As a dev trying to create 3D games on my spare time, I actually am (I'm also eager to use stableprojector once I upgrade my 10yo pc)
It's really hard having to be a 3D modeler, animator, art director, developer and having good enough taste to know you're never going to have the time to build what you find acceptable
First time making something 3D and code wise, codex has been very useful, even creating a in-game 3D editor as well as netcode
The trickiest part is really using 3D and it comes with lot of extra scoping you normally take for granted: animation, uv texture, rigging for humanoids, making sure stuff doesn't clip through etc.
Still learning Blender but its very slow. I haven't tried the MCP for it yet but I want to get proficient at it to be able to produce psx graphic models and textures...
I'm kind of keen to see what mess Claude code could do with a small Unreal Engine 5 C++ project. Or what clever tricks it could actually pull off in that environment.
We made a good video about the differences between n8n, OpenAI, and Inkeep here: https://youtu.be/tRgU5FQoe3s. Short overview.
Re:OpenAI agents builder - there is a hard one-time ejection to code. You can export to their TypeScript or Python SDKs (in some limited use cases), but it's a one-way fork. Their visual canvas is meant to stay visual canvas.
Their SDK is open source -- it's basically for calling the OpenAI APIs downstream. But their visual builder / orchestration layer is not.
Check the /game folder haha. The main.go file has all the stuff related to webrtc
And yes, the signaling server IS a normal http server.
That’s the whole point. You can set up a WebRTC connection by even just emailing each other the SDPs if you want
I thought it was “intellectual curiosity” but it turns out it was a segway into insisting with your own preferences and eventually when being contradicted by others with their own needs and preferences, becoming plain insulting. Will leave your words here for reference:
> I think ignorance is bliss and you should avoid knowing about anything that could be better. Your mind might do this for you (rejection) but best not to tempt fate.
There’s nothing intellectual about fake curiosity, passive aggressive remarks, or insistently pushing your opinion just for the sake of sounding smarter than the next guy.
I was curious about why someone would have a preference, what does Teams serve that alternatives do not.
But you blanket claimed its fine, its not fine.
I won’t work in a company that forces me to use Teams- its a good proxy for how they think about internal communications and how they feel about staff.
You can claim what you want, I was curious, but don’t come in here telling people its ok to use teams- we’ve established that his options were fucking WebEx- which is also not fine.
My word doesn’t have to be law, however anyone who has touched any system outside of Teams is universally stating that Teams is bad.
That is an important consideration to have if you’re going to be telling people that its fine to inflict it on your workforce. You used cost as a reason but:
1) Teams is a seperate paid license now (since it was anti-competitive- the only way they could have grown such a market share with such a terrible product).
2) There are superior free alternatives.
Don’t come up in here, (in a thread where I am asking, genuinely, about what makes Teams a viable and active preference for people) saying its fine without any fucking follow up on why and then get bent out of shape when challenged.
Teams is not fine, if you’re working on the product or you have inflicted it on your workforce you should be better- I won’t pretend its ok so that you feel better.
I agree with your point that most of us probably couldn't direct much worthwhile, but surely art/game/movie directors have more than an "idea". Granted the only creative directors that I know of are the ones that did an exceptional job, so that might be a skewed perspective. I guess my objection is largely that the creative process is the fumbling around, treating LLMs as a shortcut to a creative product because you "haven't mastered the medium" is skipping the whole creative process; if you haven't bothered to fail at it, why should I be bothered to read it?
I use AI to generate lists of ideas. And then, if my idea is in the list I know it’s at best not novel and at worst cliche. There are many short cuts like this that aid the process but aren’t replacing it with dreck.
It's also not a static process. It is reasonable to expect that through interaction with AI, just like through the usage of any tool, people can get better at this. Especially since AI can explain people concepts about the thing they're trying to make, teaching them about it, even if it cannot apply them consistently at scale on its own.
I'm talking about my kid here. I think you're missing the point of what I'm talking about here. YouTube is ok for the most part, where as shorts is mostly not ok, and there's no way to turn it off.
It's really hard having to be a 3D modeler, animator, art director, developer and having good enough taste to know you're never going to have the time to build what you find acceptable