Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Well, I think most software engineers in games don’t work all that much with scripts or database queries, nor write that many tests for systems of scale that GPT could produce. You might be in devops, tools, or similar if you deal with a lot of that in game dev.

GPT code in a lot of critical path systems wouldn’t pass code review, not probably integrate well enough into any bespoke realtime system. It seems to be more useful in providing second opinions on high level decisions to me, but still not useful enough to use.

Maybe it could help with some light Lua or C# gameplay scripting, although I think co-pilot works much better. But all that doesn’t matter as due to licensing, the AAA industry still generally can’t use any of these generative AIs for code. Owning and being able to copyright all code and assets in a game is normally a requirement set by large publishers.

To conclude, my experience is indeed very different from yours.



I think the difference in our perspectives is the type of studios we work for. In a AAA studio what you're saying makes perfect sense. But I've worked entirely for small- and mid-size studios where developers are often asked to help out with things outside their specialization. In my world, even having a specialization probably means you're more experienced and thus you're involved in a variety of projects.

Whether that's "most" software engineers in games or not I can't say. AAA studios employ way more engineers per project but there are comparatively way more small- and mid-sized developers out there. It's interesting how strong the bubbles are, even within a niche industry like games.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: