My switch 1 is gathering dust, mostly because of the awful controllers. Looks like they made the controllers bigger, and the magnetic slide looks much better than the switch1. I hope they significantly reduced the stick drift problem. I hope they allow 3rd party controllers to turn on the device.
I’ve had every Nintendo console since the gbc and suspect I’ll eventually get this too, but they’ve got an uphill battle vs the steamdeck for me. Really going to depend on the first party games.
What a terrible interview. The interviewer literally repeatedly asks questions that they’ve already answered and shows pretty clearly that they haven’t bothered actually researching or trying AI art technology. They certainly seemed to have read plenty of articles about how bad AI is, but didn’t even bother scratching the surface of how it’s actually used.
It reads like a hit piece coming from someone who only reads what comes up in their feed.
The economics of our world are completely controlled by middle-men. This is how much power we have delegated to them. There is no free market, just a series of publisher deals that put producers of value into a casino to decide if they get compensated for their labour.
Regrettably…they kinda do. At least for studios like Obsidian and Double Fine, the landscape has become very grim. They are studios of a size that is very difficult to keep afloat in this environment. Investor funding in the gaming segment has dried up post-COVID, and these kinds of mid-level (or higher) devs were very reliant on that kind of funding. In light of that, these studios may have seen Microsoft as something of a safe harbor. They knew these layoffs were always a possibility, but I think it was better for them than the alternative. Or at least, it was the best choice for the people leading these studios prior to their respective Microsoft acquisitions. The devs that are being laid off are not the same people that signed off on the acquisition.
If you haven’t played the demo, or couldn’t tell from the trailer, this game is almost exactly the same loop as This is the Police. I liked This is the Police, but it could certainly drag after a handful of hours. That’s probably more of a problem with the execution than the idea; already, Dispatch dresses up the day at the desk job by having very ever-present banter, and not annoying quips but dialogue that feels like it’s building characters or moving the story forward. I liked what I played of this game, but I wonder what they have to spruce up the gameplay after a few iterations through its loop that This is the Police couldn’t come up with.
I played the demo and really liked it at first, as it started out like a Telltalle-style narrative game.
The actual dispatching gameplay loop though, I did not enjoy all that much. It becomes quickly way too frantic for me to enjoy the banter. Plus the actual thing you are looking at and interacting with is a map with glowing icons, i.e. not what I enjoy in video games.
Imagine if you could go on the Nintendo store and buy a game you couldn’t even run, or had to check a third party website to see if it ran acceptably and let you use all the buttons.
How is that different from any other computer buying from steam, ever? In the history of all computer games? A steam deck is a hand held computer with a community large enough, and system specs stable enough to have a rating on potentially any PC, and most Nintendo games in existence. Compared to nintendo’s walled garden. Your comparing apples to oranges.
My comment is germane to the post comparing the two devices in an aspect that exemplifies how they can’t be compared, and tries to spin it as a negative, while attempting to bury its positive.
The fact you say that the switch is not like any other computer is both true in the sense that i already argued, and false in that it IS yet just another computer, but with a walled garden.
If there was any a comment that was irrelevant, it would be yours.
If you try to buy a game on Deck that you couldn’t run on Deck, there will be very clear warning about it, one you can’t miss. At least it was last time I checked. And to be honest, I’m pretty sure the list of games like that is now almost exclusively consists of competitive shooters, and you wouldn’t even think of buying it on Deck anyway.
You can even get every achievement in a game, and return it for a full refund, granted you can beat the game in under two hours. Someone did it with resident evil 3 remake: www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bp8a5EjAcGs
I don’t really see the point in comparing them. They’re different devices for different markets.
The Switch is for people who want to play first party Nintendo titles. That’s really the only reason for its existence. Without Nintendo’s first party lineup, the Switch would be just another Arm based handheld, and a fairly unremarkable one at that.
The Switch is all about exclusivity, the Steam Deck is the exact opposite. Not only is the Steam client, and the massive library of games that it gives gamers access to, available on scores of x86 devices and hardware configurations, the Steam Deck operating system will soon be available pre-installed on multiple, third party devices, and it will be available for anymore to download and install on any device they want.
They’re not just different devices, they’re vastly different company philosophies.
