It's got good content but also a massive amount of slop. You don't see much straight up AI generated video, but it's incredibly common to see youtubers just sitting there reading a ChatGPT script.
If you think the AI problem on YouTube is getting bad you should see what kinda stuff they put on there for kids.
Every now and then I’d let my 3 and 5 year old pick what they want to watch (on my account, but I’m supervising them) and they’d find these Mario videos that are basically someone prompting “make as many YouTube channels with Mario videos as you can” and walked away from the computer. Each video is a bunch of 3 second clips smooshed together with no continuity, backgrounds constantly changing, suddenly there’s 100 Luigi’s in the background for no reason, etc. And my kids couldn’t get enough of it.
Suddenly our recommendations were all Mario videos, and banning the channels does nothing because they’re coming from hundreds of different channels.
I just locked the profile, deleted all its history, and never looked back. No more YouTube for them.
I see tons of straight-up fully AI videos being offered, whether it’s NotebookLM discussions of some topic, some nonsense reading of “accepted answers” to a tech query, or the maddening “here’s three ways old money acts”, I assume based on being interested in tech topics and retirement saving topics.
I'm looking at gaming these days and there's such an endless selection of excellent games I'd love to play. But there are far more great games than I have time to play. So when I see stuff like using AI to make games faster, I can only think what is the point, The market won't buy or play more games so something else has to give.
I feel completely the opposite. Mind, I play games a fair bit, but I generally don't feel that excited about most, and I'd say a lot of them have very repetitive tropes. I'm generally in the market for 30h+ spent on a game, so that filters out a lot of the more trendy stuff.
I started building a game on a custom engine a few years ago and I used to think about selling it, but nowadays the market is so oversaturated I tend to think of it as nothing more than a coding exercise.
The market is oversaturated of mediocre games, but I struggle to find any notable titles in the past 5 years. 30 years I was pirating games I did not afford, in the past 15-20 years I bought all the games I played, but in the past few years I don't remember buying too many games because there was nothing interesting. The last games I bought were Cyberpunk 2077 (+ extension), an indie game (Forgotten City) and Stalker 2 (a disapointment).
If you build a really good game, there is a market for it. Otherwise it will be lost in an ocean of not-interesting titles.
Same thing here. I gave up on gaming all together because my library grew too much. As a kid, I didn’t even own a console, I had to borrow gameboy or go to my friend house and even then it was just an handful of cartridges. Even now, I plan to just focus on small sample of programming languages and ecosystems, and learn them inside out. There’s just too much stuff out there.
Online games though you pretty much have to follow the herds to the newest titles. You could stick around but it usually isn't pretty: tough to find full lobbies or full of sweats or both.
This is the language of people just looking at high budget games. Much like people insisting there are no good films when they only look at superhero movies. Quality indie titles come out all the time.
Depends on how you define high quality, indie games with quality similar to Hollow Knight do not come out all the time.
It just is much harder to have that level of polish and amount of content without a bigger well oiled team, so almost no indie games reaches that level.
> indie games with quality similar to Hollow Knight do not come out all the time
Which is completely expected, and not unique to this era. The commenter said "Released recently," as though there was some time where we were basking in masterpieces. If that's your definition for quality, the situation is still better now than it was at any other time in the industry.
There used to be hardly any indie scene. Steam was not dominant yet and consoles didn't let just anyone on their platforms. Because of this, there were far fewer games, and many of them were shit. But of course, we only remember the excellent ones, or the ones from our youth, as we do for film and music.
Today, the variety of different stories and risky ideas being tried dwarfs any other time, and people are pulling off more ambitious things with less money. And the games are also cheap. I got Songs of Syx for $25.
For what it's worth, there are a bunch of indie games I like more than Hollow Knight. I think it's a good game, but it's a pretty specific genre. I don't think we "peaked" there.
Why limit yourself to only recent games? They are often unpolished and overhyped. I only buy recent games if I trust the developer (and even then I often wait a bit before starting playing them).
Thank you for this comment. I myself just got into vibe coding a few projects and anecdotally I've never been more excited about the future barring the economic implications of a world more reliant on AI. It feels as if the parent comment should take your recommendation to heart and start creating!!!
