To try everything Brilliant has to offer-free-for a full 30 days, visit brilliant.org/BellularNews . You’ll also get 20% off an annual premium subscription. Sponsored by Brilliant.
13:25 - Kinda wild you said machine leaarning isn't AI, when it's the literal foundation of generative AI, or whatever it is you think "AI" actually means. Or I think maybe the problem is with the word "intelligence", since that word by itself seems to have a different definition depending on context and who you ask.
Not much of a boycott if all of their games for the past 8 years have been objectively shit 😂 (I agree with you, the only EA games in my library are NFS hot pursuit and battlefield 1)
The problem with the current state of games is that the big guys calling the shots dont know anything about games and they are trying to please investors who also know nothing about games, so no matter how passionate de development team is the game will always be a bit soulless and in current years they came out just a *liiiiiiiiiiiiitle bit* more soulless
What if AI determines the investments and becomes the AI Board, answered to by AI C-levels? Will the rich eventually see AI as a leopard ready to eat their faces?
That these people in the industry think that anything worthwhile can be achieved with the minimum of effort is alarming. They literally believe that "we" are idiots......
If they released it to the public it would've been amazing. BUT NO! They use it for their own games. I don't mind but I do with the way they do with the results. I.e. Actually manually working on the game (Which they should continue doing if they want to stay afloat.) I can see the whole ai thing being useful for the basics right now, but nothing more.
@@LoneCanadianPoet in "fifa" gamnes I see ai voice being useful, (they never, ever add my normal dutch name into the game and all I pl;ay is player career where I would love to have commentary call my name...)
Actually scratch that. They want to go full Jetsons where you have the CEO, a middling salary tech who works 3 days a week and everything else is handled by an AI computer abd its robots.
The company I work for has two C-acronym job titles, the CEO and CFO. Everyone else at the head of a department has a VP title. This is as it should be (especially since the company's not a megacorp.)
You could use AI to give creators convenient tools to make their work easier, help the disabled, and support society in useful ways. But of course you could also exploit as many people as possible. Naturally.
There is a company not too far from me that is using AI to help disabled people communicate better. Unfortunately, the ones that get the attention are the ones who exploit it.
Usually automation tools are understood as such: they'll increase productivity, so you'll need fewer workers per product (yay, greed), but the lower cost could mean the business grows and you'll end up with more workers overall (yay, greed). Somehow, though, there's this delusion that AI will replace workers entirely. That would be a joke, except we know deluded execs will fire mass waves of people, and the failures will only come much later.
That's not the plan.The goal is to release games with AI tools for users to make more content. Very much like how you most likely purchased games like Skyrim or Fallout because you love to see what mods players create for it. What the EA executives don't understand is that AI can't and never will be a substitute for user-generated content made by an amatuer game developer or hobbyist creator.
@@KryyssTV The reason why AI can't work is because Gaming is illogical. Concord had so much funding and didn't last a month. Meanwhile Among Us became one of the greatest successes in years. There is no pattern to find here, it depends on people.
@@Mediados What you're seeing there isn't random but rather based upon trends. As such you see games that accidently fall into a trend as it starts while others completely miss it. Corporate gaming is a victim of their desire to only focus on what they call AAA titles which are iften initiated once a trend is identified but due to their lengthy development time frequently get released as the trend is over. Trends are by their nature somewhat predictable. If a market is saturated with one genre then consumers will turn to something entirely different. Again the corporate games industry is extremely limited in what they can offer which is why you see the indie market floushing. After yesrs of live service FPS multiplayer games it is no wonder that single player or coop beat-em-ups like Wu Kong and TMNT are currently trending because they're so different to the last trend. So while you may not know for certain what the next trend will be, you do know what it will NOT be.
The AI video that EA showed to their investors was not showcasing any technology that they’ve built. It’s a teaser to show what they would like to build. Even building the tech that would do what they’re showing in the video would take a decade. It would take so long for them to get there that it’s not really relevant to gamers of today. It’s annoying but it’s pie in the sky thinking. It’s like the NFT game craze of 2020.
It is propaganda for investors. We should always listen and beware, but they are trying to screw the investors as much or more than they are trying to screw their customers.
@@hikingglint9648 probably not even that, more like a concept video only, since proof of concept would mean they've achieved something already in practice.
There's a disclaimer at the bottom of the first few seconds of the video saying that it depicts an early-stage concept only. It's like date night on the timeline of sending your future child to college.
There's gonna be a reckoning once the AI bubble burst and people realise it's not a magic bullet that makes games for free. And even if it worked nobody would want to play them, the same way that nobody is listening to AI music on Spotify: it's human creativity and imperfection that makes good games/music/art/etc.
doesn't matter, venture capitalists don't care if the products they are investing succeeds or busts, all they care is the market speculation. whenever a bubble bursts, someone made a fuckton of money, even if an entire company gets caught in the conflagration.
While it is true that this garbage tool won't work to generate whole games, the same can't be said about using AI to make game scripts. Chat GPT 4o works surprisingly well for that purpose. They have good AI tools and uses, they just don't advertise them that much and focus on the eye candy to attract investors, which is what created this bubble in the first place.
This guy is one big reason EA became one of the most hated publishers there are. And not a single game the company has in the making is even remotely something i would even consider pirating. Lets hope dragon age fails so miserable the investors go beserk on his readend.
The Jedi series is good, though. And although I'm skeptical and will wait to pass judgement upon release, many people that have played The Veilguard say it's good. Edit: Before anyone claims I'm an EA apologist, the Jedi series are the only current EA games I've enjoyed. Also, I'm a Dragon Age fan that is skeptical about The Veilguard, but remains hopeful.
Investors dream of companies with zero employees, so that every dollar made goes to them. Who'll buy those products when nobody has a job? That's someone else's problem.
I always wondered about this little snag..... Upper Management in most companies at this point: "We should fire everyone but the people we ABSOLUTELY need, and even then keep the barest minimum possible to run." Nobody: "Where will people get money to buy your product?" Upper Management in most companies at this point: "Why aren't people buying the trash product I can barely manage to produce with this skeleton crew?? MUST BE PEOPLE STEALING!" Yep, and a lot of fools in this country somehow think that "businessmen" should RUN the whole country. Can't possibly see what might happen there. What's that? Autocracy? Naaaah, I'm sure it'll be just fine. After all, the folks running for office keep telling me it'll be fine so it must be fine!
its part of the mrxst plan to usher in univrsal bsc incm income that will only be allotted to those who follow party lines just look borders around the world are starting to fade people are being shuffled about the global ist are winning
@@TheRogueWolf I genuinely don't understand how they think capitalist dream realistic. There is no such thing as infinite growth, at some point you have to be content with what you have because income stagnates. It's what happens right now, the only way to increase income further short term is to cut the people who generate your income. It is a paradox.
@@deathsyth8888 I compare corporations to the Rogue Paperclip AI, that would kill humanity and destroy the planet in order to maximize fulfilling its purpose of making paperclips. Corporations are designed to pursue profits at all costs, so if they can break the law, pollute, kill people, and destroy the planet, but make a profit, they will do it. The people in charge have already abandoned their humanity to the machine.
They are funded by Vanguard and BlackRock who are the major shareholders. This means they get to dictate what EA does. The consequences of not following the ESG mandates for EA are more dire than losing costumers. In short if they do not obey Vanguard and BlackRock investment groups EA is gone as a brand and company. This is why we get the AAA slop these days.
"I played them in EA games" Ah yes when i talk about my favorite games I always list the company not the title. "Whenever i play as totodile in Nintendo games I feel alive" Natural
Yeah... and we've been hearing this for more than a decade now, in case of some companies (like EA) for closer to 15 now. Yet here we are: said companies are still bringing trucks of money for the investors, games are still bad, but we keep telling ourselves "the house will start burning down any second now!".
@@MrQwertyman111 Yeah but Ubisoft is breaking down, we see cuts left and right at every major company, and they push more and more towards predatory sales practice nonetheless. In short, they've reached a profit theshhold. The only way to increase profits further is cutting the people who make your money. And that is bound to fail.
Seriously, last couple of days I was like "Hmm, I wonder how EA would top all these mess on the industry" Then this happen. Not EA best/worst act, but they still deliver
@@MrQwertyman111 Games 10-15 years ago were starting to become mediocre, they started milking them heavily then, now they're actually bad and the decline is accelerating. Be objective and see
I don't think EA will tank, as long as they can keep the sports licenses. People will keep buying the roster updates, and they'll keep buying the the cards for the special modes, year after year. And honestly, that's about all EA has. Sports games, Sims, and some SW titles.
@@Axterix13thing is even those sports games are seeing dips. People are finally catching on that they're shit cash grabs and last year's copy has all the same features the new one has
@@Axterix13 That's the real sad bit. A good company could take two major popular culture licenses and a brand with a broad audience, make gobs of money, and not sell their soul. EA...well...man, you just gotta love securities law for publicly-traded companies (let's face it, that's the real problem here, the "shareholder value" structure that's baked into every shareholder lawsuit that the courts allow.)
