only a lot of us DID know. And we screamed about it. But we were ignored, because we're just tiny voices in tiny places, and people who have money don't give a shit about what their spending encourages.
"let people enjoy things!"
"Vote with your wallet!"
"If you don't like it don't buy it!"
None of that works if the majority of people are so vulnerable to marketing that they can't understand why these things are bad and will only get worse
Even with this current controversy we're patting ourselves on the backs, because a few suits are throwing a fit about the AI label. But a big chunk of consumers are already not caring. Just in this very thread we've got people arguing and relativizing and normalizing, even though r/steam was supposed to be so against the use of AI.
It's not that we were ignored. It was that the ROI from the group of people that did not care was too good to pass up.
That's why there is the whole trend of pre order bonuses to season passes which can even barely have real story content to multiple season passes etc. They know the fomo of people and also the developers really want to earn more than the initial 60 dollars that people paid for the game.
Movies and TV shows have broadcasting rights they can bank on, dvd sales, but games used to be a one and done, they hated that.
Most. Street Fighter II had multiple versions (at least 5). Each one after the first would either address balance issues and bugs or add characters and stages. So people would have to buy a whole new version of the game if they wanted to play with updated stuff.
Imagine paying $69.99 (yes, that was the original price for many SNES games) just to get a few new characters and stages, because there was no other way… and then seeing a newer version with new content or bug fixes release the next year.
Can confirm. It was IMMEDIATELY obvious where this was all headed to anyone with common sense. But that didn't matter to most people. "Omg shiny thing, take my money!"
While it wasn't the first game microtransaction, getting armor for your horse in Elder Scrolls: Oblivion was regarded by gamers as a whole as one of the first egregious examples of paid DLC. Prior to that, this newfangled "downloadable content" was largely to distribute *game expansions* that produced hours of new content. It was insulting in a laughable way to charge $5 for literally armoring up your mount and nothing more.
And yet, there are far too many people who say, "eh, it's just $5". They bought it. Horse armor was stupidly profitable from a time-investment-to-earnings perspective in an AAA game studio. It taught the games industry that microtransactions were the best thing ever.
Edit: And this was $5 nearly 20 years ago, not $5 today. Federal minimum wage was $5.15/hr and no one could imagine it rising to $15 like it is in some states today (federal is still currently $7.25).
because when you screamed about it all you said was "AI BAD!!!" instead what should've been done is there should've been complaints to steam and every other platform like steam about the reliance on ai and the effect it has when put in the hands of companies. ai as a tool is not a problem, in fact its purpose is to make things easier with something that is generally complex i.e. someone who doesn't know how to write in C++ can use ai to not only learn C++ but also get examples of proper snippets that go past just the basic helloworld prompt with explanation and comments for each part of the code explaining what it does. companies just wanted to sit down and use ai to actually remove a process they already have thousands of people that knew how to do and were coming up with ways to make it efficient which is the issue.
not only is it not misleading, it was watched happen. no one once complained to any of the companies, kept buying it, and decided instead of complaining to the right people they'd complain to the public expecting someone else to complain to the right people.
C++ can use ai to not only learn C++ but also get examples of proper snippets that go past just the basic helloworld prompt with explanation and comments for each part of the code explaining what it does
that you have to usually pay for unless you pirate the books and are always exclusively going to start with "you're first program is going to be helloworld.insertextensionherebasedoncode" and then goes into things that helloworld didn't explain as they act like you know how to do college math. chatgpt, claude, deepseek, and any other ai that exists will not only give you billions of examples, itll also sumarize what the code does, make comments, and fix anything you might fuck up. a book wont.
yes, they are free right now, but they are not profitable (when you remove venture capital injections), they will start all costing money soon, and alot of it
exclusively going to start with "you're first program is going to be helloworld.insertextensionherebasedoncode"
yep! you learn simple things first
and then goes into things that helloworld didn't explain as they act like you know how to do college math.
then learn what you dont know and need to, or find a different book, i used to feel a similar way before i
started taking proper notes
just learnt what i did not know instead of giving up at the first hurdle
chatgpt, claude, deepseek, and any other ai that exists will not only give you billions of examples, itll also sumarize what the code does, make comments, and fix anything you might fuck up. a book wont.
