Go here and get a pencil. <watch a cutscene>
Ok great. Now I need 3 more pencils. <watch another cutscene>
OK now go here and follow an NPC for ages while they walk really slowly. <watch another cutscene>
OK now shoot the guy <watch a cutscene>
OK we're done, have a cookie. Any time you want to, come back here and I'll send you to go fetch more pencils.
I only had the blue pencil after the first quest. I had to go back. Not for the cookies really, but rather because I needed the yellow, purple and especially the red pencil. Only then would I be the level 10 mage capable of retrieving the black pencil.
You act like they were making a fool out of me or something. /s
I hear such comparisons quite often on discussions like this, and I always wonder… have you seen a kid's idea of "creative"? Even one about to finish school?
One time my geography homework was a cut-out of a photocopy of an encyclopaedia image of Italy, surrounded by notes copied verbatim from that same page, and it got top marks. My GCSE English "creative writing" exercise was a mixture of the empty village in Riven, Pratchett's Granny Weatherwax, and the "oborot" shape-shifting spell from Sabine Baring-Gould’s Book of Were-Wolves. When we were tasked with coming up with our own versions of the witches' brew from Macbeth — why is Shakespeare sill so popular? Don't we have any new ideas? — all the students came up with much the same "new ingredients" as each other.
And then there's the music… https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5pidokakU4I
BUT...I am seeing a lot of AI generated content pop up in graphic design(emails, work decks, etc...) and some of it is terrifyingly bad.
If the computer can actually program coherently, without bugs, and understanding the program as a whole and how the pieces fit together, then it can program itself.
I don't see this being possible at all for non programmers. If AI companies have models that can generate games in 5 years, there's no way they will let other people use them. The companies with game generating models will simply become the developer and publisher.
If they can generate games, especially those deliberately addictive casual games, then they have a money printing machine. They'll just hire psychologists, economists, and testers to see which games are the most addictive and extractive- er- umm- I mean, which games are the most fun and compelling. Then they'll release those games. Further flood the games market with tripe, and probably get pretty rich doing it.
Even a kid can have better ideas than an AI fed with billions $ of nVidia hardware and data coming from unpaid labor.