No, they won't tank because there always have been and will be people willing to buy the same game every year, and also throwing money at some "surprise mechanic" in order to get that one epic player/card/whatever to build their roster upon. We thought EA would tank when series like Fifa or Madden went down the drain about 15 years ago, yet here we are. People enjoy playing the same thing over and over again, just with a new package, and they don't see anything wrong with paying for the same extra bits again. Even if it's borderline gambling.
@@grindcoreninja6527 CEOs are the most replaceable, followed by investors, shareholders, and managers*. Mind you that is managers as they are now, not the platonic ideal of managers. The platonic ideal of managers would be untouchable because they make everything else function better, unfortunately those managers do not exist in the AAA spaces.
The Twilight Zone (1959) S5E33: "The Brain Center at Whipple's" Recap In 1967, Wallace V. Whipple (Richard Deacon), the owner of a vast manufacturing corporation, decides to upgrade his plant to increase output by installing the "X109B14 modified transistorized totally automatic assembly machine", which leads to layoffs as more and more of the plant's employees are replaced by robots or computers. Some of his former employees try to convince him that the value of a man outweighs the value of a machine, but their protests fall on deaf ears. Eventually, the company's board of directors, finding Whipple neurotically obsessed with machines, decide to retire him. Whipple joins his former plant manager, replaced by another computer earlier, at the bar opposite his factory and expresses deep sorrow at his misfortune ("It isn't fair, Hanley! It isn't fair the way they... diminish us"), now that a robot runs his office.
They are the most easy to replace once AI attain superior analytical skills. AI don't have imagination but they sure can do analysis based on information and numbers.
I'm a prolific game modder & I would NOT touch that POS with a barge pole, granted in 2017 I removed Fallout 4 & Skyrim SE the day a Cash Shop was added to a game I bought years before. So I may be more extreme than most in that objection, However I now own both F4 & SSE on GOG, precisely because ALL cash shops are banned on GOG SPGs, so it's been removed. The ban is a fundamental consequence of GOG Galaxy being optional for ANY Single Player, nowadays the reality of online gaming requires a store client serves as the games client. Consoles forced this, then charged users to access game servers, on PC it's free, but GOG has a parity of service clause & that means Single Player modes/games must be offline.
Sims 4 forever is a horrible idea. It was a crappy mess when it was just the base game but with all the DLC its near unplayable at times. Considering the history of it; most of us who know the game and its history fully expected for EA to jump into developing the Sims 5 immediately, but no they doubled down and kept pumping out shallow content lacking in gameplay.
I think people underestimate Sims' importance to EA. It's a cash cow with a loyal fanbase who keeps buying the grossly overpriced dlc no matter how much controversy or lack of content there is. I do think they will regret not making Sims 5 though, it's pretty clear many developers see the life sim genre as a good opportunity. Even if Inzoi/Paralives fail to steal significant players, 10 years is more than enough time for others to succeed.
@@lenblake4752It's pretty clear on that one. Even the loyal Sims fans were pointing out it was just EA wanting to continue to milk the Sims 4 for eternity, completely ignoring the game is getting more unplayable by the day because the game was built on code that was originally meant for an MMO
Love the bit where they tell the AI to "make two characters with weapons" and one of the characters is literally just Lifeline from Apex Legends, and it even says "Lifeline" above it...
Funny how that didn't stop them when Sims 3 came out, or when Sims 4 first did. Heck, look at Train Sim World or Farming Simulator, games that go with "new release and buy all the DLC again" business models and new copy-pasted games every couple of years.
the moment a service company starts spending more time talking to investors than the consumers they service, you know the industry is broken. we are not their clients, we are the product they sell to investors.
All this AI bubble keeps me wondering : who thoses executives think they will sell their AI made products once they replaced nearly all the workers with AI ? It is already a major problem accross all Western economy : people dont earn enough money to buy stuff. And it keeps getting worse with their price gouging and their policy of crashing down salaries income.
It's part of the plan to reset the economy and put everyone on Universal Basic Income. Create a financial/economic problem. Have the population react to the problem. Offer the predetermined solution. Steps 2 and 3 of the "Four Steps for Ideological Subversion". Destabilization - *the purpose of this step is to change the status quo, particularly the country's economy,* foreign relations, and defense systems. *The intent is to create a massive government permeating society and becoming intrusive in the lives of its citizens. This can take from two to five years to perform, again with the active support of academia pushing youth in this direction. Here, entitlements and benefits are promised to the populace to encourage their support. Basically, they are bribing the people to accept their programs.* Bezmenov claims after this stage is completed, the naive college professors are no longer needed and since they will undoubtedly protest government policies when they discover the truth, they will be disposed of quickly. He cites examples of this occurring in Nicaragua, Grenada, Afghanistan, and Bangladesh. Crisis-This is a major step lasting up to six weeks and involves a revolutionary change of power. This is where a cataclysmic event (false flag event, civil war, invasion) upsets and divides the country thereby creating panic among the citizens. To Americans, symptoms would include circumventing the Constitution (re: Use "privately owned" social media sites to restrict free speech/First Amendment rights and collect personal data on the citizens) and altering the checks and balances of government, and possible martial law. *Creation of economic, financial and national security crisis.* Also includes social crisis and a breakdown of previously self-evident restrictions on moral behavior. - *The Cloward-Piven approach is used to create more takers than producers* … The Cloward-Piven strategy is a political strategy outlined in 1966 by American sociologists and political activists Richard Cloward and Frances Fox Piven. The strategy aims to utilize "militant anti poverty groups" to *facilitate a "political crisis" by overloading the welfare system via an increase in welfare claims, forcing the creation of a system of guaranteed minimum income and "redistributing income through the federal government".* The authors pinned their hopes on creating disruption within the Democratic Party: "Conservative Republicans are always ready to declaim the evils of public welfare, and they would probably be the first to raise a hue and cry. But deeper and politically more telling conflicts would take place within the Democratic coalition...Whites - both working class ethnic groups and many in the middle class - would be aroused against the ghetto poor, while liberal groups, which until recently have been comforted by the notion that the poor are few... would probably support the movement. Group conflict, spelling political crisis for the local party apparatus, would thus become acute as welfare rolls mounted and the strains on local budgets became more severe.” …. *The crisis produces benevolent leaders who will promise to deliver things to meet people's needs through “hope and change” through social and economic justice. False illusion that the situation is under control if strategic directions are followed-Bailouts, regulations of industry and so forth.*
I am sorry, but if "Jim" doesn't know what a video game is, but is investing money in the business of making them, then he needs to be fired. Investors need to know exactly what they are investing in.
Fired? By who? Lol thats not how investment and investment firms work. And the firms with hierarchies promote this behavior. It isn't the product that matters, it's everything else.
They can’t be fired from investing, but if they’re investing in a company or industry they know little about, then that’s their risk and they shouldn’t have been so dumb with their cash
@@crapshot321 You can stand by it, but Jim invests in a variety of businesses. He can't know them all. He can't know most of them. So he has to use universal stuff, like what's on financial statements, and a bunch of graphs and revenue projections produced by analysts. What makes or breaks his career is his ability to jump on a hype train early, and get off just before everyone else wants to.
For what it's worth I like the brief description of what the topic is in the thumbnail. Recently many videos on this channel have been ONLY clickbait in the titles / thumbnails which at least makes me much less likely to click on the video.
@@heroiam4067 Oh I definitely agree - which is a shame because I'm sure I've missed great videos because I couldn't even tell what the news topic was through the clickbait =/
Issue is people like me, who just use Bellular as my daily dose of gaming news and hasn't read a title in forever, and people who have no interaction with the channel that become statistically more likely to click when clickbait is applied. Can't fault them for trying to get their bag you know?
@@thehob3836 This is always the argument, but it makes ZERO sense for a news channel to not say what they're actually discussing somewhere in the title / thumbnail. Maybe I'm just old school but I like to actually know the news I'm ingesting before I see it
I h a t e the use of the term AI, it's not even close to the concept of what true A.I. is.... it's advanced algorithms with deep databases, like ol boy said in the video singular machine learning. People are brand sheep
"AI" has _never_ meant "machine sapience" to those in the field, that was a creation of SF writers. Artificial Intelligence is like artificial sweetener: a way to fake it without using the real thing. Voice recognition is real, true, genuine, actual AI: it solves a problem we used to think needed intelligence, without using intelligence. "Artificial" intelligence. Any why would anyone want to invent machine sapience in the first place? To create even more workers to compete for jobs? They'll probably demand higher pay, then slack off even more than human workers. What would be the point?
To be fair, EA made mockery of games since the 90s. I was still in my teens when I decided to never give them a single cent again, stuck with that ever since and never looked back.
AI... 🤣 That's just something they made within 5 minutes inside Frostbite and then they've put a graphic over the top to make it look like it was AI generated.
The huge issue here again is .. AI is a thing that is barely functional and will come with huge downsides. The company does not care. They will always attempt to create MVPs, meaning the minimum invest for the biggest payout. That always ends up being utterly destructive for the products and workforce. Because in an execs and investors mind, the best thing is just money that grows out of nowhere. Which is what AI is 'promising' to do. If you ignore literally around you, the limitations of AI and how bad a product you get. You simply ignore reality at this point. Does it stop companies from making the utterly wrong decissions? No. Do companies get to eat the consequences of their bad decissions? Most likely not. The market is simply unbalanced and not in favor for both trade partners of the transaction. Utterly unsustainable and since everyone plays it wrong, with huge consequences to our society and economy as a whole..
