Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Show HN: I AI-coded a tower defense game and documented the whole process

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 163 posts

Re: Show HN: I AI-coded a tower defense game and documented the whole process

#11

Post by danielbln »

mgdev wrote: post #6

This is awesome. I've been in software for 20+ years now as well. One thing I've noticed is many (most?) people in our cohort are very skeptical of AI coding (or simply aren't paying attention). I recently developed a large-ish app (~34k SLOC) primarily using AI. My impression is the leverage you get out of it is exponentially proportional to the quality of your instructions, the structure of your interactions, and t…

In addition, there is a learning curve and a skill ceiling that is deceptively higher than people think. Also, running Claude Opus in some tight agentic harness will give very different results than asking GPT-4o in the browser and copy/pasting stuff around.

Re: Show HN: I AI-coded a tower defense game and documented the whole process

#12

Post by qsort »

mgdev wrote: post #6

This is awesome. I've been in software for 20+ years now as well. One thing I've noticed is many (most?) people in our cohort are very skeptical of AI coding (or simply aren't paying attention). I recently developed a large-ish app (~34k SLOC) primarily using AI. My impression is the leverage you get out of it is exponentially proportional to the quality of your instructions, the structure of your interactions, and t…

I commented on this before, I'm in this weird "opinion arbitrage" spot where I'm relatively skeptical by HN standards but I'm actually pushing for more usage at work. Hell, I'm typing this while I wait for Claude to be done.

The reason for my skepticism is the delta between what they're being sold as and what they actually do. All AI solutions, including agents (especially agents!), are effectively worse-than-worthless without guidance from someone experienced. There's very little that's "autonomous" about them, in fact.

The very guy who coined the term "vibe coding" went on stage effectively saying we're putting the carriage before the horse!

Omitting the important caveat that while they are fantastic tools they need to be restrained a lot is effectively lying.

Re: Show HN: I AI-coded a tower defense game and documented the whole process

#13

Post by kordlessagain »

qsort wrote: post #12
mgdev wrote: post #6

This is awesome. I've been in software for 20+ years now as well. One thing I've noticed is many (most?) people in our cohort are very skeptical of AI coding (or simply aren't paying attention). I recently developed a large-ish app (~34k SLOC) primarily using AI. My impression is the leverage you get out of it is exponentially proportional to the quality of your instructions, the structure of your interactions, and t…

I commented on this before, I'm in this weird "opinion arbitrage" spot where I'm relatively skeptical by HN standards but I'm actually pushing for more usage at work. Hell, I'm typing this while I wait for Claude to be done. The reason for my skepticism is the delta between what they're being sold as and what they actually do. All AI solutions, including agents (especially agents!), are effectively worse-than-worthle…

My opinion is that it's about the tools you use. Bad tools, bad agentic behavior.

Re: Show HN: I AI-coded a tower defense game and documented the whole process

#14

Post by AnotherGoodName »

mgdev wrote: post #6

This is awesome. I've been in software for 20+ years now as well. One thing I've noticed is many (most?) people in our cohort are very skeptical of AI coding (or simply aren't paying attention). I recently developed a large-ish app (~34k SLOC) primarily using AI. My impression is the leverage you get out of it is exponentially proportional to the quality of your instructions, the structure of your interactions, and t…

I've come to this same conclusion pretty strongly in the past few months in particular. I actually had negative comments on my experience with AI previously.

For all the talk of AI hitting a ceiling the latest tools have improved greatly. I'm literally doing things in hours that'd previously take weeks with little issue. I do of course have to think about the prompts and break it down to a fine grained level and i also have the AI integrated well with the IDE.

The biggest wins are the times you hit a new framework/library. Traditionally you'd go through the 'search for code samples on usage of new library/language/framework -> work those samples into a form that accomplishes your task' cycle. AI is much better for this to the extent it even often surprises me. "Oh the library has a more straightforward way to accomplish X than i thought!".

For those who are still skeptical it's time to try it again.