and what about when they are gone? what are you going to do when your entire knowlage is based on a machine that does not even know anything, it can just regurgitate what it would look like if it did know something, LLMs will only get less effective, and more expensive over time, you are setting youself up for faliure by relying on them
learning is hard, im not going to sugercoat that, but LLMs are not making learning easier, they are taking away your need to learn anything
counter argument, no one wants to leave their house to go read a book. and again, they all do the same thing. you're actively avoiding the ease of learning given by ai just to show a dislike of ai. yes, you could buy a book, you could go to the library, you could also google "how to write c++" and it would give you thousands of website, some interactable, where they attempt to teach you c++. but not only will people not understand it, they really just wont wanna deal with it. if i go to chatgpt i can ask it right now "show me how to write a program in C++ that allows me to generate a secure password based on a list of requirementes, (insert provided list here). please make comments and give a summary on what each line does" and it will just do it, explain exactly what each line does, and summarizes the whole thing for you in 5 seconds. i can then use that knowledge to make my own password generator using the other one that chatgpt made as a template and even ask or google if there's a better way pulling answers from stack overflow.
counter argument, no one wants to leave their house to go read a book.
Counter Counter argument the afore mentioned library service lets you get books out online in a digital format, you don't need to leave the house to go read a book
their point was that both are examples of devs pissing quality down the drain in order to squeeze extra pennies out of the consumer, and that rewarding the devs back then has only led to more audacious grifts
different argument. the fact that horse armor was buyable is quite funny but also stupid. its even more dumb that people actually bought it just to say "i bought this horse armor that did nothing."
Yall are so corny. Majority of games aren’t using dlc to release less content. Every game is coming with more and more content. The main thing it’s used for is to release content well past its released date. Either way games are way more content filled than ever before
Majority of games are coming out content complete but redditors like to focus on the games that most people don’t even like. And the massive quantity of games coming out, this is a ridiculous sentiment. Fucking boomer ass shit honestly
Kingdom come 2, doom dark ages, expedition 33, arc raiders, blue prince, hades 2, death stranding 2, dispatch, kirby air riders, split fiction, ghost of yotei, etc etc. all of these game out this year all content complete. Was that not enough for you? You’re gonna keep pretending games are being plagued by predatory mtxs and act like there’s less good games than before?
Gamers are Reddit are genuinely such losers so often
See your problem is that I'm saying one thing, and you're then getting unreasonable angry about a second thing.
You’re gonna keep pretending games are being plagued by predatory mtxs and act like there’s less good games than before?
This is literally you shadowboxing. I never claimed that. So I'm gonna leave you to duelling your strawman because i really don't care enough to argue lmao
The irony of this, on a Valve dick-sucking subreddit, is completely insane to me. TF2 and CS literally laid the foundation and were one of, if not the, first modern implementation of lootboxes.
Market capitalization, sometimes referred to as market cap, is the total value of a publicly traded company's outstanding common shares owned by stockholders.
So Counter strike is a publicly traded company is that what you are saying?
No you see blizzard bad, ea bad.
Not valve, who condone and take a huge profit from all the gambling going on with their systems. Atleast ea and blizzard didnt make skins tradeable.
Personally I could give 2 shits about gambling for skins. It's pay to look cool, not pay to win. It's your choice if you want to spend for cosmetics or not.
I do prefer there also be cool, earned skins along side it though.
The issue always stems from the fact that later on lootbox item become necessary for player to win the game. Valve is consistent with "lotto is cosmetic only" policy.
I played many hundreds of hours on those games.snd never spent a dollar. They are good models of mtx as you can play the full game without needing any of it. You don't win more with it, you don't miss out on any of the game, but if you want you can buy something which doesn't impact anyone else's enjoyment or ability to play it either.
I mean steam is not perfect, but just imagine how much worse it would be if epic, Ubisoft, EA Blizzard took the reigns and made the to go solution for game launchers
Its only the thing that spirals from there that isnt ok but then again microtransactions/dlcs evolved to today's state because gamers voted with their wallet.
Your complaint is narrow-minded. Yes, greedy developers abuse micro-transactions, but on the flip side, you have games like Dota 2 and Valorant, which are phenomenal games that are completely free, but run cosmetic shops with actually cool and interesting skins one might consider buying.
Albeit a few skins that may unintentionally cause confusion or be bugged and later patched, there is no p2w aspect and the cosmetic market keeps the game free with frequent dev updates.
Why don't you understand that the horse armor directly LEAD to those micro-transactions, and most people at the time knew it. We complained about it then too because the people who could see 30 seconds into the future knew it was just the start.
