when I see it". Now I'm a bit happier.