@@canariawing just because the big name studios that were good 10 years ago are bad now, doesn’t mean there aren’t 10 other new big studios that are awesome. Gaming is so far from being bad, I don’t have enough time to play all the games.
AI have its usecases, it's not bad by itself, it's these companies misusing them. It's a tool, just like everything else, just the wrong application for it.
That chaotic mashup with the cardboard box dumpster fire is such a horrid example of player-driven content creation... I can't even imagine how or why the investors saw this and thought "ooo, that looks so innovative and cool!" If they want some quality player-made content, then just do what Daybreak did with EverQuest II -- they opened the ingame Marketplace up to player-made creations, with profit-sharing for the creators and curation by the devs to keep the selection of high quality. That's one of the core problems with letting AI create content independently -- it has no idea what "quality" is, so it just chucks out a dumpster fire of whatever fits the keyword because sooner or later something will stick. And that's sooo not the way to develop a game!
The cardboard box thing looks better than most Roblox games, I'd say. But I doubt the investors thought it was anything special; it's not like EA's stock has been rocketing up. The college football game was real investor news, this slop just went straight down the memory-hole.
Andrew Wilson told our team that we couldn’t have any personal items visible above our cubes. If you’ve ever worked at a game studio, you know how lame this was, but I guess he just couldn’t tolerate the sight of a few action figures on the way to his office. That is the kind of guy Wilson is. He doesn’t care about the games or the employees. Only the stock price matters.
It's amazing how videogame companies will do anything to avoid improving their AI behaviour that they will go out of their way to try and apply advancements in AI to everything except their games actual AI. I think AI is not quite where it needs to be yet, but when it is, the first thing it will be good at is mimicing player behaviour. It's literally what it's for. It won't be good at creating well balanced gameplay and assets, that will come later. I look forward to the day when an AI can dynamically reprogram a game on the fly but that day is not today.
Ah, but good ai requires EA and other greedy AAA companies to... gasp... PAY PROGRAMMERS to design it so it works well and with few bugs! No, instead, they want to "make" generative ai that... removes the necessity of paying more employees. Until they find out what data decay is, that is.
If I were an investor, I'd be less inclined to invest in EA after their demonstration. Because if they can do that, then so can an open source collective. And at that point, EA is done. Their advantage is that they are big, so can fund a bunch of projects, including some expensive, long term ones, and can afford licenses. Shift away from that and why invest in them?
Bruh, a The Sims Movie? What kinda shit are these people smoking? Never in my wildest dreams would i have imagined anyone would think that is a good idea
I love how AI stuff is always “the good stuff existed for 15 years while everything else is scam and sparkles”. We have turned even progress as a species in a scam to make more money.
if it's made to reduce the number of humans involved, it's a negative, the industrial revolution allowed more people to work, be separating tasks into single easy to do steps, and then hiring workers to just repeat one of those steps over and over again, that was a good thing, allowing the average man to make a living wage, automation is the opposite of that, it's regression, reducing the number of jobs available, the average man can no longer get a living wage, we're going back to pre-industrial times, where there are only specialist jobs, there will be no jobs for the average man, just like pre-industrial times.
I'm sorry, but that's is the future, it's a sh*t future but that's what will happen, as a business perspective, less workers = less wages = more money.
@@liuwang9899 less workers = less people with money = less customers = less profits = less money. you need as many people making money as possible to increase your profits, firing everyone and replacing them with machines that only cost money and don't buy things seems kinda counter-productive in that sense.
The industrial revolution was automation, though. I don't think there's a difference there. We're in for tough times with AI because of the delusions about it, and the inevitable collapse of the many companies that go all-in on it, but that's what makes a bubble. The use of AI in applicant screening is wrecking so many industries right now. But the problem with AI in particular is that _it_ _doesn't_ _work,_ or at least not yet. It's not actually any good at what it does (yet), but deluded execs are leaning into it. Gonna be a rough landing.
@@SkorjOlafsen the industrial revolution was separating building something into smaller simpler steps that could be done by unskilled workers, with days or weeks of training, rather than needing specialized craftsmen that took decades to train. it's basically what allowed the human population to balloon to multiple billions. automation really started in the 70's with the microprocessor, being able to program machines to do these simple tasks humans once had to do, and i believe will be the cause of the human population to start to decrease at an ever more rapid pace.
@@AKATenn The industrial revolution started with the lifting of water out of mines by steam power - automation replacing human workers, leaving miners (more skilled than walking a treadmill). Powered looms increased the productivity of weavers, and the Jacquard machine automated them, using punch cards, patented in 1804. Automation is not a new concept, it pre-dates the industrial revolution. Steam power to drive machines that could benefit from automation while producing something is a 19th century combination, that has gradually grown from niche to ubiquitous. Steam shovels go back to around 1800, guys with shovels replaced by skilled equipment operators. You can find examples in just about any industry. Manufacturing lines are just a corner of the industrial revolution.
It's amazing seeing both Ubisoft and EA near nerf themselves to the ground. The state of the industry is always growing, newer, better games are being made by new studios.
How so? The music industry is doing quite well - not as good as the ten years when everyone bought their collection over again in CD format, but better than most of history. The _music_ took a real hit, but as Paul Simon wrote "the music suffers baby, the music business thrives".
Not that Bethesda has normalized the concept of paid mods I wouldn't be surprised if more companies start to jump in on that same sort of thing. I mean, why pay employees to create compelling content for your games when you can get someone in their bedroom to do it for you for relatively cheap, without needing to worry about giving them any sort of benefits or anything, and not having to worry about them unionising? Sounds like a big win for major publishers.
I'm still boycotting Ubisoft over their position on NFTs. So "investor facing" positions are not necessarily a wash for gamers. It might actually fuck them, because WE pay the bills, not the investors.
It's funny, but I mentioned to a friend of mine that only one company REALLY understood the idea of NFTs the way they were originally pitched to consumers.... except those tokens turned out to be VERY fungible: Nintendo. What companies originally pitched were digital Amiibos that couldn't be re-sold. And then people kept going "what if we gave them LESS for what they paid?", until NFTs just became a joke. Meanwhile, Big N is over in Tokyo going "So what's the next set of RFID action figures we can put out that'll make people give us millions of dollars?" and the meh ones make decent bank while the popular ones turn fans into Philip J. Fry in the "Take my money" meme.
@@INF2.160 Not anymore, you're probably right. But Assassin's Creed 4 and Far Cry 3 are still pretty great. South Park: The Stick of Truth is to date my favourite screen to game adaptation of all time. But as of 2024, they probably don't have enough talent remaining to be worth keeping around.
the video creator failed at seeing what EA actually showed. This was not addressing game consumers but game developers. Remember EA is a game DISTRIBUTER ? pair that game creator with your own launcher in the long term and you have a money printer.
In a move surprising precisely no one at all, EA delivers yet another reason not to give them any money. It's actually amazing at this point, though perhaps not in a sense EA would like very much. Or even have the institutional capacity in the upper echelons to comprehend anyway, by the looks of things.
What do you have against retirees? I mean, maybe your country pays enough from the government to actually live on, but most people need a pension or investments to add to that to not be eating cat food. Believe it or not, one day you too will be old.
@@nullpoint3346 ??? You either try to make do with a government check (ever-less buying power in the US), or you have a pension, or enough money to do better. That's a tautology, no? So directly or indirectly, most retirees are investors, otherwise they'd still be working. Most people in the US have some stock investments, through a 401K or pension plan; it's not some lofty class. Before the 2008 crash it was 2/3rds of adults IIRC.
@@SkorjOlafsen I do live in a first world country that have a pension system. Well this is a video about video games and how most investors don't know or care anything about games, just short term wins, they are actively ruining gaming together with greedy leaderships.
That beginning analogy about share holders just gave me a new perspective on why large companies, like EA, won't ever give the consumers what they ask for. Indie and AA.companies have much more to lose in PR. EA on the other hand needs to please 1 group of people, and it's not their customers.
How do these people stay CEOs? Do the shareholders not want their investment to grow and make them more money? And what is up with all of these AAA game studios being allergic to making good decisions that could/would make them millions more?
Because the masses enthusiastically and increasingly hand over gobs of money for content of all sorts that makes "Ow, my balls!" look Shakespearian by comparison.
People have gotten so used to consuming mindlessly they forgot why these products existed in the first place. A game isn't just content you paid for, it's art people made...
You don't understand artificial intelligence and that's pretty clear. Especially where it's going. This is the worst it's ever going to be it is the very beginning of exploring the possibilities. All this anti-Ai stuff is just hilarious to me. I know change is scary, but change with it or you'll be left behind. There is no other option. There is nothing you can do.
In the end, EA being "the most hated company" is a bunch of BS. If that was the case, consumers wouldn't keep buying their products. Voting with the cash is what makes these dollar-sign-eyed folk feel a slap on the face. In the past, videogame CEO's were programmers and visionaries, enthusiasts of the media. It's been already a lot of years since now CEO = business executive. Andrew is an EA veteran yes, but since its inception he's always been a capital raiser. His idea of "player friendly" meant = more variations on how to make the player spend money.