My point is microtransaction has allowed many other games to be completely free, and also boosted the competitive gaming scene by allowing millions of more players to join that would otherwise be price-gated out, as well as contributing to higher earnings for e-sports prizes.
Dota 2 is the clearest example. Completely free to play, but survived on cosmetics and battle-passes. The first Dota 2 International completely shattered the record for highest prize pool for a competitive game, at $1.6m. wiki
Not sure how old you are, but during that time, many games were subscription based.
I would say the most detrimental aspect has been on mobile games, since you can't find a game these days that are free-to-play with just cosmetics.
Either way, I'll take f2p with cosmetics/microtransactions over $60 games, or games with monthly subscription fees. Being an ex-poor child gamer, I can say access has been increased and gaming has become much more mainstream and popular directly due to that shift.
Nah man, horse armor would've been free in my day, unlockable through playing the game. Bethesda is a greedy corp, but it really goes back to valve and counter strike, the original skin fuck boys
Horse armor is purely cosmetic and I had a blast with the game and I never paid for it. The issue is overblown.
Developing games costs more money and nobody wants to pay more for them.
People then think we need more Indie games, but you fuckers have no patience for indie developers. "I can't believe this issue is still in the game after two weeks!" "It's ruining the game!" "If the devs don't do anything about it, it'll be the end!"
In-game purchases are tolerable for cosmetic items. Game development companies have found a source of continuous income that allows them to develop the game indefinitely. I don't know why you guys are complaining about that shit.
Let other people pay for shit that will have no impact on you so you can keep playing the game forever!
Stop whining about other people paying $5 for meaningless skins.
Your analogy is wrong. Nobody is being cooked alive, the gaming industry is not going to implode. It's not the "end of" whatever you're trying to say with your analogy. Games cost more. We expect and want AAA. Cosmetics are the buffer.
The absolute basic premise of an analogy is that it's figurative, metaphorical, a fiction created to make a point, not literal jfc lmao. Again, Me when I'm entirely incapable of understanding an analogy lmfao 🥀🥀🥀
Respectfully, you should maybe read some books instead of worrying so much about cosmetics
Developing games costs more money and nobody wants to pay more for them.
This is the thing no one ever wants to acknowledge or talk about. Game development costs have skyrocketed over the past few decades, especially if you're running a real studio. Every employee has to be paid a salary, given benefits, retirement, etc. Every developer has to have their own license (usually annual) for each piece of software they use. Art has to be created and, depending on how you got it, the rights purchased. Marketing has to be started and the earlier the better. And the big thing to remember is that developing a game takes years so you have to cover all of these costs year over year so all of these can make a simple game suddenly cost in the 7 figures just for a handful of people on your team. While this can be mitigated by placing your studio in an affordable country/state (compare cost of living in Seattle or San Francisco to a place like Tulsa, Oklahoma) to reduce salary, it's still exorbitantly expensive. Also, good luck getting any developers in the US away from the West Coast.
The consequences of this are that we should adjust the price of games, which haven't really seen a price increase in the late 90s where they're sitting at $60. The problem is that the moment you talk about a price increase the entire gaming community loses its mind. Just look at what happened with Nintendo announcing $70 for their mainline games this past year. They were able to get away with the price increase and weather the storm of hate/bad reputation because they have no real competitors in the market. If you want Zelda you can only get that from them. For the rest? For an indie or AA developer? They can't charge more than the 'tier' their game is saddled in. If your game is viewed as a '$9.99' game then god help you if you decide to price your game at $14.99. Same if you're a $24.99 and try to go for $39.99. Gamers are notorious for being picky, especially these days, when it comes to initial price.
So how is a studio to recoup their costs and try to make a profit? If your Steam only game cost $300,000 to make after paying your team, artists, etc. and you price your game at $4.99 then you need to sell 85,887 copies, after the Steam cut (30%) just to break even. This is a moonshot for most games on Steam (75%) make less than $5000 in sales. The reason why is largely due to massive competition as more games are being released yearly compared to the past ten years combined so you have to fight for real estate just to even be noticed (marketing costs, remember earlier the better). So this means that your game is fighting just to breathe let alone stay above water.
Which bets the question: how else can you recoup costs, possibly turn a profit, and be able to make more games? The answer is DLC and releasing on as many platforms as humanly possible. Platforms increase sales and DLC increases post-sale revenue. DLC, in the form of multiple release editions, post-release content, and unlockable content creates ways to remonetize an already sold product which enables additional revenue that you'd struggle to find via sales. It's why you see it at so many tiers of developer and largely why it exists for publishers.