People are expecting too much out of sitting in a chair watching a screen, whether or not you're partially in control of what happens or just passively consuming. At some point, if you want to see the face of God, you need to go trek to the south pole, sail around the world, learn to scuba dive and spend time with sperm whales and orcas. I don't think it's the "creators" here who are deficient. No depiction of action can ever beat the real thing. And nobody needs to make the real thing. It's just there and you only have to go find it. At least for now. We're quickly bulldozing and paving the entire world to build more space for computers, so get it while it's still possible.
Funny how the more it keeps "declining", the more it stays the same. Once you realize there's nothing new under the sun, things become a lot less stressful. Things are only declining if you're looking for it, as has always been the case. [Insert quote about mountain and river here.] (And yes, I'm old AF.)
But not finding joy in anything is an actual sign of depression. Have some media standards declined? Yes, definitely. But by no means is literally everything bad now. You can still find plenty of non-formulaic media on streaming services.
> But not finding joy in anything is an actual sign of depression.
Moving to something else that provides joy is a sign of healthy life, not depression. If you don't like modern media, you don't have to find some that you like, you can look somewhere else, in a completely different area.
> literature, you can trivially read all the classics by the time you are 30
I don't think this is true, at least not for an ordinary person, unless you're dedicating your life to it (hardly trivial) or ploughing your way through for the sake of completion rather than absorbing them intellectually and emotionally. Writers like Joyce can be difficult to even parse if you're trying to read their work quickly, and to truly understand it you'll probably need to engage with secondary sources. And then there's the likes of Proust, which aren't exactly difficult to read but are extremely long (and probably won't do much for you unless you take your time with them). There's no objectively valid set of 'classics' but we're talking about certainly hundreds and arguably thousands of books. A book a week every single week from the age of 15-30 would do it if we're taking about a medium-sized set of classics...
Hey, I actually have "played all the classics" for some definition of the term.
Some time ago I started playing all the games that to me felt worthwhile to play in roughly chronological order.
I think the project is overall quite different than "reading all the classics" though - a lot of old games have aged pretty poorly so I can either skip them or abandon after giving them a fair shot.
I'm currently roughly in the 2000-2010 era of games. (It's not pure chronological, because I tend to sort play order by console, then by series, then by year.)
Games unlike books can have depth in duration of playing. While possible to play a game for 500 hours and feel very different about it on hour 501 vs 51, while books (usually) do not deliver such a feeling. Thus "playing all the classics" has much more dimensionality and as a result, requires much more time than just literally playing it once through and being done.
Games work in very different ways. Some are narratives where unless you complete them it isn’t really true to say you’ve fully played them. Others are essentially skill-acquisition challenges - you don’t have to finish Sonic the Hedgehog or ‘beat’ Civilization to be able to say you’ve played them. And others are goalless sandboxes - the Sims or Minecraft, where what you get out of it depends entirely on what you put into it.
Which classics? There is more than the English language in the world. You could even learn every single language and read their classics, much less all good books in human history. You are either underestimating the amount of text corpus that exists or overestimating people's reading and comprehension speed.
> Even if you take an old established media, like literature, you can trivially read all the classics by the time you are 30.
Or spend a lifetime reading and re-reading them non-trivially.
"My definition of a great story has nothing to do with 'a varied and interesting background.' It is: One that can be read with pleasure by a cultivated reader and reread with increasing pleasure."
There are roughly 50-70 new games released on Steam every day. I think there's pretty good review metrics available that you can assume 2-5% of those could be categorized as "Excellent". So that's around 1–3 excellent new games per day on just one platform.
Even if we're over-estimating "excellent" by a lot, that's still more games that anyone can reasonably play.
>There are roughly 50-70 new games released on Steam every day.
Ever bothered to actually go through the "all new releases" list on steam and actually check each new release? You should try it.
99% of "stuff" there is worthless trash, think 0 effort assetflip, which is never going to make $100 steam tax back. 1% is barely passable, as in "not a blatant insult to consumer".
Unique stuff worth playing is extremely rare, if you're not 7 years old and you played more than a couple of games in your life of course.