I haven't bought any EA games in over 10 years, probably 15 and I've never regretted it. All their games are disasters, or just mediocre cash grabs. Plus they are so anti-consumer and predatory it's pretty disgusting. Personally I think EA is a huge threat to the entire game industry, they need to go away. Also I'm pretty sure Andrew Wilson is a Terminator sent from the future to destroy us all, he's definitely not human.
5:40, I think you misinterpret how awesome it is for game devs. It is not meant to be binary tool that will make a game for you, but if you want to prototype something quickly, see how an idea feels without putting 400 work hours just to get an idea, this is a game changer.
These companies end goal is to have a "pay per prompt" user controlled game creation tool, that allows them to do nothing, while players play with generic slop, and need to pay more to recreate their own crappy FPS game that rips off real games they actually trained the Ai on.
xanex is just some douche. Godot needs to respond well sure, but let's see how they cook in the next days. I've already seen way enough about the godot thing, not really enough meat to the story yet.
a publicly traded company's real product is the money that they "sell" to investors. Such a company that makes games is not interested in the people who buy the games.
It´s so funny how all those AAA companies still try to recreate Roblox or stuff like IMVU which got hella rich with user generated content. They fail to see though, that the reason why experienced people made custom content for those sandboxes in the first place, was because they´re actually getting paid for it. I know people who got stupidly rich (compared to average 9-5) with just creating custom props for random 3D chat rooms.
The ultimate in corporate efficiency - AI generated games for: Minimal development time. Minimal development cost. Minimal required employees. Minimal fun. Minimal gamers playing the game.
Yeah do it! Go all in on AI! Cuz the only thing they´ll archive is further decreasing AAA quality, giving indie another grow boost. Especially now that making games becomes ever more easy and cheaper.
"Look at this shinny new tech we have" Says the ceo while showing to a room full of stupid investors tech that has already existed for a few years already.
I used to think that the clueless, greedy and heartless evil executive villains on cartoons I watched as a kid were an exaggeration. Now I realize that the cartoons were, if anything, too kind and humanizing.
Let me ruin The Sims Movie. What it should be is a "foreign film" shot entirely in Simlish and subtitled in every region, with a story of a new family moving in, and getting acclimated with the town. They meet the Goth family, where the main character Dad hits it off with Bella Goth, while the main character Mom, without any cooking training, attempts to cook on the stove for everyone, resulting in a fire and her untimely death. Main character Dad then decides that he's going to off Mortimer Goth, so he can marry Bella Goth and acquire their wealth while replacing his dead wife at the same time. He builds a pool and hosts a pool party, waiting until Mort drives in, then sells the ladder out of the pool, leaving Mort to drown, as he can't climb the side of the pool because game logic. The movie ends with main character Dad and Bella Goth doing their best Brady bunch impression into the credits. Now, if the movie does this and I wasn't financially enriched beforehand, I have a case for creative theft and can sue. Otherwise, they can't use this idea because I've hated ea since they failed SimCity, not buying a single game from them since.
The IDEA is great. Having artists able to generate code for their ideas at a moment's notice without heavy reliance on programmers is great. The execution is just awful.
The moment I saw Ubisoft saying "We won't replace writers,programmers,etc with AI", I immediately knew that the entire Industry would rush to use the trend to milk money as quick as possible, or in this case, save costs. Then,when the games, because it would be more than just one, a lot of people will be fired but the higher ups who cause ALL OF THIS, will just throw a cheap apology/excuse but keep their sweet bonus while sniffing the next trend.
![ลองสั่งของจากแอพ temu ถูกจริงหรอ?? ( part : 1/2 ) [โกงไหมครับ ep.89 ] | DOM](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/RTcZSQTiDZw/mqdefault.jpg)
![เปิดบ้าน พี่ตูน Bodyslam หลังใหม่คนแรก ที่ภูเก็ต l [Nickynachat]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/flFwcmyDQSk/mqdefault.jpg)
To try everything Brilliant has to offer-free-for a full 30 days, visit brilliant.org/BellularNews . You’ll also get 20% off an annual premium subscription. Sponsored by Brilliant.
Ea is the og bad guys
13:25 - Kinda wild you said machine leaarning isn't AI, when it's the literal foundation of generative AI, or whatever it is you think "AI" actually means. Or I think maybe the problem is with the word "intelligence", since that word by itself seems to have a different definition depending on context and who you ask.
I have been boycotting EA games for the past 10 years. Seems like this boycott will continue lol
Not much of a boycott if all of their games for the past 8 years have been objectively shit 😂 (I agree with you, the only EA games in my library are NFS hot pursuit and battlefield 1)
would you continue once the company shuts down?
@@JNJNRobin1337 What if you could then but he pointed South can go. What then?
Easy to bocott a publisher who produces garbage games or copy-paste sequels to titles you most likely played years ago.
Frankly Battlefield 3 was the last game ive bought from them. So yeah, dont feel like im missing anything.
When you hear "X isn't merely a buzzword" it actually a buzzword.
I read that as Buzz-Sword and was briefly in a more hopeful timeline.
Denials are usually lies. If a Hotel needs to issue a statement that their rooms are clean don't stay there.
@RorikH - ngl now I'm imagining looting a fantasy videogame weapon with that item name; the Buzz Sword!
"X" ? Do you mean Twitter?
The problem with the current state of games is that the big guys calling the shots dont know anything about games and they are trying to please investors who also know nothing about games, so no matter how passionate de development team is the game will always be a bit soulless and in current years they came out just a *liiiiiiiiiiiiitle bit* more soulless
@@ChinaResidence yeah it’s so bad!! I hate what has happened to the gaming industry. They just don’t give a shit.
The day major gaming companies went public became the day they made a pact with the devil, and now he's coming to collect his share
That is why so many small studios come out on top right now. They are passionate and make games people really want to play.
And then there is Gabe "piracy is a service problem" Newell.
@@cayreet5992Sadly eventually a lot of those studios will be taken over by the major video game companies like so many beforehand
Well he isn't called Andrew "Android" Wilson for nothing
They want to use AI to cut so much cost so andrew and his shareholders het a far bigger cut
well he's going to get cut from the company
alongside roughly 80% of the company
What if AI determines the investments and becomes the AI Board, answered to by AI C-levels?
Will the rich eventually see AI as a leopard ready to eat their faces?
@@blackjacktrialno, they’ll hire college graduate human shields as unpaid interns to feed the leopards
EA investors need to understand that the company’s bottom line will improve drastically by replacing the CEO with AI.
That these people in the industry think that anything worthwhile can be achieved with the minimum of effort is alarming. They literally believe that "we" are idiots......
I already thought EA was Heartless and Soulless, than I saw them using the AI to build a game, and now I know there will be no Redemption.
If they released it to the public it would've been amazing. BUT NO! They use it for their own games. I don't mind but I do with the way they do with the results. I.e. Actually manually working on the game (Which they should continue doing if they want to stay afloat.) I can see the whole ai thing being useful for the basics right now, but nothing more.
Every big company is that way. Profit is at the forefront.
Yeah, that AI being used the wrong way to take over for voice actors, music, and movie/visual arts etc is such a trash situation.
Now EA is brainless
@@LoneCanadianPoet in "fifa" gamnes I see ai voice being useful, (they never, ever add my normal dutch name into the game and all I pl;ay is player career where I would love to have commentary call my name...)
There's nothing investors love more than the idea of firing all those expensive employees.
The ideal conpany has a CEO, CFO, CCO and no one else.
Actually scratch that.
They want to go full Jetsons where you have the CEO, a middling salary tech who works 3 days a week and everything else is handled by an AI computer abd its robots.
@@Goatcha_M Naw, you need an office full of people so you can buy real estate. It creates its own value.
Frankly, I’m sure an AI can do a better job than the average executive, and for a much lower price.
The company I work for has two C-acronym job titles, the CEO and CFO. Everyone else at the head of a department has a VP title. This is as it should be (especially since the company's not a megacorp.)
Well of course, they only want the employees that do exactly what they want.
You could use AI to give creators convenient tools to make their work easier, help the disabled, and support society in useful ways.
But of course you could also exploit as many people as possible. Naturally.
@@Mediados they are nothing for excuses.
Economy is where humanity ends.
money money money money money money money money money
There is a company not too far from me that is using AI to help disabled people communicate better. Unfortunately, the ones that get the attention are the ones who exploit it.
Usually automation tools are understood as such: they'll increase productivity, so you'll need fewer workers per product (yay, greed), but the lower cost could mean the business grows and you'll end up with more workers overall (yay, greed). Somehow, though, there's this delusion that AI will replace workers entirely. That would be a joke, except we know deluded execs will fire mass waves of people, and the failures will only come much later.
I'm not spending 100$ for AI to make a game using assets. Tf?
That's not the plan.The goal is to release games with AI tools for users to make more content. Very much like how you most likely purchased games like Skyrim or Fallout because you love to see what mods players create for it.
What the EA executives don't understand is that AI can't and never will be a substitute for user-generated content made by an amatuer game developer or hobbyist creator.
@@KryyssTV The reason why AI can't work is because Gaming is illogical. Concord had so much funding and didn't last a month. Meanwhile Among Us became one of the greatest successes in years. There is no pattern to find here, it depends on people.