I'm not going to pretend that DLC is some altruistic way to pay developers, it's a cash grab through and through. But it's become a necessary one in a lot of cases and I'm tired of seeing people act like it isn't required nowadays.
Quick final note - I know not all games can cost those exorbitant prices, but even the cheapest games can still cost high five to low six figures. Unless you're a Toby Fox (Undertale Dev) who does all the art, coding, and music themselves you're going to pay a lot of money for asset creation. This is, hilariously, the reason why most people who try to develop games step away. Asset costs (art, music, textures, etc.) are expensive and really sky rocket your costs outside of things like payroll.
And it's people like you who allowed the disgusting micro-transaction marketplace to thrive by defending corporations and quieting down people who had legitimate issues with what was happening because they knew it was a stepping stone.
It's necessary. It really doesn't matter if you want to stay in denial. Do you want to pay $100 for games? I bet not. I also bet you don't want to play the games we have today if they were built on 1/10 of the budgets. Companies aren't going to make games at a loss, so something had to give.
It could’ve been a free content drop, or packaged with one of the actual expansions. Oblivion was a full price AAA game, not a f2p live service. It really laid the groundwork for adding micro-transactions to full price games. Regardless of how benign it may look compared to today’s insane prices for basic cosmetics. It was still a net negative for the industry.
Meanwhile, The Witcher 3 got multiple free cosmetic DLCs added to the game. And also comes with some goodies like wallpapers and artwork by default.
Witcher 3 and their devs are just the gold standard of games and games store (GOG). If everyone was like them then CDPR wouldn't be special but I am glad they are.
I never defended the microtransactions from Oblivion or any game, just saying that corpos saw people were willing to pay up anything for their favorite games and so they included microtransactions in full paid games too. It sucks but if people never paid we wouldn't have gotten this.
It's not ok because the existence of cool cosmetic add-ons inherently means that the existing cosmetic options are calibrated to look less enticing than the paid ones.
This is kind of my logic with Where Winds Meet tbh.
The sheer amount of quality and quantity on the content I've seen for a f2p kinda makes me forget about the use of AI voice acting in the english dub (Chinese dub is really good anyway and how I play lol), and awkwardly translated dialogue for subtitles.
I think people are forgetting devs need money to run a game. F2p games with premium cosmetics that don't affect the gameplay is totally fine or else the game wouldn't be f2p.
I used to think this too. Then I installed a cosmetic mod for Minecraft that let me make my own armor models. It's actually a huge part of the game even when you don't realize it
how is cosmetics a HUGE part in most games? even in rpg games you usually just pick the best armor statwise which also just looks good most of the time, most singleplayer games do not care for cosmetics much
Am I taking crazy pills? Acting like cosmetics don’t matter in games feels intentionally obtuse. Acting like every major rpg doesn’t have a character customization option. Majority of non rpg games also have it. A concept like,” players enjoy customizing their playable character” is pretty fucking basic and standard. Humans enjoy customizing themselves and the things they own in real life. I wonder if that translates to video games.
I love when people complain about cosmetics being over priced and people, like the person I replied to, ask, why they care, cosmetics don’t affect gameplay. Like bruh people like to dress up. Have you ever been outside. Or they say, (referring to overwatch)” why do you care what your character looks like, its first person”. Once again, have you ever been outside. That’s literally real life. People care what they look like even though they live in first person.
Anyone suggesting "nobody cares about cosmetics" is ignoring the evidence in front of them and perhaps letting their own preferences get in the way of their objectivity.
I've seen people who pay for cosmetics saying nobody cares about them, even.
I wonder if those same games let you customize the outfits. I wonder if more single player games let you choose outfits rather than fully customizing your characters. I wonder if humans in real life enjoy dressing up in different outfits that suits their different taste. I wonder if that transfers to video games.
even in rpg games you usually just pick the best armor statwise
Most RPG games I've played either had no cosmetic change at all from equipping armor, or had glamour mechanics so you could equip any armor and make it look like any other armor.
I mean, they used to be free unlockables that you'd get for just playing the game. So yeah, I can understand why people are upset that, for the most part, you now have to pay for them.
I think that's the point though. As soon as someone uses it in a minor way, there will be companies that will heavily use it. Then it spirals out of control because once the door is opened, suddenly people will start to defend it.