Re: Show HN: I AI-coded a tower defense game and documented the whole process

#15

Post by roenxi »

mgdev wrote: post #6

This is awesome. I've been in software for 20+ years now as well. One thing I've noticed is many (most?) people in our cohort are very skeptical of AI coding (or simply aren't paying attention). I recently developed a large-ish app (~34k SLOC) primarily using AI. My impression is the leverage you get out of it is exponentially proportional to the quality of your instructions, the structure of your interactions, and t…

> One thing I've noticed is many (most?) people in our cohort are very skeptical of AI coding (or simply aren't paying attention).

I'd hope most devs are using AI heavily when coding, the last 6 months seem to have reached a level of competence in raw programming skill somewhere around mid- or senior- level with hilarious variance between brilliance and idiocy.

I think you might be seeing the most vocal programmers are terrified for their future prospects and there isn't much room to reason with them so they're let alone.

Re: Show HN: I AI-coded a tower defense game and documented the whole process

#17

Post by sitkack »

kordlessagain wrote: post #13
qsort wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I commented on this before, I'm in this weird "opinion arbitrage" spot where I'm relatively skeptical by HN standards but I'm actually pushing for more usage at work. Hell, I'm typing this while I wait for Claude to be done. The reason for my skepticism is the delta between what they're being sold as and what they actually do. All AI solutions, including agents (especially agents!), are effectively worse-than-worthle…

My opinion is that it's about the tools you use. Bad tools, bad agentic behavior.

Better spoons, better food.

Re: Show HN: I AI-coded a tower defense game and documented the whole process

#18

Post by squidbeak »

sitkack wrote: post #17
kordlessagain wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My opinion is that it's about the tools you use. Bad tools, bad agentic behavior.

Better spoons, better food.

Owners of silver spoons tend to eat pretty well.

Re: Show HN: I AI-coded a tower defense game and documented the whole process

#19

Post by cgriswald »

mgdev wrote: post #6

This is awesome. I've been in software for 20+ years now as well. One thing I've noticed is many (most?) people in our cohort are very skeptical of AI coding (or simply aren't paying attention). I recently developed a large-ish app (~34k SLOC) primarily using AI. My impression is the leverage you get out of it is exponentially proportional to the quality of your instructions, the structure of your interactions, and t…

This post was interesting to me because I also have a lot of programming experience but other than hunt the wumpus high school I haven’t programmed a game and recently started using AI to help with a new game.

AI has become three things for me:

(1) A learning tool. What it is really great at is understanding my questions when I don’t have the proper terminology. Because of this it can give me a starting point for answers. It is also really fantastic for exposing me to unknown unknowns; probably the most important thing it does for me.

(2) A tool to do boring or tedious things that I can do but slow me down. I’ve found it good enough at a variety of things like commenting code, writing a config file (that I usually edit), or other text-based adventures.

(3) Search. Just like (1), because it understands what I’m actually after, it is irrelevant if I know what a thing is actually called. I also let it filter things for me, make recommendations, etc.

I think you can let it think for you, but… why would you? It’s not as smart as you. It’s just faster and knows more things. It’s like an FPU for the CPU of your brain.

Re: Show HN: I AI-coded a tower defense game and documented the whole process

#20

Post by jpcom »

AnotherGoodName wrote: post #14
mgdev wrote: post #6

This is awesome. I've been in software for 20+ years now as well. One thing I've noticed is many (most?) people in our cohort are very skeptical of AI coding (or simply aren't paying attention). I recently developed a large-ish app (~34k SLOC) primarily using AI. My impression is the leverage you get out of it is exponentially proportional to the quality of your instructions, the structure of your interactions, and t…

I've come to this same conclusion pretty strongly in the past few months in particular. I actually had negative comments on my experience with AI previously. For all the talk of AI hitting a ceiling the latest tools have improved greatly. I'm literally doing things in hours that'd previously take weeks with little issue. I do of course have to think about the prompts and break it down to a fine grained level and i al…

Which IDE are you using?
Post reply on HN