@@Mediados What you're seeing there isn't random but rather based upon trends. As such you see games that accidently fall into a trend as it starts while others completely miss it. Corporate gaming is a victim of their desire to only focus on what they call AAA titles which are iften initiated once a trend is identified but due to their lengthy development time frequently get released as the trend is over.
Trends are by their nature somewhat predictable. If a market is saturated with one genre then consumers will turn to something entirely different. Again the corporate games industry is extremely limited in what they can offer which is why you see the indie market floushing. After yesrs of live service FPS multiplayer games it is no wonder that single player or coop beat-em-ups like Wu Kong and TMNT are currently trending because they're so different to the last trend. So while you may not know for certain what the next trend will be, you do know what it will NOT be.
Video games are truly art
And yet people keep doing it...
The A.I. got it wrong, "make it epic". It wasn't purple. It failed.
The AI video that EA showed to their investors was not showcasing any technology that they’ve built. It’s a teaser to show what they would like to build. Even building the tech that would do what they’re showing in the video would take a decade. It would take so long for them to get there that it’s not really relevant to gamers of today. It’s annoying but it’s pie in the sky thinking. It’s like the NFT game craze of 2020.
Right right. More like a "proof of concept" than a fully developed game.
It is propaganda for investors. We should always listen and beware, but they are trying to screw the investors as much or more than they are trying to screw their customers.
@@hikingglint9648 probably not even that, more like a concept video only, since proof of concept would mean they've achieved something already in practice.
There's a disclaimer at the bottom of the first few seconds of the video saying that it depicts an early-stage concept only.
It's like date night on the timeline of sending your future child to college.
There's gonna be a reckoning once the AI bubble burst and people realise it's not a magic bullet that makes games for free. And even if it worked nobody would want to play them, the same way that nobody is listening to AI music on Spotify: it's human creativity and imperfection that makes good games/music/art/etc.
For sure
You'd be surprised to see how much AI music there seems to be on Spotify... 😅
doesn't matter, venture capitalists don't care if the products they are investing succeeds or busts, all they care is the market speculation. whenever a bubble bursts, someone made a fuckton of money, even if an entire company gets caught in the conflagration.
While it is true that this garbage tool won't work to generate whole games, the same can't be said about using AI to make game scripts. Chat GPT 4o works surprisingly well for that purpose.
They have good AI tools and uses, they just don't advertise them that much and focus on the eye candy to attract investors, which is what created this bubble in the first place.
As if people want to play the slop humans are producing now? I'm pretty sure even an AI can come up with something better than Dustborn.
This guy is one big reason EA became one of the most hated publishers there are. And not a single game the company has in the making is even remotely something i would even consider pirating.
Lets hope dragon age fails so miserable the investors go beserk on his readend.
hey man i want to play battlefield again so at least hope dice is doing their best :^(
The Jedi series is good, though. And although I'm skeptical and will wait to pass judgement upon release, many people that have played The Veilguard say it's good.
Edit: Before anyone claims I'm an EA apologist, the Jedi series are the only current EA games I've enjoyed. Also, I'm a Dragon Age fan that is skeptical about The Veilguard, but remains hopeful.
@@VisiblyShaking EA wants you to pay them and then make it yourself 🤣
@@VisiblyShaking Dice would make a good game, and then EA will step in taint it all to shit with their shitty business ambition
@@MyUsualComment dead space remake is good too
Investors dream of companies with zero employees, so that every dollar made goes to them. Who'll buy those products when nobody has a job? That's someone else's problem.
I always wondered about this little snag.....
Upper Management in most companies at this point:
"We should fire everyone but the people we ABSOLUTELY need, and even then keep the barest minimum possible to run."
Nobody:
"Where will people get money to buy your product?"
Upper Management in most companies at this point:
"Why aren't people buying the trash product I can barely manage to produce with this skeleton crew?? MUST BE PEOPLE STEALING!"
Yep, and a lot of fools in this country somehow think that "businessmen" should RUN the whole country. Can't possibly see what might happen there. What's that? Autocracy? Naaaah, I'm sure it'll be just fine. After all, the folks running for office keep telling me it'll be fine so it must be fine!
its part of the mrxst plan to usher in univrsal bsc incm income that will only be allotted to those who follow party lines just look borders around the world are starting to fade people are being shuffled about the global ist are winning
@@TheRogueWolf I genuinely don't understand how they think capitalist dream realistic. There is no such thing as infinite growth, at some point you have to be content with what you have because income stagnates.
It's what happens right now, the only way to increase income further short term is to cut the people who generate your income. It is a paradox.
"Yes, the (company/industry/economy/nation/planet) got destroyed; but for a beautiful moment in time we created a lot of value for shareholders."
@@deathsyth8888 I compare corporations to the Rogue Paperclip AI, that would kill humanity and destroy the planet in order to maximize fulfilling its purpose of making paperclips.
Corporations are designed to pursue profits at all costs, so if they can break the law, pollute, kill people, and destroy the planet, but make a profit, they will do it. The people in charge have already abandoned their humanity to the machine.
Bellular: "EA Games Just Made A Mockery Of Games"
Me: EA's existence IS a mockery of games.
Don't buy it. If you don't buy it they realize they are wrong
@@randomclod385 I can't wait to see everyone's face when it amounts to being a hyper social Fortnite clone.
They are funded by Vanguard and BlackRock who are the major shareholders. This means they get to dictate what EA does. The consequences of not following the ESG mandates for EA are more dire than losing costumers. In short if they do not obey Vanguard and BlackRock investment groups EA is gone as a brand and company. This is why we get the AAA slop these days.
@@Brakka86 They totally didn't try that before with the Firestorm mode for Battlefield V and the whole 2142 thing.
i dont know a single person that buys sports games and yet theyre still best sellers
The talking point about AI being a useful tool for the end user died pretty quickly, didn’t it?
It could be, but the people in charge of finding uses are not exactly competent...
Oh, eventually it will be, but it's dark days ahead as the delusion plays itself out.
"I played them in EA games"
Ah yes when i talk about my favorite games I always list the company not the title.
"Whenever i play as totodile in Nintendo games I feel alive"
Natural
i know its not the point of your comment but ... Totodile? good choice
My mom, watching my brother and me playing Sega Genesis in 1991: "The kids are playing Nintendo."
@@Sleepy_Kitsune Mystery Dungeon fans rise up!
@@RorikH i was more talkin about gen 2 but im more then alright of supporting that statement
Every major gaming company is making an ass out of itself and i *LOVE* it.
Their time is running out and it cant happen too soon
Yeah... and we've been hearing this for more than a decade now, in case of some companies (like EA) for closer to 15 now. Yet here we are: said companies are still bringing trucks of money for the investors, games are still bad, but we keep telling ourselves "the house will start burning down any second now!".
@@MrQwertyman111 Yeah but Ubisoft is breaking down, we see cuts left and right at every major company, and they push more and more towards predatory sales practice nonetheless.
In short, they've reached a profit theshhold. The only way to increase profits further is cutting the people who make your money. And that is bound to fail.
Seriously, last couple of days I was like "Hmm, I wonder how EA would top all these mess on the industry" Then this happen.
Not EA best/worst act, but they still deliver
@@MrQwertyman111 Games 10-15 years ago were starting to become mediocre, they started milking them heavily then, now they're actually bad and the decline is accelerating. Be objective and see
@@MrQwertyman111 The house _is_ burning, they're just shoveling more wood into the fire like some sort of Dark Souls parody.
EA and Ubisoft will eventually Tank, they cannot keep up this negative trends
I don't think EA will tank, as long as they can keep the sports licenses. People will keep buying the roster updates, and they'll keep buying the the cards for the special modes, year after year.
And honestly, that's about all EA has. Sports games, Sims, and some SW titles.
@@Axterix13thing is even those sports games are seeing dips. People are finally catching on that they're shit cash grabs and last year's copy has all the same features the new one has
@@Axterix13 That's the real sad bit. A good company could take two major popular culture licenses and a brand with a broad audience, make gobs of money, and not sell their soul. EA...well...man, you just gotta love securities law for publicly-traded companies (let's face it, that's the real problem here, the "shareholder value" structure that's baked into every shareholder lawsuit that the courts allow.)
No, they won't tank because there always have been and will be people willing to buy the same game every year, and also throwing money at some "surprise mechanic" in order to get that one epic player/card/whatever to build their roster upon. We thought EA would tank when series like Fifa or Madden went down the drain about 15 years ago, yet here we are. People enjoy playing the same thing over and over again, just with a new package, and they don't see anything wrong with paying for the same extra bits again. Even if it's borderline gambling.
EA has NFL, UFC, what was FIFA (EAS FC), NHL and F1 licenses to make their official games. They not tanking anytime soon
Can't wait for the day they will replace CEOs by AI.
Oh, you know they'll never allow that, even though they're probably the most replaceable.
@@grindcoreninja6527 CEOs are the most replaceable, followed by investors, shareholders, and managers*.
Mind you that is managers as they are now, not the platonic ideal of managers. The platonic ideal of managers would be untouchable because they make everything else function better, unfortunately those managers do not exist in the AAA spaces.
