I’ve written before about how November 2025 was an inflection point for coding agents—the point where Opus 4.5 and GPT-5.1 crossed a tipping point that meant their respective coding agents …
That’s the dumbest thing I’ve heard today. Having Claude “play”-test a game 1200 times isn’t the same as having 1200 humans playtest something. It’s having one pseudorandom test 1200 times.
Also, isn’t the point of games that humans play them? That’s why it’s called a playtest. Humans play the game and report what they found enjoyable versus what needed work. The designer then gets to choose if adding units or balancing abilities is warranted. How would a machine know what an audience finds fun? How could it know what a dominant strategy might be? They don’t, and this idea that you can outsource creativity to AI is fundamentally flawed.
It’s not like your average play tester making 20 bucks an hour is some kind of artistic genius, mostly they’re just working the bugs out.
The guy made a thing with a computer. So what? Get off your high horse like clicking a mouse a few times is some kind of proof of the ‘creative process at work’.
So he spent his time differently, great. If he decides to be an indie, he can spend the next 8-24 months going to conferences and begging for reused art assets and small checks to pay people on fiver or buy models on the unity store, he can spend the same amount of time going to conferences and begging for creative feedback and small checks to pay people to work on the design.
You can also phrase it another way: Why shouldn’t you play some random guys polished free game? Why would you play something made by soulless Electronic art MBA dudes who are pushing microtransactions everywhere to milk additional money out of you, build by some generic formula by abused devs (look up “crunch time”) just so that the Saudi royals can get more money?
That’s the dumbest thing I’ve heard today. Having Claude “play”-test a game 1200 times isn’t the same as having 1200 humans playtest something. It’s having one pseudorandom test 1200 times.
Also, isn’t the point of games that humans play them? That’s why it’s called a playtest. Humans play the game and report what they found enjoyable versus what needed work. The designer then gets to choose if adding units or balancing abilities is warranted. How would a machine know what an audience finds fun? How could it know what a dominant strategy might be? They don’t, and this idea that you can outsource creativity to AI is fundamentally flawed.
The lack of understanding of the entire process is incredible.
By who? The game is playable.
It’s not like your average play tester making 20 bucks an hour is some kind of artistic genius, mostly they’re just working the bugs out.
The guy made a thing with a computer. So what? Get off your high horse like clicking a mouse a few times is some kind of proof of the ‘creative process at work’.
So he spent his time differently, great. If he decides to be an indie, he can spend the next 8-24 months going to conferences and begging for reused art assets and small checks to pay people on fiver or buy models on the unity store, he can spend the same amount of time going to conferences and begging for creative feedback and small checks to pay people to work on the design.
You are right, but … it does work. If you play the game, it really is a solid RTS.
Why would I play a game a human didn’t make? This is actual hedonism. Just raw masturbatory dopamine seeking.
You can also phrase it another way: Why shouldn’t you play some random guys polished free game? Why would you play something made by soulless Electronic art MBA dudes who are pushing microtransactions everywhere to milk additional money out of you, build by some generic formula by abused devs (look up “crunch time”) just so that the Saudi royals can get more money?
It managed to achieve the lofty quality of 10,000 identical uninteresting mobile RTS games before it.
deleted by creator
Don’t mix hedonism and slop posting