To give perspective on people like Tim Sweeney, it wasn't craft, it was work. He distresses over business rivals but doesn't manage business strategies, opting to instead actively focus on monetary transactions. He isn't interested in why current AI is contentious, he just wants it not to be.

People that aren't interested in it pronounce their disinterest because production flooding makes every treasure harder to find, in a manner of speaking. It's something that it held dear because its personal and extremely therapeutic to share, the harder it is to do that, the less you can have joy.

Of course there are many issues when you look at details of AI InOut, but enthusiasts of current AI aren't concerned with morality or philosophy of AI utilisation, they are concerned about the production and what it directly gives them. Which is what people go to proverbial marvel films for.

Depends on the product and investor.
In entertainment, if you're the kind of person that watches superhero movies every year, it unlikely matters bc you're buying into a laugh or excitement. You can use AI to meet criticism needs but not critical exploration, and at that point, it has no use.

iirc the original marketing for the first borderlands was "diablo with guns"

I went to a doc about pathological demand avoidance. They suggested we go for a walk together, I said "sorry my legs are funny today" (typical PDA response.)
They never once tried anything else, I was going there for about a year.

you think inflation is a general happening and not a consequence. Do you wholeheartedly believe that the disconnected c-suite ID's have earned the choice to charge so much for base-line product? The change in economy is a direct effect of their arbitrary worth.
bsky.app/profile/smex...

Yes, games do indeed cost too much, and they want you to pay more because it's easy to make up theories compared to basic line of thought which history teaches will always win. The majority of people think about what they hear before what they can know.

in case my point isn't clear:
if you have 15k employees and you make 116x that of your employees, your product prices can technically be reduced until you have the same salary without layoffs.
Directly converting the extra money to reduced product cost would make a $60 EA product valued at $34.80.

it's become such an issue that nobody has touched that Nvidia publicly announced their plan to fix it is to make their bribe product get translated to an open-source director within the product. Making it a redundant service that exists due to contracts and grants.

This is why FOSS has been a philosophy since the 80s.
Everyone becomes a trained and familiar potential employee for every beneficial feature. Yes, Unreal is popular in the industry but there are probably 5 people alive that both know UE and why it's griefing customers atm. How many fixed it?

It shouldn't be 53% of sales to 15,400 people that do all the work (including product conception). It needs to be far far higher.
I'd argue that sales percentage isn't even good enough as a foundation.

0.8% to EA CEO.
15,400 permanent staff count of EA.
0.8% of 15,400 = 116.
That's far more than the amount of people that have any sense of creative control or security at EA.
Just because you make numbers go down on the warning signs, the danger doesn't go away.

I'm living proof it isn't. Rude upsets can't kill you, might as well take advantage of that by accepting everything as genuine.

so fight disarmed. Emotional lashings are for you to learn from, not command.

my game is a lost memory and now has no meaning.

This has been on my wishlist for a while now. Very patiently, yet eagerly waiting <3

tbh i thought it was this;