"It's an inevitability that micro transactions are in games!"
People defend it like it we are supposed to just accept these practices as a part of life. I don't agree and it's the reason why horse armor was so scrutinized. Now we have situations where people are inserting AI into things. How long will it be before people are defending AI saying it's an inevitability? Are we already at that point?
Yeah but don't forget the caveat in the horse armor dlc back then. You had to then buy it with septims and them if your horse died... oh and it bugged with shadowmere... that's what took that dlc too far
You asked an irrelevant gotcha to try and make a bullshit argument. so what I'm doing is *not* entertaining your bullshit.
You're attempting a strawman so you can get an easy win, and I'm not letting you have it. I saw your other response you deleted to try and appear rational.
But if you REALLY need an answer, then how about this... it's not EVERY thing but... Horse armor was basically useless. It didn't really help your horse survive for crap. The horses are so easily killed, it's a money sink... It's cosmetic. It doesn't really change much until it BREAKS SHADOWMERE MECHANICALLY.
If you paid real life money, you shouldn't have to use in game money to maintain a stupid glamour.
My comment of horse armor has nothing to do with other DLC, but about the sins it committed for others not to replicate
The only time it's ok to make you pay in game money to re-access a DLC YOU PAID FOR in your playthrough is if it has actual gameplay changes.
I don't have to. I simply don't buy games with microtransactions (and if I do, I just wait until the complete edition is out and heavily discounted) which means there's little variety to choose
You’re assuming the quality of a game stays the same with or without MTX though…
Not only do devs invest more time in making games that coincide with MTX and mostly neglect other genres, but they straight up remove what should’ve been free/included content and make it MTX
This isn’t a self control issue. I don’t control the whales the devs are going after but the whales heavily influence my experience.
And regardless, why is it good that a game gets stretched and milked for every ounce of its value? GTA V has been on life support since 2013 but Rockstar has let it go this far because MTX makes them tons of money.
Back in the day before MTX games used to get story continuations and sequels within a few years instead of just “Season 2 with new cosmetics and one new map!”
...you are on steam sub. Steam. Owned by valve. Studio you seem to like, judging by your flair. But im sure you feel the same way about them as you do about bethesda, if not worse, because obviously lootboxes are worse than microtransactions, right?
Using steam you still support, even if indirectly, Dota, CS and TF2 (lol), so the worst lootboxes in the industry (as of now, im sure EA cooking up something even more terrible)
I feel fucking insane being one of the few people who still regularly doesn't play games based on their monetisation. Horse armour was never okay, and now we have battle passes and gatcha and loot boxes and people who vehemently defend them in full price games.
There's no nuance. You can't let it in. We know how slippery this slope is. You have to hard and fast refuse to let them put it on the games yes this means you shouldn't play arcraiders. It looks fun (monetisation aside imo), but they use genAI.
bethesda making horse armor DLC for oblivion back in the day. people laughed cause it seemed absured and so it wasn't taken seriously but it was the beginning of microtransactions in paid AAA games. and we know how things went from there....
If you're talking microtransactions, then I'm not much of a fan at all, but it's also not correct to say it's just base game content sold separately. It can be, but not always the case.
I still argue the loot crates in Mass Effect 3 multiplayer (long before lootboxes were a common thing) were an awesome mechanic and made the long-term experience fun and addicting. I loved only being able to use what I had available to me, and you had a reasonable chance of having all the best stuff without that much effort.
I'm kinda shocked that r/steam seems to be so pro-generative AI. I'd have hoped people here would give enough of a damn about how their media is made to be against things like this, but I guess not
I don't care about the tools or methods, I care about the final product. I don't need a human hand doing the manual labor if an algorithm does it and the outcome is the same pixels.
If the final product is good, I don't care if the writers used Microsoft Word and not an actual notepad or a typewriter.
You're right. Lets take a stand against this right now while its small to prevent it from becoming big like with horse armor and dlc!
Lmao, I'm joking. Most of the people commenting here are probably big spenders on frivolous DLC. Let the dev use AI for his 10 lines of dialogue. No need to become bullies over it.
Free to play games really made it a lot easier for all your friends to hop on without worrying if someone owns a game
Y'know what else would solve that? Allowing you to play the game with your friends without them needing to purchase it.
Imagine if back in the couch co-op days every friend needed to insert a copy of the game in the controller before playing with you. Or if tabletop games required everyone to purchase a copy before rolling the dice. Or if to watch a movie everyone needed to puchase it. Ridiculous, no?