> Unique stuff worth playing is extremely rare, if you're not 7 years old and you played more than a couple of games in your life of course
I think you'd be hard pressed to find someone who has played as many games as I have, and I couldn't disagree more. I find this sentiment more common amongst people who have played 20-30 games in their lifetime. The more I play, the more interested I am in the smaller titles sprinkled throughout the month. Even a janky, low budget game can do something unique. I have a massive backlog.
There are very cool games coming out every week, IMO. Just this next month,
- The Kingsfield inspired game Queen's Domain. That looks visually amazing.
- Noble Fates is a very cool Colony Sim that surpasses Rimworld in some respects (even if it comes short in others)
- Worship is a game where you play as a cult leader and command minions like Pikmin (I'm a sucker for cult games).
- County of Fortune is a massive city builder that goes a scale beyond what most city builders allow
- Silver Pines is a horror game borrowing from the genre's greats. It got a 97% on Steam.
Thanks for pushing back, completely agree. GP's 99% trash is a massive exaggeration. It's actually super tough out there for indie game devs, and you have to put up with people lumping your game in with actual trash without a chance.
That's how I feel about the current streaming content library and the list of books I want to read and the YT channels I want to watch and the list goes on... The fact that there is so much media vying for our time is one of the drivers bringing down old school media.
> Unique stuff worth playing is extremely rare, if you're not 7 years old and you played more than a couple of games in your life of course.
This is a hot take indeed. Unless you use the word unique to pick only a single game from each genre, even a single genre has more games than I can hope to finish in a lifetime.
I mean, I still play Dune 2, warcraft II, sc:broodwars and C&C, in addition to Starcraft II.
just clicking on your link: Final Fantasy Resonance would likely be regarded as "excellent". If you're a fan of RPGs.
But I suppose that's part of the problem with all media. We have more media than ever, so tastes get more divserse. This can consequently be bad for "cultural" purposes because you can meet 1000 people and struggle to find more than 2 who like the kinds of games or movies you watch regularly. So you instead default back 20 years ago to The Wire or Sopranos or The Dark Knight Rises, etc. Around the last time we have "mass culture". or Sports.
For gaming, GTA VI will be an interesting time, even if I don't personally care for the series. Because that may be the first time since perhaps Pokemon GO where you have so many subgroups of gaming aligning together for a single release.
Silver Pines has a 97% on Steam. It might not be your genre, as Clair Obscur is not mine, but people obviously think it's excellent.
If you have a limited interest in genres, no, you're not going to enjoy a lot of games, which has always been true. There is not some mythical time before now where a greater quantity of excellent games were being made.
The whole industry is on edge right now, and numbers wise the CVE count has exploded beyond belief. It's probably to take the side of caution, treat everything as important and update everything promptly rather than the old way of doing things where libraries are left months or years out of date until something happens.
> I's probably to take the side of caution, treat everything as important and update everything promptly
The risk is that if people keep seeing headlines about some vuln emergency that isn't in fact exploitable in most cases they'll just start to ignore them.
“Might be” seems to carry a lot of weight. I’ve been running lockdown mode and I haven’t seen any images not load. Presumably it’s only images of a certain obscure kind.
My experience has been the iPhone chip is fast enough to still run pages just fine. Maybe those ones that load 300 adverts and relay out the page 5 times as they load won’t work but they hardly worked before anyway.
Everything that runs with such a major performance decrease will also run fine on a cheap phone. If this is your normal use case that's fine, but it simply means you also didn't need such a powerful Iphone in the first place. It's like buying an RTX5090 and then playing 2048 in a browser and saying you don't understand why people always install Nvidia drivers.
You can do so and that's fine, but it doesn't change the fact that it's stupid to buy a crazy expensive GPU and then only run it in a limited way because of some personal preference in an unrelated field.
Had a short moment to glance at it. My guess would be BROTLI_DCHECK(s>meta_block_remaining_len <= (int)BROTLI_BLOCK_SIZE_CAP) along with BROTLI_SAFE_WITH_STATUS having that goto saveStateAndReturn on non BROTLI_DECODER_SUCCESS.
I pulled all of my data out of google at the start of the AI boom because I just new google is so hungry for training data they will take anything they can get their hands on.