The Twilight Zone (1959) S5E33: "The Brain Center at Whipple's"
Recap
In 1967, Wallace V. Whipple (Richard Deacon), the owner of a vast manufacturing corporation, decides to upgrade his plant to increase output by installing the "X109B14 modified transistorized totally automatic assembly machine", which leads to layoffs as more and more of the plant's employees are replaced by robots or computers. Some of his former employees try to convince him that the value of a man outweighs the value of a machine, but their protests fall on deaf ears.
Eventually, the company's board of directors, finding Whipple neurotically obsessed with machines, decide to retire him. Whipple joins his former plant manager, replaced by another computer earlier, at the bar opposite his factory and expresses deep sorrow at his misfortune ("It isn't fair, Hanley! It isn't fair the way they... diminish us"), now that a robot runs his office.
@@nullpoint3346 how tf are investors replaceable
They are the most easy to replace once AI attain superior analytical skills. AI don't have imagination but they sure can do analysis based on information and numbers.
I'm a prolific game modder & I would NOT touch that POS with a barge pole, granted in 2017 I removed Fallout 4 & Skyrim SE the day a Cash Shop was added to a game I bought years before.
So I may be more extreme than most in that objection, However I now own both F4 & SSE on GOG, precisely because ALL cash shops are banned on GOG SPGs, so it's been removed.
The ban is a fundamental consequence of GOG Galaxy being optional for ANY Single Player, nowadays the reality of online gaming requires a store client serves as the games client.
Consoles forced this, then charged users to access game servers, on PC it's free, but GOG has a parity of service clause & that means Single Player modes/games must be offline.
EA pulling a Ubisoft?
Hopefully
EA is pulling an EA, they are the original scum bags of the gaming industry.
EA jumping on the Roblox and UEFN bandwagon without any clue how to create a UGC platform or having any experience in making creatve editing apps.
@@Treshar For a while they dropped off my radar for lack of shitty business practice, glad they reminded me why we despise them.
@@Mediados For lack of NEW shitty business practices.. They never changed their old ways, it just became old news.
That AI demonstration was so obviously a completely faked "proof of concept" that it reminded me very strongly of Project Milo.
Makes you wonder now why should you pay 100-200$ for a game that was mostly made by Ai.
Sims 4 forever is a horrible idea. It was a crappy mess when it was just the base game but with all the DLC its near unplayable at times. Considering the history of it; most of us who know the game and its history fully expected for EA to jump into developing the Sims 5 immediately, but no they doubled down and kept pumping out shallow content lacking in gameplay.
I think people underestimate Sims' importance to EA. It's a cash cow with a loyal fanbase who keeps buying the grossly overpriced dlc no matter how much controversy or lack of content there is. I do think they will regret not making Sims 5 though, it's pretty clear many developers see the life sim genre as a good opportunity. Even if Inzoi/Paralives fail to steal significant players, 10 years is more than enough time for others to succeed.
@@lenblake4752It's pretty clear on that one. Even the loyal Sims fans were pointing out it was just EA wanting to continue to milk the Sims 4 for eternity, completely ignoring the game is getting more unplayable by the day because the game was built on code that was originally meant for an MMO
Someone at EA, "Roblox + AI?"
Everyone else at EA, "Well, its better than every other idea we got! Send it!"
Love the bit where they tell the AI to "make two characters with weapons" and one of the characters is literally just Lifeline from Apex Legends, and it even says "Lifeline" above it...
Sims 4 players have spent so much money and I think EA realized people aren’t keen to start all over…..
Funny how that didn't stop them when Sims 3 came out, or when Sims 4 first did. Heck, look at Train Sim World or Farming Simulator, games that go with "new release and buy all the DLC again" business models and new copy-pasted games every couple of years.
Lots of people like me who played Sims 4 are tired of how shity the game is and have moved on
I return to sailing the high sea because I hate EA, and only EA.
Yet it's the diehard Sims 4 players I've been seeing upset about Sims 5 being cancelled because the game is getting more unplayable
the moment a service company starts spending more time talking to investors than the consumers they service, you know the industry is broken. we are not their clients, we are the product they sell to investors.
All this AI bubble keeps me wondering : who thoses executives think they will sell their AI made products once they replaced nearly all the workers with AI ?
It is already a major problem accross all Western economy : people dont earn enough money to buy stuff. And it keeps getting worse with their price gouging and their policy of crashing down salaries income.
it's all about the short term
They're trying to return to the feudal days where only royals, nobles, and the very lucky merchants possess money and nobody else does.
It's part of the plan to reset the economy and put everyone on Universal Basic Income.
Create a financial/economic problem.
Have the population react to the problem.
Offer the predetermined solution.
Steps 2 and 3 of the "Four Steps for Ideological Subversion".
Destabilization - *the purpose of this step is to change the status quo, particularly the country's economy,* foreign relations, and defense systems. *The intent is to create a massive government permeating society and becoming intrusive in the lives of its citizens. This can take from two to five years to perform, again with the active support of academia pushing youth in this direction. Here, entitlements and benefits are promised to the populace to encourage their support. Basically, they are bribing the people to accept their programs.*
Bezmenov claims after this stage is completed, the naive college professors are no longer needed and since they will undoubtedly protest government policies when they discover the truth, they will be disposed of quickly. He cites examples of this occurring in Nicaragua, Grenada, Afghanistan, and Bangladesh.
Crisis-This is a major step lasting up to six weeks and involves a revolutionary change of power. This is where a cataclysmic event (false flag event, civil war, invasion) upsets and divides the country thereby creating panic among the citizens.
To Americans, symptoms would include circumventing the Constitution (re: Use "privately owned" social media sites to restrict free speech/First Amendment rights and collect personal data on the citizens) and altering the checks and balances of government, and possible martial law.
*Creation of economic, financial and national security crisis.* Also includes social crisis and a breakdown of previously self-evident restrictions on moral behavior.
- *The Cloward-Piven approach is used to create more takers than producers* …
The Cloward-Piven strategy is a political strategy outlined in 1966 by American sociologists and political activists Richard Cloward and Frances Fox Piven. The strategy aims to utilize "militant anti poverty groups" to *facilitate a "political crisis" by overloading the welfare system via an increase in welfare claims, forcing the creation of a system of guaranteed minimum income and "redistributing income through the federal government".*
The authors pinned their hopes on creating disruption within the Democratic Party:
"Conservative Republicans are always ready to declaim the evils of public welfare, and they would probably be the first to raise a hue and cry. But deeper and politically more telling conflicts would take place within the Democratic coalition...Whites - both working class ethnic groups and many in the middle class - would be aroused against the ghetto poor, while liberal groups, which until recently have been comforted by the notion that the poor are few... would probably support the movement. Group conflict, spelling political crisis for the local party apparatus, would thus become acute as welfare rolls mounted and the strains on local budgets became more severe.”
…. *The crisis produces benevolent leaders who will promise to deliver things to meet people's needs through “hope and change” through social and economic justice. False illusion that the situation is under control if strategic directions are followed-Bailouts, regulations of industry and so forth.*
They'll just try to kill us all.
Promt: "Make it less buggy"
AI: Removed the bees from the flowers.
I am sorry, but if "Jim" doesn't know what a video game is, but is investing money in the business of making them, then he needs to be fired. Investors need to know exactly what they are investing in.
investing is just watching a line buddy. line goes down, buy. line goes up, sell.
Fired? By who? Lol thats not how investment and investment firms work. And the firms with hierarchies promote this behavior. It isn't the product that matters, it's everything else.
@@SenkaZver I stand by my opinion.
They can’t be fired from investing, but if they’re investing in a company or industry they know little about, then that’s their risk and they shouldn’t have been so dumb with their cash
@@crapshot321 You can stand by it, but Jim invests in a variety of businesses. He can't know them all. He can't know most of them. So he has to use universal stuff, like what's on financial statements, and a bunch of graphs and revenue projections produced by analysts. What makes or breaks his career is his ability to jump on a hype train early, and get off just before everyone else wants to.
EA. I wouldn´t even consider pirating one of their games, let alone buy them. Especially if they become even more soulless by using AI.
yet will keep pirating them just to hurt them
Would AI generated stuff really be more soulless than the shit EA release these days? I'm honestly not convinced....
@PeteBaldwin are you sure that veil guard isn't ai generated? It would explain a lot.
For what it's worth I like the brief description of what the topic is in the thumbnail. Recently many videos on this channel have been ONLY clickbait in the titles / thumbnails which at least makes me much less likely to click on the video.
@@RaccChannel agree 100%. This one was a great video too.
@@heroiam4067 Oh I definitely agree - which is a shame because I'm sure I've missed great videos because I couldn't even tell what the news topic was through the clickbait =/
Issue is people like me, who just use Bellular as my daily dose of gaming news and hasn't read a title in forever, and people who have no interaction with the channel that become statistically more likely to click when clickbait is applied. Can't fault them for trying to get their bag you know?
Clickbait channel u say & with ppl liking ur comment hmm. He also left out the jump ahead option for premium users
@@thehob3836 This is always the argument, but it makes ZERO sense for a news channel to not say what they're actually discussing somewhere in the title / thumbnail. Maybe I'm just old school but I like to actually know the news I'm ingesting before I see it
Lmao ask the prompt to "make it multiplayer" lmaooooo
All the exploits, horrible netcode, yada yada
I h a t e the use of the term AI, it's not even close to the concept of what true A.I. is.... it's advanced algorithms with deep databases, like ol boy said in the video singular machine learning. People are brand sheep
i kinda call it animal intelligence as it is nowhere near on our level thou even that is to advanced for current "A I".
