Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ruin Explorer" data-source="post: 9520033" data-attributes="member: 18">They're already incredibly profitable, what on earth are you talking about?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.You don't need AI to do that - and it's not even going to save you a meaningful amount of money. Nor is it going to make your game more successful - it's easy to see on Steam that games which use AI art tend to fail hard, even in the porn-game sphere, which has very low standards and accepts hideous CGI. AI is already used to assist coding and isn't a major concern but also Musk can offer nothing new there, nor can it turn a non-programmer into a programmer, nor even assist a programmer in all situations. And you'd be using something trained on all of GitHub, which unless Grok is, as rumoured but explicitly denied by a Musk, a fork of ChatGPT, not going to be anything Musk owns.This is just Musk spewing feces as usual and some people desperately, hopefully/hopelessly searching for silver pennies in said feces, sure that there must be some.If Musk actually wanted to make great games, he could - by financing them, whether or large or small. A huge AAA game costs like $100m. Musk could finance ten BG3s for a billion, and he's got 200+ of those. For what he paid for Twitter, which is now trash and dropping in value fast, $44bn, he could have 440 BG3s, or 440 possible BG3s.Hell, he could fund a hundred times that many indie games, easily, more even. This is just a crappy attempt to try and find a use for his failing AI tool.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ruin Explorer, post: 9520033, member: 18"] They're already incredibly profitable, what on earth are you talking about? 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. You don't need AI to do that - and it's not even going to save you a meaningful amount of money. Nor is it going to make your game more successful - it's easy to see on Steam that games which use AI art tend to fail hard, even in the porn-game sphere, which has very low standards and accepts hideous CGI. AI is already used to assist coding and isn't a major concern but also Musk can offer nothing new there, nor can it turn a non-programmer into a programmer, nor even assist a programmer in all situations. And you'd be using something trained on all of GitHub, which unless Grok is, as rumoured but explicitly denied by a Musk, a fork of ChatGPT, not going to be anything Musk owns. This is just Musk spewing feces as usual and some people desperately, hopefully/hopelessly searching for silver pennies in said feces, sure that there must be some. If Musk actually wanted to make great games, he could - by financing them, whether or large or small. A huge AAA game costs like $100m. Musk could finance ten BG3s for a billion, and he's got 200+ of those. For what he paid for Twitter, which is now trash and dropping in value fast, $44bn, he could have 440 BG3s, or 440 possible BG3s. Hell, he could fund a hundred times that many indie games, easily, more even. This is just a crappy attempt to try and find a use for his failing AI tool. [/QUOTE]

Verification