Musk says he'll create an AI Game Studio

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

I don't think we need an "AI" studio, and it doesn't matter much to me if a game studio is held by a big corporation or by some billionaire. It does bother me to think that a lot of artists work are basically now capitalized on by rich corporations and rich dudes without compensating the artists for it.
It's not that I think it's novel that artists are inspired by other artist, and that isn't always a financial transaction benefitting the "inspirator". But it feels like it's eliminating the people out of the equation.
We probably also still have a long way to go to make an AI game that actually would have good gameplay and decent graphics without weird hallucinatory and gigeresque or lovecraftian abonimiation in the mix. I suppose you could try starting with a Cthulhu game...

Also, I don't really feel like we need to put that much attention to Musk, especially not on EN World. The last Gygax/Musk headline was already annoying.

 

[OptionalRule]

Indie games make boatloads of cash. They're priced at typically 1/4 to 1/3rd as much as AAAs, but they're usually made by single individuals or small teams on very small budgets. Some sell millions of copies. Many sell tens of thousand to hundreds of thousands.

Most independent games fail. People have taken to using the term Indie for studios like the one that make Wukon but that just isn't accurate. Triple I indies aside, reveneue generated by small team games has been almost flat for a decade, and there are more studios than ever so that flat pool is being sliced thinner and thinner every year. Attempts to grow teams have hit a wall and revshare of mid-sized indie teams is down, not up.

Like movies. Most video games lose money, particularly in the indie scene. Games like Stardew or Dwarf Fortress are an anomoly, not a rule.

vginsights.com is a good source of info in indie games. YouTube Creators like CodeMonkey speak at length about this as well.

 

[Parmandur]

Wow, that sounds terrible.

 

[OptionalRule]

Define "failure rate" in the context of games. We can probably work it out from Steam.

We don't live in a world where we have to wonder. This has been known for years and numberous studies on it. You can't swing a dead tabaxi on youtube without hitting an indie game dev talking about how they are losing money.

From Perplexity.ai

Recent studies on the failure rate of indie games are limited, but available data and industry insights suggest that the majority of indie games still struggle to achieve commercial success. While exact failure rates are not provided, several sources indicate ongoing challenges:

1. A 2022 survey by Indie Bandits found that nearly two-thirds of independent developers reported their games underperformed expectations[1].

2. As of 2024, only 18% of American PC and console gamers play indie games, up from 13% in 2021, indicating a growing but still limited market[3].

3. Some industry professionals estimate that 96% of indie games fail, though this figure is not backed by a formal study[4].

4. The indie game market is becoming increasingly competitive, with more games being released than ever before, making it harder for small teams and solo developers to stand out[2].

5. Recent data suggests a trend of "hollowing out" in the industry, where very small (solo or tiny teams) and very large (AAA) developers find success, while mid-sized indie teams struggle[2].

These insights indicate that while the indie game market is growing, the majority of indie games still face significant challenges in achieving commercial success.

Citations:
[1] [2] The Return of David: The State of Indie Games in 2023 and Beyond
[3] How Indie Games Are Becoming Industry Hits - Devoted Studios
[4] [5]

 

[Morrus]

 

[Parmandur]

View attachment 387423

Satire is impossible.

 

[Ryujin]

Satire is impossible.

Satirizing someone who self-satirizes is impossible.

 

[OptionalRule]

This has proven historically untrue in many markets. When the cost to entry lowers, what actually happens is centralization. A few (or one) large players become the kingpins, maximizing profits on high quantity and economy of scale. Meanwhile, a multitude of tiny independents are left scraping up the leftovers but never getting any real traction (unless they get bought and absorbed by one of the big guys).

This is what has happened to video games over the years; mid-tier releases are fewer and far between as AAA budgets skyrocket and indie developers struggle for tiny pieces of the pie. This is what the internet did to the music industry; big stars are bigger, and no one can make a living selling albums anymore.

Of course, the RPG market is already highly centralized. But lowering cost of production will not be the factor that will change that.

Yes, this is exactly the point.

Studios haven't managed the balance between profit and quality well. The need to feed stockholders drives that imbalance, and the product suffers. Studios are losing massive amounts of money because of it. We're saying "then make a better product." This is literally the definition of capitalism.

By saying "well, I'll just use AI," you're still not addressing the "make a better product" part. You're just saying that you'll do it even cheaper. But even that is untrue. There is no cheap way to spin up a new AI studio, even piggybacking off of existing AI companies. It will be some time before any AI effort is cheap.

So this won't address the quality issue, and it won't be cheap. Again, exactly what problem are we solving here?

edited for spelling

 

[Kaodi]

xAI is a privately held company. Not a corporation.

I do not think public ownership is the defining feature of a corporation. Rather it is being a separate legal personality from its owner(s)?

 

[CM]

Rofl, can't wait. /s