this post was submitted on 28 Nov 2025
690 points (98.9% liked)
Gaming
4107 readers
337 users here now
The Lemmy.zip Gaming Community
For news, discussions and memes!
Community Rules
This community follows the Lemmy.zip Instance rules, with the inclusion of the following rule:
- No NSFW content
You can see Lemmy.zip's rules by going to our Code of Conduct.
What to Expect in Our Code of Conduct:
- Respectful Communication: We strive for positive, constructive dialogue and encourage all members to engage with one another in a courteous and understanding manner.
- Inclusivity: Embracing diversity is at the core of our community. We welcome members from all walks of life and expect interactions to be conducted without discrimination.
- Privacy: Your privacy is paramount. Please respect the privacy of others just as you expect yours to be treated. Personal information should never be shared without consent.
- Integrity: We believe in the integrity of speech and action. As such, honesty is expected, and deceptive practices are strictly prohibited.
- Collaboration: Whether you're here to learn, teach, or simply engage in discussion, collaboration is key. Support your fellow members and contribute positively to shared learning and growth.
If you enjoy reading legal stuff, you can check it all out at legal.lemmy.zip.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
That's kinda fallacious as an argument. AI cannot create good code, it CAN be used to create code, but requires.expert to fix the tons of mistakes and simply bad coding solutions it comes up with. If you don't have the skills it's better to use a tool made to help you with that with its limitations (rpg maker in your example) rather than use a tool made to aid already expert users (that even they say it actually creates more work for them lol). I write code myself and LLMs simply suck at coding. They can create "art" but it's all the same and you can spot it on their steam page when they do. Honestly, I'm not even angry at them for thinking the same way as you do: it's just that those coding solutions are advertised as such, and people are simply ignoring the expert in the field that tell them they can't actually do that. If you try that road you will either create something that doesn't work or something that will put its users at risk (by creating trojan backdoors in theor system or sharing sensitive information) and that's something I can't simply condone.
You're kind of right, in that it's not a total solution right now and you probably won't be able to vibe code a whole game (except a really simple one maybe) with no knowledge. But that doesn't mean it couldn't lower the skill floor for someone. I'm assuming the person in my scenario would be also using an engine like Unity or Godot, maybe asking the AI to walk them through how to do what they want, write simple scripts and explain/suggest syntax. That shouldn't have too much risk of generating inadvertent backdoors, and I think LLMs are pretty good at explaining basic code. Game engines already enforce the basic design structure, which will make it easier to avoid big unfixable mistakes and do everything in small pieces a LLM is less likely to fuck up.
The same is true with using it for art; you're right that a lot of AI art on Steam is obvious and looks the same, but really good AI assisted art isn't. The amount of skill and effort required for that is not zero, but is less than it might be otherwise. There are probably a lot of games out there where you just can't tell, and because there's so much fear of backlash it just isn't disclosed.
No, it DOES. In fact, it RAISES the skill floor.
How is a dev supposed to be able to find an error in the code if they don't know how to code?
As a programmer, most of your time isn't actually spent writing code. It's mostly spent debugging. An amateur programmer relying on AI is minimizing a task that takes a minority of their time while maximizing a task that takes the majority of their time.
For amateur programmers, AI isn't an asset, it's a liability.
I didn't learn to program using AI, so I don't know all the details of how it would go for an amateur in the process of learning, but I have incorporated it into my work, so I know it can be very useful and save a lot of time, and that isn't just about generating code. If you want to plan out how to debug something, you can get solid guidance. If you want clarification on what an unclear part of a tutorial means, you can get that. The more introductory the topic, the better and more reliable the explanation. I remember when learning spending a lot of hours just staring at a screen being completely lost on what to do next to debug something. I'm assuming you haven't used it for coding very much? How can you be so confident it would be useless for them, isn't this just speculation?
Anyway, this is all kind of beside the point. If it's not useful, people won't use it, and there's no need to be angry about its use. If it is useful, it can be used to assist making games that are worth playing, and people shouldn't be attacked for that.