Ask HN: It's still worth to show own handmaded games to the public internet? | Hacker News Reader

Ask HN: It's still worth to show own handmaded games to the public internet?

1 pointWormaus3 comments

In the past, we made games for fun and showed them off here and there. Some people were amazed, others didn't care. So far, so good, completely normal. But what are people supposed to do today with such fun stuff when they get banned and bashed with the blind accusation that everything is just "AI slop"? I see it as a cutoff for individual content on the net. "Only mainstream allowed!" leads to handing over internet content to these actors, who define and control the content for their own benefit.

View on HN

In the last week I saw Skate 3, Halo, Gran Turismo, basically any PS2 games, the entire Adobe Creative Suite - all running in the browser, all made by AI.

So how does a hand-built (read: no AI, or at least an original concept) compare to what's available and theoretically possible today? If people want a game, they're close to being a prompt away from being able to create and play it - so why would they want a game made by someone else?

Inversely, what is great about seeing a game made by someone else nowadays? It ain't the development because that will be entirely AI soon enough. Game concept? Visuals? I think we're about to reach saturation where everything we produce - that would be considered amazing just a few years ago - will no longer be special and therefore, wanted.

Fair point on where the trajectory might seem to be heading. If we reach a stage where anyone can effortlessly prompt any bespoke piece of software into existence, the perceived utility of sharing simple hobby projects definitely changes. However, I think there’s a crucial distinction between something being "made by AI" and being "accelerated by AI": * When we see projects like the recent viral clean-room Adobe clones or browser ports, they aren't the result of an AI just conjuring complex software out of thin air. There is still a human sitting there making architectural decisions, defining boundaries, separating good code from bad, and fixing edge cases. The LLM acts as an incredible accelerator for boilerplate, but the intent and system design still come from a developer. A simple prompt like "build me a shooter" or "clone this complex app" still falls apart 99.9% of the time. * And when it comes to games specifically, the code is only half the story. The rest is taste, pacing, subtle game-feel, and constraints. When you prompt something for yourself, you only ever get a reflection of what you already expected. Playing someone else's game - even a tiny, flawed hobby project - is about experiencing someone else's vision and surprises. Maybe the web will be saturated with instantly generated disposable software, but I'd argue that makes deliberate, opinionated human craft more refreshing to encounter, not less.

Some people still bind and print their own books.

Its going to change, but there's still going to be people out there who appreciate the old forms.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com