All the abominability of Abominable Intelligence, but so little of the actual intelligence.
@@RorikH yeah its more smart than intelligent
"AI" has _never_ meant "machine sapience" to those in the field, that was a creation of SF writers. Artificial Intelligence is like artificial sweetener: a way to fake it without using the real thing. Voice recognition is real, true, genuine, actual AI: it solves a problem we used to think needed intelligence, without using intelligence. "Artificial" intelligence.
Any why would anyone want to invent machine sapience in the first place? To create even more workers to compete for jobs? They'll probably demand higher pay, then slack off even more than human workers. What would be the point?
@@SkorjOlafsen for me its awsome thing to have in the games as i could have more living breathing world type of a thing.
To be fair, EA made mockery of games since the 90s. I was still in my teens when I decided to never give them a single cent again, stuck with that ever since and never looked back.
AI... 🤣 That's just something they made within 5 minutes inside Frostbite and then they've put a graphic over the top to make it look like it was AI generated.
I'm getting some serious Peter Molyneux "Project Milo" vibes from that presentation.
Then they get away by claiming, "that was a concept", so they can't be held accountable for making crap up.
Minecraft and others already did this, and they didn't need AI
"Please purchase our products. No livable wages or humane working environment. Only purchash our products!"
The huge issue here again is .. AI is a thing that is barely functional and will come with huge downsides. The company does not care. They will always attempt to create MVPs, meaning the minimum invest for the biggest payout. That always ends up being utterly destructive for the products and workforce. Because in an execs and investors mind, the best thing is just money that grows out of nowhere. Which is what AI is 'promising' to do. If you ignore literally around you, the limitations of AI and how bad a product you get. You simply ignore reality at this point.
Does it stop companies from making the utterly wrong decissions? No. Do companies get to eat the consequences of their bad decissions? Most likely not.
The market is simply unbalanced and not in favor for both trade partners of the transaction. Utterly unsustainable and since everyone plays it wrong, with huge consequences to our society and economy as a whole..
the age of AAA games truly is over. i hate this timeline i'm stuck living in. f*ck AI, this is torture
@@canariawing just because the big name studios that were good 10 years ago are bad now, doesn’t mean there aren’t 10 other new big studios that are awesome. Gaming is so far from being bad, I don’t have enough time to play all the games.
@@canariawing I don’t want to live in this world anymore…
AI have its usecases, it's not bad by itself, it's these companies misusing them. It's a tool, just like everything else, just the wrong application for it.
If you have EA stock, I would sell. I feel like this is just going to be another Ubisoft in 5 years.
probably less. the bubble is bursting fast
Brace yourselves. 1983 is coming.
The only reason EA is still alive today is because gamers voted with their money, gamers gave their money to EA.
video begins at 4:10
Since you clearly don't enjoy this content, why do you bother watching?
Dudes made one helpful comment on the channel chill out @@link5688
@@link5688 what made you think that?
@@clyp3016 thanks dude
That chaotic mashup with the cardboard box dumpster fire is such a horrid example of player-driven content creation... I can't even imagine how or why the investors saw this and thought "ooo, that looks so innovative and cool!"
If they want some quality player-made content, then just do what Daybreak did with EverQuest II -- they opened the ingame Marketplace up to player-made creations, with profit-sharing for the creators and curation by the devs to keep the selection of high quality. That's one of the core problems with letting AI create content independently -- it has no idea what "quality" is, so it just chucks out a dumpster fire of whatever fits the keyword because sooner or later something will stick. And that's sooo not the way to develop a game!
The cardboard box thing looks better than most Roblox games, I'd say. But I doubt the investors thought it was anything special; it's not like EA's stock has been rocketing up. The college football game was real investor news, this slop just went straight down the memory-hole.
E.a. must stand for expliot anyone
Andrew Wilson told our team that we couldn’t have any personal items visible above our cubes. If you’ve ever worked at a game studio, you know how lame this was, but I guess he just couldn’t tolerate the sight of a few action figures on the way to his office.
That is the kind of guy Wilson is. He doesn’t care about the games or the employees. Only the stock price matters.
It's amazing how videogame companies will do anything to avoid improving their AI behaviour that they will go out of their way to try and apply advancements in AI to everything except their games actual AI.
I think AI is not quite where it needs to be yet, but when it is, the first thing it will be good at is mimicing player behaviour. It's literally what it's for. It won't be good at creating well balanced gameplay and assets, that will come later. I look forward to the day when an AI can dynamically reprogram a game on the fly but that day is not today.
Ah, but good ai requires EA and other greedy AAA companies to... gasp... PAY PROGRAMMERS to design it so it works well and with few bugs! No, instead, they want to "make" generative ai that... removes the necessity of paying more employees. Until they find out what data decay is, that is.
AI should be used as tool to help artists do their work better, *NOT REPLACE THEM*
If I were an investor, I'd be less inclined to invest in EA after their demonstration. Because if they can do that, then so can an open source collective. And at that point, EA is done. Their advantage is that they are big, so can fund a bunch of projects, including some expensive, long term ones, and can afford licenses. Shift away from that and why invest in them?
@@Axterix13 where are the open source initiatives?
They have been making a mockery of games for decades at this point.
Bruh, a The Sims Movie? What kinda shit are these people smoking? Never in my wildest dreams would i have imagined anyone would think that is a good idea
Eh, a rom-com could do OK these days, since it's been a long while. If it has to be called "The SIms" to get funded, that won't affect much.
@@SkorjOlafsen only if it's in untranslated Simlish.
I love how AI stuff is always “the good stuff existed for 15 years while everything else is scam and sparkles”.
We have turned even progress as a species in a scam to make more money.
if it's made to reduce the number of humans involved, it's a negative, the industrial revolution allowed more people to work, be separating tasks into single easy to do steps, and then hiring workers to just repeat one of those steps over and over again, that was a good thing, allowing the average man to make a living wage, automation is the opposite of that, it's regression, reducing the number of jobs available, the average man can no longer get a living wage, we're going back to pre-industrial times, where there are only specialist jobs, there will be no jobs for the average man, just like pre-industrial times.
I'm sorry, but that's is the future, it's a sh*t future but that's what will happen, as a business perspective, less workers = less wages = more money.
@@liuwang9899 less workers = less people with money = less customers = less profits = less money.
you need as many people making money as possible to increase your profits, firing everyone and replacing them with machines that only cost money and don't buy things seems kinda counter-productive in that sense.
The industrial revolution was automation, though. I don't think there's a difference there. We're in for tough times with AI because of the delusions about it, and the inevitable collapse of the many companies that go all-in on it, but that's what makes a bubble. The use of AI in applicant screening is wrecking so many industries right now. But the problem with AI in particular is that _it_ _doesn't_ _work,_ or at least not yet. It's not actually any good at what it does (yet), but deluded execs are leaning into it. Gonna be a rough landing.
@@SkorjOlafsen the industrial revolution was separating building something into smaller simpler steps that could be done by unskilled workers, with days or weeks of training, rather than needing specialized craftsmen that took decades to train. it's basically what allowed the human population to balloon to multiple billions.
automation really started in the 70's with the microprocessor, being able to program machines to do these simple tasks humans once had to do, and i believe will be the cause of the human population to start to decrease at an ever more rapid pace.
@@AKATenn The industrial revolution started with the lifting of water out of mines by steam power - automation replacing human workers, leaving miners (more skilled than walking a treadmill).
Powered looms increased the productivity of weavers, and the Jacquard machine automated them, using punch cards, patented in 1804. Automation is not a new concept, it pre-dates the industrial revolution. Steam power to drive machines that could benefit from automation while producing something is a 19th century combination, that has gradually grown from niche to ubiquitous.
Steam shovels go back to around 1800, guys with shovels replaced by skilled equipment operators. You can find examples in just about any industry. Manufacturing lines are just a corner of the industrial revolution.
I know people shit on different companies nowadays but I still remember when EA was thought of just plain and pure evil.
It's amazing seeing both Ubisoft and EA near nerf themselves to the ground.
The state of the industry is always growing, newer, better games are being made by new studios.
Love the thumbnail of Android Wilson staring directly into my soul wishing he had one.
In the 80s, we wrote music. Later, machines wrote the music. That destroyed the music industry totally.
How so? The music industry is doing quite well - not as good as the ten years when everyone bought their collection over again in CD format, but better than most of history. The _music_ took a real hit, but as Paul Simon wrote "the music suffers baby, the music business thrives".
Not that Bethesda has normalized the concept of paid mods I wouldn't be surprised if more companies start to jump in on that same sort of thing. I mean, why pay employees to create compelling content for your games when you can get someone in their bedroom to do it for you for relatively cheap, without needing to worry about giving them any sort of benefits or anything, and not having to worry about them unionising? Sounds like a big win for major publishers.
I'm still boycotting Ubisoft over their position on NFTs.
So "investor facing" positions are not necessarily a wash for gamers.
