So I would completely agree with you concerning things like my dayjob. But maybe there are some details and edge cases being overlooked.

Like I would love to make an indie game as good as like Shovel Knight, Celeste, or Into the Breach. I know these are extremely ambitious goals but AI should make my 1000x more productive, right? ... right?

But what Imve realized is that for someone not in the industry and without the experience I'll provably never make it.

You could blame this on the fact that games are asset heavy and involve interaction, but even then, it seems like just pulling a slot machine after your project gets to a certain size.

I'll accept that AI will most certainly be used to great effect in this industry but I don't believe some factory paradigm will arrive leveling an ignoramus like me and an "artisan" to be equal.

▲

XorNot a day ago | parent [-]

Programming has arguably never been the most important part of making video games though, except when people stuff it up and a game doesn't run well on the hardware people want to play it on.

Story, design, game mechanics...these all have something in common, and it's that at a moderate sized studio they're not even slightly the programmers job.

Arguably if you wanted to make games then now is the best time to do it because a lot of the boilerplate won't be in your way.

	▲	uludag a day ago \| parent [-]
		I agree with this in general and that a game in theory is so much more than code. The the one caveat is that code is the ultimate bottleneck of games. Assets, story, mechanics, design are all mediated my code and that code complexity is what limits scope. Also, a lot of these aspects are touted as stuff that AI is so good good at: AI can write better fiction, AI can design better, AI can produce better art, AI can infinitely churn out 3D models, etc. There are people 100% sincerely drumming the same beat that we see here concerning code for all these areas... and yet something really isn't there yet.