"Striking the right balance between leveraging AI and preserving the human touch will be crucial." PlayStation's Hermen Hulst said. https://bit.ly/3CRGB0f
Comments
Log in with your Bluesky account to leave a comment
They should be worried about human hands on their products they sell bc I'm about to sell my boring ass PS5 I only use as a mini space heater that can play YouTube videos
I feel like there’s going to eventually be a market for people who really want a hands off AI experience. Almost like how people prefer listening to vinyl now compared to digital streaming.
As an editor I'm really excited for the idea of using AI for automatic rotoscoping, separating a video into layers for compositing and other things that are similar to what we have now such as motion stabilizer, auto captions, etc. I believe that's what Hulst is referring to.
Using AI to streamline the busy work that will allow artists to get to the actual creative aspects and prospects faster and easier. Generative AI absolutely has no place anywhere, but that doesn't mean there aren't other good and moral uses for it
Tbh, as much as people hate it. A.I. is going to be around/used regardless. It's almost mental to believe it won't be used AT ALL at this point. It's just going to be part of our lives if we want it to or not in some capacity. It's just TOO good for companies not to use it.
But it isn't even finished and you acne clearly tell when it's being used. Like that new Coca Cola Christmas ad. The wheels are damn near falling off the trucks, the digits on the hands of the humans are inconsistent, their faces are probably stolen from real models that aren't being paid, fuck AI.
But people are talking about it. It's a lose-lose. You either have companies using AI and its just "fine" (But it's REALLY cheap to make than normal advert) or it's weird AI, but because of that it's getting views/sales for said company? That's advertisement 101. They win either way.
Technology that would be marketed as AI has been used since Skyrim, yo. It's functionally impossible to even understand what he means here. He could be talking about procedural generation, which is great when used sparingly, or he could be talking about ruining art assets.
It's hard to define generative AI without including technology like procedural generation because it's a marketing buzzword and not a technical term. And the buzzword has tainted a slew of useful technologies because idiot CEOs thought calling something AI would excite us.
Art theft AI and even most image generative/music chord generative/voice/code generative AI are the type of AI that these CEOs keep pedaling when the general public is either sick of it and does not want it, or does not want it because rhey already have some other platform that does that.
"Generative AI is not ready to replace human developers" Yeah and let's keep it that way! By not funneling anymore fucking money into generative AI. The general public is sick of it, artists & voice actors hate it, there's too much of it, it's a tool for lazy fucks who don't wanna learn and scammers
yeah, if you look at the nintendo eshop, every second game cover / art is ai made, seen from miles away and it puts off immediately, looks like unprofessional cheap trash
No AI to replace developers, but I want to see AI used for NPC reaction/responses, and also as a compliment to user testing of the game (expecially given how more complete testing only makes the game better).
Comments
The only thing is using it where it makes sense and responsibly.
AI has been used in game dev before ChatGPT was a thing and will probably grow in use.