If you look at the technical state of Unreal Engine 5, then how modern GPUs can barely run games without frame generation which also makes them look blurry, then you are not surprised. Its not just gamers but also developers who are fed up with the status quo of how games are done these days. The big use case for UE moved from technical excellence to churning through people who can work on your game for hiring convenience, because you don't have to train them on an inhouse engine. Its unhealthy to have this much fluctuation with hiring people, then if the game fails or succeeds (it doesn't matter), people are laid off anyway.

It is just mismanagement of the money they earned with fortnite, they failed to keep the momentum and stopped taking risks. The technical incompetency doesn't stop with UE5, it shows in the store, which is laughably bad and inefficient since forever. I think its good these people get a new chance to start working for companies who can put their skills and time to good use and value their expertise. Long term nobody working there would be happy with the way the software portfolio is moving downwards.

> ... they failed to keep the momentum and stopped taking risks.

This is a problem that infects all of the large studios now, from Epic to EA, Ubisoft, etc. My read on it is that it feels less risky to double-down on an exiting successful live service game like Fortnite or Rainbow Six Siege. That's probably true for ~5 years. After those ~5 years, it's far riskier to continue investing in the game than it is to start winding it down into maintenance mode while working on new titles or IP. The related risk is assuming that since the one title was huge that players are going to crave other titles in the same brand or franchise. For example, Ubisoft's assumption that Rainbow Six Extraction would naturally follow the success of Rainbow Six Siege.

These companies get addicted to the recurring revenue stream and pivot their businesses under the incorrect assumption they will last forever, at the expense of new projects.

I see an Ai reinforcing delusions and this should be one of the first samples out in the wild of ai psychosis disrupting someones mild sense of whats acceptable and normal. I really hope the LLM wrote this and pretends to be human..

I just hope they accelerate this with a complete ID requirement everywhere, so I can finally forcibly kick my addiction to such time sinks and interact with my friends in more direct ways.

Now consider how much of the original C compiler's source code it was trained on and still managed to output a worse result?

Proof of just how lossy the compression is.

I like how my eyes went over the first sentence, barely parsing it and already discarding the information, because its obviously ai generated. Its like the circumstances we live in added a new layer of perception to my brain to guard itself against the flood of useless information!

Holy mother of ai psychosis

wat

We are about 2 decades away from that

I wonder if interacting with AI all day, whether you work with it or just talk to it, has a negative impact on your perception of reality...

How do you learn soft skills? Maybe you have a point there

Watching other people do it better than you, or reading about it and trying things yourself would be two ways I can think of.

Feels like soft skills are peddled as if developers don't have "enough" and it is a common assumption by nearly everyone that this is the case. I think of it in a similar way: the magnitude of soft skills you put on display is positively correlated to the difficulty of social interactions at that workplace. Navigating all the nuances, implies how complicated and maybe loaded that environment is. Do one "mistake" regarding social skills and you will face "consequences"?

I think this could be applied to most fields where LLMs move in. Let's take the field we are probably most familiar with.

Currently companies start to shift from enhancing productivity of their employees with giving them access to LLMs, they start to offshore to lower cost countries and give the cheap labor LLMs to bypass language and quality barriers. The position isn't lost, it's just moving somewhere else.

In the field of software development this won't be a an anxiety of an elite or threat to expertise or status, but rather a direct consequence to livelihood when people won't be hired and lose access to the economy until they retrain for a different field. So a layer on top of that you can argue with authority and control, but it rather has economic factors to it that produce the anxiety.

In that sense, doesn't any knowledge work have a monopoly on knowledge? It is the entire point to have experts in fields that know the details and have the experience, so that things can be done as expected, since not many have the time nor the capabilities to get into the critical details.

If you believe there is any good will when you can centralize that knowledge to the hands of even less people, you produce the same pattern you are complaining about, especially when it comes to how businesses are tweaking their margins. It really is a force multiplier and equalizer, but a tool, that can be used in good ways or bad ways depending on how you look at it.