Are there examples of AI generated content where people like it for something beyond the fact that its AI generated or its a "shocks content"?<p>Generative AI is cool but the novelty of started to wear off IMHO and when the AI content is looked without the "wow AI made this OMG" glasses, the outputs are blunt and uninteresting.
Non blogspam: <a href="https://sites.google.com/view/genie-2024" rel="nofollow">https://sites.google.com/view/genie-2024</a>
So is it safe to say that any concern about what AI should and shouldn't do has no gone out the window at Google and they will release (or show, I know this is just a paper) anything they can at the risk of being left behind by OpenAI?<p>Like seriously, why was this worked on?<p>I don't really buy that the goal is to train other AI based on this generated AI. Is that really valuable? That seems... like the end result will be pretty bad.
Eventually we will all trying to sell gear on the street, with a couple of select druids being allowed to work for the big brother corps, with a couple of leetcode trials during the planets alignment phase.
Really crappy games nobody wants to play.<p>It's incredible the number of side-projects that Google can afford with its advertising revenue, I bet this will never generate them a single cent, the folks creating it will probably make big bucks and move on their careers to create a company that will do this better and make others pay for it.<p>It's a company really needing activist investors that have the billions and billions to kick the CEO and executive team out. Also split its business. Imagine how many business lines from Google would be more efficient if they would operate on its own.<p>I hope they do this, I'd totally invest in Google. Before they do that, I wouldn't, as it would be considered charity for those making $1M comp making useless moonshot projects.
I wonder if there's more variety in game. From all the examples in the blog and release, it looks like the model is segmenting static background, non interactive background, platforms and the player. And just builds the game to allow you to control the player and interact with the platforms.<p>I guess it's impressive if it inferred physics and the idea of these abstract concepts organically, but overall doesn't seem overly impressive to me compared to the things I've seen recently
Prev discussion here <a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39509937">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39509937</a>
So are these games actually playable, or is it generating a GIF of a theoretical game given a list of keyboard "inputs" that would take place?<p>I'm wondering if it's generating a runnable binary, or just a video.
I am starting to resent these things more and more - the old phrase "you were so concentrated on wondering if you could, you didn't think about if you <i>should</i>".<p>Feels like there are loads of researcher's trying to replace people with AI in every possible avenue. While I am sure it is a technical feat etc, I am not enjoying how this is going.<p>I hope these researchers are able to sleep at night. They are already causing pain for people's livelihoods and yet they just keep on going trying to find more ways for more people to get sacked.
I would be curious on how well it builds an immersive environment. Early stages might be useful for LEOs to train in VR in a wide variety of settings. No need to hire or outsource to a third party. Or build/maintain expensive real life replicas.<p>Consequently, also allows for pieces of shit to train as well. Got to take the bad with the good, right?
This seems to be the problem with generative ai. It’s unable to tackle the hard problems due to a lack of massive data sets and existing solutions?<p>All it is good at is solving things humans have already solved. When I see this I definitely wonder why we aren’t researching bigger issues that really affect people.
I don’t think the screenshots (that it uses as training data) contain enough useful information on what makes a game enjoyable to play, to make this an immediate threat to game designers.
When AI will be able to generate credible stories with credible characters then put them into credible worlds whose data can be fed to a Open Source game engine, we'll hear a great disturbance in the Force, as if thousands of game designers and publishers suddenly cried in terror and were suddenly silenced.<p>On a serious note, it seems to me technology isn't that far from that point.
Ha. Ha. "Ok Google."<p>These guys just humiliated themselves over their static image AI and just recently burned every single bridge and shred of faith the gaming industry had for them with Stadia.<p>This is going nowhere. It's quite literally non-news.
As someone who has worked in video games both at the hobbyist and AAA level, this is a demo meant to fool non-experts. There are a <i>million</i> tutorials to get a really shitty version of mario running in unity or godot or unreal. And they openly say that they used these shitty mario clones to train this model.<p>This will not scale in the near term because<p>a) There aren't that many types of games that get cloned over and over again with small variations that they can train their data on. Mario games, card games, toy 2d strategy games, etc. Even something as basic as the rougelike genre has so much variation between games in style, feel, gameplay loop, system design, online play, etc that I don't think you can mix them up in an algorithmic slurry and get anything legible out on the other end.<p>b) The output of this so far looks ... really bad to be frank. It's unacceptably low res, no anti aliasing, you immediately see that this is just a sprite superimposed over the provided images. It looks so terrible that they are not getting buzz from word of mouth (the tweet thread has very much not gone viral despite being up for 3 days now).<p>c) Getting a character to move left or right and jump in a 2d scene with some collision detection is the only thing this has done and that is the easiest part of making a game. I have seen average 13 year olds manage it. There is so much technical depth in games and game engines beyond getting a sprite to render and move. They don't even have a walk animation in this demo. Good luck ever getting this to create a double buffer for rendering. The game industry very jealously keeps its code internal and its gonna take more than the payouts reddit and tumblr have been getting for ATVI/EA/Ubisoft to give up their source to Google. If Google had kept Stadia around, that actually could have provided them with so much free training data from the images being passed back and forth, but since Google is a non-functional company we don't have to worry about that :)<p>d) Bugginess in a game, once over a certain threshold, causes players to drop the game really quickly. I cannot even begin to imagine the amount of bugs or what the process would be to fix them in this mess.<p>You could create the same thing back in the day with a webpage where users can submit a set of background tiles and then run a flash mario game superimposed over those images.