Focus to remain on entertainment for the living room.
Sony’s gaming chief Andrew House sees limited global potential for handheld gaming in the age of smartphones, saying that the company doesn’t have any concrete plans to take on Nintendo's Switch.
Electronic Arts CEO Andrew Wilson said generative AI will allow bigger, more immersive worlds, and the developers were very eager for it.
If you want a tool to reduce the time it takes to make a product, AI is a tool to do that. If you want a tool to just make content for you, AI is a poor crutch for good writing and storytelling.
I don't disagree. However, good writing and storytelling in games are still pretty rare. Honestly, AI as it is right now could probably produce output similar to, if not better than, your average experience. Especially because the main issue I see being thrown around for its use is the generation of ludonarrative problems. But, we have literal GotY winners that are incarnations of ludonarrative problems and written by humans. So if specialists don't care, would the average player even notice?
That said, from the perspective of improving the craft, AI will undoubtedly do more harm than good if used for that.
Oh, don't get me wrong, I'm not saying what we're getting out there right now is overall great from everyone. There are obviously a lot of bad writers out there. The problem is AI learning from bad writers. No thanks!
Time for AI to replace CEOS. That way, when it fails, as it inevitably will, there's no one to tell. The employees can continue to make games, get raises (no CEO bonuses), and there will no longer be bone headed decisions by id10Ts.
Think how much easier it will be to fire an AI CEO than a real one! We've sacked Ocrulos AI CEO and will be replacing him with Kensho Technologies v3 CEO.
Honestly, that's the funny thing I find about AI. Is that it's the management and higher up positions that are the most perfectly replaceable positions with AI vs people at ground level.
Games are about to get worse. AI will do most of the lifting, devs will polish the turd and prices will raise because of "the economy".
'Generative AI Will Allow Bigger, More Immersive Life>>>>>> >> Work Balance and Paychecks for our Employees, Says EA, and Developers Were 'Hungry' for It'
Sounds good to me.
EA's CEO says that AI will revolutionize 50% of their development, enhancing speed and creativity in gaming.
I've heard of garbage in, garbage out.
But garbage creating garbage is a whole new "landscape of gaming" garbage.
Coming from Andrew Wilson, an AI designed to behave like a tech bro, this sounds like nepotism.
Yeah and it'll also destroy creativity, as well as cause more job losses.
The more I hear things like this, the more I think the games industry is finished. I see nothing to be excited about any more.
EA says the next Battlefield game is being built by the "largest Battlefield team in history," and confirms the game is in a playable state.
“I’ve just spent a whole bunch of time with the collective Battlefield team, playing what they’re building and it is going to be another tremendous live service.”
It's just what gamers want, more live service garbage.
What Henderson has leaked so far is that ... even though the dev size's large, they are playing safe this time,
so I am guessing big budgeted BF3 2.0 ... fingers crossed
We don't need thousands of workers wasting their time and effort, for many years, on a live-service project nobody asked for.
Just take a dedicated small team and create a cool Battlefield GAME. Not a service, but a game. As in 10-12 Conquest maps, 4 classes, cool gameplay, done. That's it.
That doesn't need 3-4 years of development. That doesn't need thousands of employees. Just go back to basics; Release a cool game, let gamers buy and enjoy that game, and 1-2 years later you release a sequel. No 'service', no subsciption, no DLC, no seasons. Just a game. On its own. Done. 50 bucks.
Maybe is because the memory card, horrible marketing, not a lot of first party games and no big third party games like GTA was the reason that sales were very low compared to PSP.
Of course because you cant succeed with a Vita "Switch".
You cant just throw a copycat version of the switch out there thats more powerful it wont get big appeal just like what happen with vita and 3ds.
Sony lacks any first party that could even sell the device.
Just like vita it would be left to die on the mountain of memory cards and indies.
Sony should stick to consoles. That's where they excel. They won't take resources away from their console business to support a handheld, which I understand. But if you can't fully support both, then don't do both. Just do the one that you can do best.
You just need to focus on PS4, Sony. Just do what is best for ya.
Sony's biggest selling factor with their handhelds for the past 13 years was console style gaming on the go.
With Switch pretty much taking this selling point as its main appeal, it'd be hard for Sony to make another handheld compelling enough to justify their continued manufacturing in the portable space for future generations.