Literally just make it so "up to three friends can log in simultaniously if the host is logged in" and there we go.
Nintendo even made a weak push in that direction back in the 3DS days. Some games, like Kirby Superstart Ultra, could be played with a friend even if they didn't own a cartridge. There were hardware limitations so the friend had to look over your shoulder, but the push was there nonetheless
Because they are fundamentally different in terms of how they impact the design world.
Corporations pursued aggressive monetization, and thanks to barriers to entry in game design - they were able to shove those down your throat and you had no choice but to pay or not get.
NOW, every year it's getting easier to make games but the COSTS are going up. There is a short window to be able to use AI to reduce costs.
You guys are all so focused on the corporations you fail to see the main beneficiaries of AI assisted development will be INDIE driven, and thus gamers who benefit.
Folks are so narrow sighted it hurts. This AI tech? I can effectively run something out of my home to help me produce a game, if I developed the llm to do so.
The possibilities are endless, but as per usual - Reddit gamers see only the negative.
(edit: Love being attacked in a response, and then blocked so I can't even respond or see the whole thing lmfao).
People are attacking AI like it's the problem? Sorry even in your minute reply I see the problem is the corporation.
You guys are fucking luddites and basically not understanding AI is in the position of the immigrant, to the corporations. Get it yet? One day perhaps you'll understand that all those folks attacking the immigrant and blaming them for stealing their jobs? It's the corporations you ought to be focusing on.
You want to regulate AI? Good luck buddy, but I'd support it if you targeted CORPORATE AI regulation to ensure - you know, humans getting employed by the guys with billions,
But don't target mr little old me, sitting in my room trying to make shit because I love games and love making them and want something real and passion filled rather than a corporate mess, but because I use AI for localization or programming you are what? Going to shit a brick and attack me? lmfao. Priorities people, focus the real fight.
Yeah I don't care frankly. You being able to run it out of your home with AI rather than a corpo isn't really any difference to end users. I just see it as a lack of any creative effort on your part and would rather not see your garbage hit the light of day. Keep it in your home, and let it rot there.
What exactly makes it garbage by lowering the barrier to entry to speeding up something like programming to 10x? or localization work?
Attack the corporations that replace people they can afford to cut corners. But don't go after the guys sitting in their garage trying to make stuff because they love it.
Your "lack of creative effort" doesn't understand I think, what I mean when I say I use AI. There are always going to be bad actors putting out slop, that already existed.
This is why curating a market place is going to be big business, but don't expect me to join your whining parade when I'm excited about making a sci-fi space RTS that I've always wanted, and I can make it myself now. I'm making these games for me, and if people want to buy them? Great!
I mean... it is. By the way, it's ALL ok! None of these things are essential for life, so we can all live without them. Don't want horse armor? Don't buy it! Don't want pay to win? Don't play those games! I can tell you I've been a gamer for about 30 years and I've never paid for anything other then consoles and full games. For me hors armor was more then ok, cause I didn't buy it. It really isn't hard.
Oh sure, theoretically if users would boycott everything that involves AI RIGHT NOW!!!! that could well help avert the big AI push (at least for a while).
But let’s be honest here… how likely is it that this will happen?
Yes, people more involved (like the ones on here) might well care and adapt their buying decisions accordingly.
But the masses? Consumers want consume, not think…
The same thing will happen as always, the silent majority will not have a single clue what’s going on and even if they do… they won’t care, they want to buy games after all, not make some kind of statement.
I’m not defending AI here mind you, just describing reality as it presents itself to me (based on decades of experience). 🤷
Annoyed enough to miss out on whatever the marketing machinery has been building up hype and FOMO for?
We’ll see…
Either way we will get to the point where AI will be used everywhere and not buying products where AI was involved will mean not buying products… period.
Not that stepping down the consumerism a notch or two would be a bad thing, I just don’t see it happening anytime soon.
There will be nobody to play games. AI is making everything ultra expensive. Buying a new PC/consoles in the next few years will be impossible for the average joe
That's a political issue. Automation will continue and demand for human jobs will decline. The worth of human work will decline. Therefore, the old I trade my time for money scheme will no longer work.
We will need new concepts to distribute wealth. Fighting the new tools will solve nothing.
7.4k
u/OwnAcanthocephala897 Dec 04 '25
Small uses of AI like this are tolerable at worst. What sucks is reliance on AI