I disagree. Gameplay loops come from programming in what it is a very simple and early game called: "The Game of Life" by John Conway.
The whole point of The Game of Life, is you are given an arena, a set of basic rules, and you may choose a starting position. The results will then vary and generate different experiences with your input. This is the interactivity of which you speak. The gameplay loop is how you interact with the program, it is the rule set.
The reason The Game of Life is useful as an example here is because it is a "zero-player" game, with no objectives, and yet is fulfills the basic tenets of what a game must have to be a 'game' or specifically what we think of as a "video game". You're not even competing against anything, you are simply interacting with the rule-set. The core gameplay loop is the rule-set, and the passage of time.
Games do not even necessarily need to be fun, but they have to cause some kind of human emotion. In this case, it's curiosity. And the level of detail within this simple rule-set that humans can input is shockingly large.
Even the earliest game that is known to exist has a similar function. The Royal Game of Ur it has 2 players competing against each other to get to the end of the board. It uses dice to add random chance for movement, and betting to add additional risk and reward. Despite this game emerging from the the earliest human civilization to ever exist as far as we are aware, once you have the rules, it is actually a quite entertaining and competitive game that combines both chance and strategy. Again, the basic rule set is the environment you are operating in, and the loop is each each iteration of positioning against your opponent.
You could create an AI that could follow some basic mathematical equation for what a good game should entail, but the entertainment value in the aesthetic and variations still need to come from humans.
No. I don't consider those to actually count as "games". There's no gameplay loop. Those are stories.
I also disagree that AI can generate good stories. I think all that it can do is craft the same story, because it has no capacity for creativity, just association.
Art is inherently a human expression. Without humans, it can not be art.
I choose the right-wing part of the Libertarian Party. Which looks something more like this.
Yeah, it's gonna be great.
Well, until Joy Reid looses her shit, starts screaming "CUT DOWN THE TALL TREES" over her television show, and all our Leftist friends grab machetes. But, it will be really funny to laugh at their delusion until then.
If the Democrats go with "It was Trump who was committing voter fraud all along! The election was stolen!", will all of your leftist friends go with the narrative, or just most of them?
One of those is actually trying to be edgy. The other is corporate slop pretending to be edgy because it decides to be "bold & courageous" by repeating the double-plus-goodthink that every HR department in western civilization has in their handbooks; and because it "subverts the audiences expectations" of a multi-million dollar game being any good, or having quality control standards met.
AI can not build video games. Not really.
I'm one of those people that see video games as, at least partially, art. The concept of a game is first to construct a rewarding gameplay loop, followed by the art of actually building the aesthetics of the world that contains your loop.
AI generation to make a "game", rendering it from scratch, as you play it, is not even really a game. There's not even really a good way of building out a world. One of the unique features of a game is that it allows people to have both similar and different experiences at different times, as the result of interacting with the core gameplay loop. A "full game" where the AI builds things as a human interacts with it, will inevitably fail because no AI can match the ingenuity of a human, and the AI isn't constraining itself within a core gameplay loop.
The best that AI can actually do is what one guy already has done. I can't remember the name of the game, but a single person is building a heavily AI built Space Sim game like Elite Dangerous or Star Citizen. Lot's of AI generated assets and content around the game he actually built. All it's doing is reduce his personal workload, and make the game cheaper. The core game is still developed by a person.
This is one of the reasons I'm saying that AI is currently a bubble. Most of what is claimed to be AI, literally isn't anything beyond basic algorithm work, or is being badly misapplied to do things that don't make sense. Just like with the Dot Com Bubble, investors are dumping shitloads of money into gimmicks and scams.
He's definitely going to flip a blue state that the Democrats are expecting. I've said before that I expect one, maybe two, of these states to flip: Virginia, Minnesota, New Hampshire, Maine, New Mexico. And in such a case, since the Democrats aren't planning to use fraud to flip these states, they won't be prepared for the flip.
I think that Georgia and North Carolina are basically locked down right now. Barring something properly crazy, he's also very likely to win Arizona and Nevada. If he so much as wins 3 electoral votes in Maine, and looses Pennsylvania, Michigan, Minnesota, Virginia, and Wisconsin, he'd still win the electoral college. His lead in Arizona may be around 5 points, so that's asking a lot for Maricopa if you're a fraudster. Nevada is a likely win for Trump, as everyone agrees he's already polling around +2-3. And there's still a likelihood for Trump to have another +2 from polling errors (really, just Trump supporters not talking to pollsters). When you look at it that way, no one's really focusing on Maine, but Trump's guaranteed to win at least one electoral vote there, and that would put him in the margin of error for those last two electoral votes.
Imagine if the Dems blew millions of dollars fraud operations in Pennsylvania, Virginia, Michigan, Georgia, and Minnesota; all for it to be useless because they didn't predict Maine was a battleground state.
The Democrats are deluding themselves into thinking that Georgia and North Carolina are well within their grasp. There's still some idiots talking about Ohio and Florida! It's not gonna happen. Trump has a better chance of taking New Mexico, than Harris has in Florida; and Trump has a better chance taking New Jersey than Harris has in Ohio.
will the BBC now give up the pretense of being impartial and separate from the state?
Ha ha ha ha. No.
Attacking their enemies is not hypocritical. They want us broke, homeless, our wives dead, our children raped, and they think it's funny. That 2nd to last one is especially true because it's the BBC.
As I've said before, the only reason anyone needs to literally see themselves in something is to help small children develop self-image, such that they are better able to understand themselves in the environment in which they live. What these children need for their psychological development is for them to look like their parents (so they can better associate with them) and for them to understand what they look like and who they are within their peer groups. But that's basically it.
Adults who say they need to be physically represented in the game are Narcissists.
Copying my reply from yesterday:
If this were not the case, then why would people keep playing as Dragonborn characters in Baldur's Gate 3? Is it because these players are actually interdimensional, shape shifting, alien, reptiles that rule over our civilization, or is it because the whole premise of this hypothesis is wrong? Perchance they are all other-kin?
Or... or... hear me out... let's assume that the premise here is true, and society burdens certain demographics with negative stigma, and as such we need to make people feel represented. But what if society is so negative towards a demographic, that that demographic learns to self-hate and disassociate to such a degree that they have to actually pretend to be animals. So, let's say, a white male kid chooses to play as the anthropomorphic character because he's been taught by society that being white is worse than being a reptile. Should we go with that line of thinking?
You're right. They're clearly the interdimensional alien reptiles.
Race haters doing their normal thing. This is why you can't allow any of these Leftist freaks in any position of power.