It might actually fuck them, because WE pay the bills, not the investors.
It's funny, but I mentioned to a friend of mine that only one company REALLY understood the idea of NFTs the way they were originally pitched to consumers.... except those tokens turned out to be VERY fungible: Nintendo. What companies originally pitched were digital Amiibos that couldn't be re-sold. And then people kept going "what if we gave them LESS for what they paid?", until NFTs just became a joke. Meanwhile, Big N is over in Tokyo going "So what's the next set of RFID action figures we can put out that'll make people give us millions of dollars?" and the meh ones make decent bank while the popular ones turn fans into Philip J. Fry in the "Take my money" meme.
Im boycotting them due to their ability of always never making a fun game
@@INF2.160 Not anymore, you're probably right. But Assassin's Creed 4 and Far Cry 3 are still pretty great. South Park: The Stick of Truth is to date my favourite screen to game adaptation of all time.
But as of 2024, they probably don't have enough talent remaining to be worth keeping around.
@@Danceofmasks >Assassin's Creed 4
More than 10 years ago. Just saying.
@@Vladislav888 it does indeed take years to replace all your good employees with crap ones.
the video creator failed at seeing what EA actually showed. This was not addressing game consumers but game developers. Remember EA is a game DISTRIBUTER ? pair that game creator with your own launcher in the long term and you have a money printer.
It's BAFFLING to see them have NO clue as to how bankrupt they're going to be LMFAO 🤣GO EA! CHALLENGE EVERYTHING PFFT! LOL
If you are still buying EA games you are what is wrong with gaming, not EA.
In a move surprising precisely no one at all, EA delivers yet another reason not to give them any money.
It's actually amazing at this point, though perhaps not in a sense EA would like very much. Or even have the institutional capacity in the upper echelons to comprehend anyway, by the looks of things.
“If you don’t want to end up like one of the Jim’s of the world…” HEY WATCH IT!!!!
I think it would be better if we replaced investors with AI, they are competely useless humans
What do you have against retirees? I mean, maybe your country pays enough from the government to actually live on, but most people need a pension or investments to add to that to not be eating cat food. Believe it or not, one day you too will be old.
@@SkorjOlafsen If you have enough money to invest after retiring, you weren't going to be eating catfood anyway.
@@nullpoint3346 ??? You either try to make do with a government check (ever-less buying power in the US), or you have a pension, or enough money to do better. That's a tautology, no? So directly or indirectly, most retirees are investors, otherwise they'd still be working. Most people in the US have some stock investments, through a 401K or pension plan; it's not some lofty class. Before the 2008 crash it was 2/3rds of adults IIRC.
@@SkorjOlafsen I do live in a first world country that have a pension system.
Well this is a video about video games and how most investors don't know or care anything about games, just short term wins, they are actively ruining gaming together with greedy leaderships.
Would you rather them not spend their money? And just keep it out of circulation destroying the economy m?
Why does this feel like "Hey we can just let players pay money to develop for us and then take the best of what they make and sell it for profit"?
lol those shitty ai generated nothing games will flop so hard
That beginning analogy about share holders just gave me a new perspective on why large companies, like EA, won't ever give the consumers what they ask for. Indie and AA.companies have much more to lose in PR. EA on the other hand needs to please 1 group of people, and it's not their customers.
How do these people stay CEOs? Do the shareholders not want their investment to grow and make them more money? And what is up with all of these AAA game studios being allergic to making good decisions that could/would make them millions more?
Because the masses enthusiastically and increasingly hand over gobs of money for content of all sorts that makes "Ow, my balls!" look Shakespearian by comparison.
People have gotten so used to consuming mindlessly they forgot why these products existed in the first place. A game isn't just content you paid for, it's art people made...
You don't understand artificial intelligence and that's pretty clear. Especially where it's going. This is the worst it's ever going to be it is the very beginning of exploring the possibilities. All this anti-Ai stuff is just hilarious to me. I know change is scary, but change with it or you'll be left behind. There is no other option. There is nothing you can do.
EA invents the gaming 'self checkout' system, let the customer work and pay us for it
Android wilson strikes again!
What's the point of buying EA games when EA actively wants to do as little work as possible? 🤣
In the end, EA being "the most hated company" is a bunch of BS. If that was the case, consumers wouldn't keep buying their products. Voting with the cash is what makes these dollar-sign-eyed folk feel a slap on the face. In the past, videogame CEO's were programmers and visionaries, enthusiasts of the media. It's been already a lot of years since now CEO = business executive. Andrew is an EA veteran yes, but since its inception he's always been a capital raiser. His idea of "player friendly" meant = more variations on how to make the player spend money.
Voting with your wallet never work. Whale and the masses that don't follow this do not care nor will be. They outspent us by a huge miles.
Dump it
I haven't bought any EA games in over 10 years, probably 15 and I've never regretted it. All their games are disasters, or just mediocre cash grabs. Plus they are so anti-consumer and predatory it's pretty disgusting. Personally I think EA is a huge threat to the entire game industry, they need to go away. Also I'm pretty sure Andrew Wilson is a Terminator sent from the future to destroy us all, he's definitely not human.
5:40, I think you misinterpret how awesome it is for game devs. It is not meant to be binary tool that will make a game for you, but if you want to prototype something quickly, see how an idea feels without putting 400 work hours just to get an idea, this is a game changer.
These companies end goal is to have a "pay per prompt" user controlled game creation tool, that allows them to do nothing, while players play with generic slop, and need to pay more to recreate their own crappy FPS game that rips off real games they actually trained the Ai on.
I'm disappointed you are not covering the Godot scandal.
Bro it just happened and it's still actively unfolding. Give him a break.
@@TheLimeCrimes hello simp, I see you.
@@wyattderp9719 simp? For asking you to be patient? Damn, the bar is in hell.
xanex is just some douche. Godot needs to respond well sure, but let's see how they cook in the next days. I've already seen way enough about the godot thing, not really enough meat to the story yet.
It is pretty’s scandalous for that rascal to stood up Estragon and Vlad like that and for so long.
a publicly traded company's real product is the money that they "sell" to investors. Such a company that makes games is not interested in the people who buy the games.
EA thought to themselves... "what if we could be the ones selling the asset flips?"
if you think about EA and Ubisoft are extremely similar EA just has life insurance with Sports Games
Do you understand your sound foam doesn't work if you have giant holes in it? It just looks ugly.
It´s so funny how all those AAA companies still try to recreate Roblox or stuff like IMVU which got hella rich with user generated content. They fail to see though, that the reason why experienced people made custom content for those sandboxes in the first place, was because they´re actually getting paid for it. I know people who got stupidly rich (compared to average 9-5) with just creating custom props for random 3D chat rooms.
The ultimate in corporate efficiency - AI generated games for:
Minimal development time.
Minimal development cost.
Minimal required employees.
Minimal fun.
Minimal gamers playing the game.
Is EA going full Bethesda Creative Club? Never go full Bethesda Creative Club..
Yeah do it! Go all in on AI! Cuz the only thing they´ll archive is further decreasing AAA quality, giving indie another grow boost. Especially now that making games becomes ever more easy and cheaper.
angry gamers are less threatening than angry toddlers
"Look at this shinny new tech we have"
Says the ceo while showing to a room full of stupid investors tech that has already existed for a few years already.
Corporates: your ability to pay your way off the streets is their plaything
Modern Child Labor... Why is the people always attracted to the worst things from the past?
All these slow pans of Sims 4 have reminded me graphically there definitely needs to be a Sims 5. Almost never buy EA titles. Evil company
I used to think that the clueless, greedy and heartless evil executive villains on cartoons I watched as a kid were an exaggeration. Now I realize that the cartoons were, if anything, too kind and humanizing.
Let me ruin The Sims Movie. What it should be is a "foreign film" shot entirely in Simlish and subtitled in every region, with a story of a new family moving in, and getting acclimated with the town. They meet the Goth family, where the main character Dad hits it off with Bella Goth, while the main character Mom, without any cooking training, attempts to cook on the stove for everyone, resulting in a fire and her untimely death.
Main character Dad then decides that he's going to off Mortimer Goth, so he can marry Bella Goth and acquire their wealth while replacing his dead wife at the same time. He builds a pool and hosts a pool party, waiting until Mort drives in, then sells the ladder out of the pool, leaving Mort to drown, as he can't climb the side of the pool because game logic. The movie ends with main character Dad and Bella Goth doing their best Brady bunch impression into the credits.
Now, if the movie does this and I wasn't financially enriched beforehand, I have a case for creative theft and can sue. Otherwise, they can't use this idea because I've hated ea since they failed SimCity, not buying a single game from them since.
the way you talk about this seems like a youtube of videogames were eventually they'll put ads everywhere in the games people create.
The IDEA is great. Having artists able to generate code for their ideas at a moment's notice without heavy reliance on programmers is great. The execution is just awful.
The moment I saw Ubisoft saying "We won't replace writers,programmers,etc with AI", I immediately knew that the entire Industry would rush to use the trend to milk money as quick as possible, or in this case, save costs.
Then,when the games, because it would be more than just one, a lot of people will be fired but the higher ups who cause ALL OF THIS, will just throw a cheap apology/excuse but keep their sweet bonus while sniffing the next trend.