I’m hoping this lights a fire under devs’ asses and reminds them that the platformer genre exists. I’ve played a few recent indie platformers that were decent but I’d love to see the genre get some love from bigger studios (other than Nintendo).
The only recent one I can think of that fits that bill is Yooka Laylee and that game was doodoo.
It gets to be way harder to argue in court when it isn’t a “clean kill”, using Ross Scott’s words, so The Crew is going to be one of the best examples we’ll ever get for courts to rule on. I expect Ubisoft would rather settle than let this one go that far though.
I imagine a lawsuit would likely bring up the topic of how hard it would be for a developer to keep the game around past purchase.
For instance, imagine a massively multiplayer online game; everyone playing the game is acutely aware of how much server hardware is needed to maintain that online presence, and it’s unrealistic to assume it would exist forever.
That’s probably why attention was pushed onto The Crew. It’s a racing game that shouldn’t need much from a server, so it’s arguably unfair to tie it to that access and take it offline.
I would imagine it would reveal how sh*tty the ubisoft code bases are and has a reputation cost XD. But if it’s that big of a risk then they should keep the servers running indefinitely.
Pirates have managed to run servers for tons of MMOs. The only thing stopping people from running servers themselves is that they’re not made available.
Don’t get it wrong, the reason The Crew was the perfect game to start the movement is solely because Ubisoft is french, a country that has pretty strong consumer laws that they aren’t respecting.
You’d be making a mistake there. AI elements can’t be copyrighted, but human-created elements can. There’s also a line somewhere at which point AI generation is used as a tool to enhance hand-made art rather than to generate entire pieces wholesale.
Like, let’s look at this Soul Token for my Planescape themed Conan Exiles server (still in development).
I went into GIMP, drew a simple skull based on a design I found on google image search, slapped it on a very simple little circle, and popped it into NightCafe for some detail work. The end result is something I composed myself, with the most significant visual elements created by hand and spiced up a bit essentially using a big complicated filter. The result saved me hours and gave me one of many little in-game items to mod into my server that I never would have had the resources to produce in bulk otherwise as an independent developer.
Who owns it?
Well, I drew the skull after training myself on google image search data, but presumably my hand drawing of a fairly generic object still belongs to me. I drew the circle that makes up the coin itself, but NightCafe added some nicely lit metallic coloring, gave it a border, and turned my little skull into a gem. This, of course, requiring some prompt engineering and iteration on my part.
So is adding a texture and a little border detail enough to interfere with my ownership? Should it be? If I didn’t hand-create enough of the work to constitute ownership, surely there’s some point at which a vanishingly small amount of AI detail being added to the art doesn’t eliminate the independent creation of the art itself. If I were to paint an elaborate landscape by hand and then AI generate a border for it, surely that border shouldn’t eliminate the legitimacy of my contributions.
At some point, the difference between the use of AI and the use of a filter in an image editor becomes essentially non-existent. Yes, an AI can create a lot more from scratch, but in practical terms it’s much easier to get it started with a bit of traditional art than it is to spend hours engineering prompts trying to get rid of weird extra eyeballs and spaghetti fingers.
I’d love to see a more elaborate discussion on this topic, but so far all we get is some form of ‘AI bad!’ and then some artists dropping a little bit of nuance without it really seeming to go anywhere.
This technology has the potential to elevate independent artists to the sort of productivity that only corporations, with their inherent inspiration-killing bureaucracy, could previously achieve. That’s a good thing.
Seems like even if someone could in theory legally reuse some aspect of AI generated/assisted art, it would be prohibitively difficult or impossible to separate it out from the manually created components or know exactly where the line is legally, so it would be completely impractical to use.
Artists aren’t lawyers and don’t want to be. Except for the ones that are. But that isn’t most of us.
Artists make art. If you want to look for the people who like to make policy, look to the jackasses in suits who sit around having meetings about meetings all day to justify scalping the work made by actual artists. The same kinds of people who fund stories like this blatantly uninformed hit piece.
Fuck them and the horse they rode in on.
At some point the line will have to be discovered, because the use of AI for art isn’t going away. Suits can whine about it all they want. Art doesn’t really care.
polygon.com
Ważne