- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.world
You must log in or register to comment.
I suspect their real goal is to somehow train “AI” to move in the real world with obstacles on customers hardware for future use for robots in the real world.
Future Microsoft care bots throwing the elderly from the second floor windows as there’s no fall damage under 5 meters and it is notably faster than the elevator.
Just pause mid fall, this resets the height calculation.
Reminder that all the big companies crank out a dozen patents every day, that cover everything under the sun, just in case they ever have to engage with each other in patent warfare. For the simple reason that the competitors are doing the same.
Somehow we never hear about the vast majority of these patents.
So they’ll sell you the games, then rent you an AI model to play the games for you.
I can just not play games on my own, for free.
They don’t sell you games, but perpetual revokable licenses. They can alter your game after you bought it. They can enshittify it.
Imagine a game gets harder and harder the more you play it to the point it’s so unfair that you need AI assistance.
Yeah this is where it’s going. Putting that AI exec in charge of Xbox really paying off for MicroSlop.
To be fair, its just suggested to help you on certain points when you cannot make it on your own. I personally don’t think this is a bad idea to have as an option. It’s not like it plays the entire game for you. I see it more like when your big brother helps you finish that one boss you struggle as a kid type of help. Or hell, doing cheats in single player games to have it easier is a common thing to do.
Cheats (and big brothers, to an extent, I guess) are free.
Yes, but that doesn’t mean everything that is not your brother have to be free too. I mean its a service. I assume the Ai tool would be integrated into a subscription like Game Pass. As long as you don’t have to use it, its fine to charge money. I don’t get the argumentation that your brother is free… What’s the point?
As long as you don’t have to use it, its fine to charge money.
Look at the state of gatcha games. Yeah, sure, you technically -can- access all the content without paying, but in practice it’s not going to happen in a human lifetime. It isn’t that much of a stretch to picture games that are “technically” humanly possible, but so difficult that most people will resort to the AI. Remember the oldschool quarter-eaters in arcades? Same business model but with more steps. I also wouldn’t put it past MS to offer “incentives” in the game store for titles with AI integration. Also see the comment upthread about enshittification.
And if you really don’t understand the difference between a paid subscription service and a family member, I feel sorry for you.
And if you really don’t understand the difference between a paid subscription service and a family member, I feel sorry for you.
Why do you have to say something stupid like this? My point is, just because your brother can do it for free is no reason that a service has to be free too. In example my brother can do a lot for me… but I guess at this point the discussion is over.
I notice you don’t bother to address any of my other points, and boldly declare the time for talking to be over. I suspect that’s because you can’t.
Arrr, ye can, matey!
(But please still support small independent developers)
As long as this is for single player games, I have no problem people cheating. But why does this need a patent?
Because incredibly stupid things can be patented, companies want to get in before other parties (often patent trolls) patent ideas, and also to build up their own warchest of patents, even if they never exercise them. It’s a forced war because of a broken system.
like having a parasocial relationship with streamers, except much lonelier.
These are the same companies who insist on kernel mode anticheat
Something tells me it was never about “the integrity of the game.”
there is a difference between offline and online games
I doubt AI would ever solve videogame levels properly, unless the solutions were pre-baked into the videogames themselves. Humans, on the other hand, would definitely get the task done.
It probably depends on the game and type of problem and how much data it is trained on for this game. It also sees and knows what you do and how often you try and fail. So this could be taken into account. Off course I have no clue at the moment, just speculate.
AI couldn’t even be a good partner with me in something as Kirby Superstar back in the SNES days.
I also hated the Ai in International Superstar Soccer Deluxe.
