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

Godot will no longer accept AI-authored code contributions

pcgamer.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 419 posts

Re: Godot will no longer accept AI-authored code contributions

#231

Post by terminalbraid »

ianm218 wrote: post #226
terminalbraid wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Weird that AI is supposed to be able to enable all this and yet all we get is news about how it's really just burning out projects that have limited resources making them more expensive and companies having to hire back devs they laid off.

I think this is a false dichotomy. We’re getting lots of new productive output in some areas and in other areas it is too much slop.

Your argument might carry some weight if you added any kind of argument past "lots of new productive output" and then silence.

Re: Godot will no longer accept AI-authored code contributions

#233

Post by maiybe »

rschiavone wrote: post #195
maiybe wrote: post #192

A point of wild speculation. This is likely to be the slow decline of Godot. As someone with 2 years of Godot experience (which seems like a lot given their lifespan), the underlying infra isn't strong enough to ward off the many competitors that will embrace AI at the heart of the engine. Ironically, the best engine right now for AI-assisted coding is Godot! It has plain text scene files, and Opus does a half decent…

This is exactly what will make Godot shine in 2 years while the rest of the world will be busy cleaning up inefficient code.

By all accounts, with the current curve of model improvement, I don't see strong evidence that aligns with that belief. Perhaps with a plateau in model improvement or a saturation of the tech (a la iPhone 2020s), one could argue the lack of growth. But right now with evidence at hand? I wouldn't take that bet.

Re: Godot will no longer accept AI-authored code contributions

#234

Post by Silamoth »

maiybe wrote: post #192

A point of wild speculation. This is likely to be the slow decline of Godot. As someone with 2 years of Godot experience (which seems like a lot given their lifespan), the underlying infra isn't strong enough to ward off the many competitors that will embrace AI at the heart of the engine. Ironically, the best engine right now for AI-assisted coding is Godot! It has plain text scene files, and Opus does a half decent…

Funny enough, I see it the exact opposite. LLM slop code degrades software quality. While one person may appear to move quickly, the software quality suffers dramatically. It takes them (or other team members) more time to fix the issues than it would have to just do it right the first time.

I mean, even with the advent of “AI” agents, is software today any better than it was 3 years ago?

I think teams embracing too much LLM coding are going to see a continued decrease in quality and a massive drop in team productivity. Godot, on the other hand, is avoiding this. While it might not be as trendy, I think it’ll be a competitive advantage in the long term.

Re: Godot will no longer accept AI-authored code contributions

#235

Post by maiybe »

nemomarx wrote: post #221
maiybe wrote: post #192

A point of wild speculation. This is likely to be the slow decline of Godot. As someone with 2 years of Godot experience (which seems like a lot given their lifespan), the underlying infra isn't strong enough to ward off the many competitors that will embrace AI at the heart of the engine. Ironically, the best engine right now for AI-assisted coding is Godot! It has plain text scene files, and Opus does a half decent…

If the AI tools are that effective, the maintainers can just use them themselves? That way they would have the full oversight on how it's done. PRs with just the results and final code doesn't seem better even if we assume ai coding will be much faster.

Integrating AI-assisted PRs into an existing team is a skillset all in itself.

The team is taking a pretty strong stance against external AI-assisted PRs, which makes you think they'd take a weak stance against internal AI-assisted PRs? It's hard to draw the exact line, but maybe?

For our team, the outcome is the PR, and you have to set up _a lot of testing infrastructure_ to prevent regressions. It's a skillset like any other.

It would be consistent with their actions that my belief is they are slow to adopt workflows that will accelerate them. Thus velocity will decrease.

Re: Godot will no longer accept AI-authored code contributions

#236

Post by [deleted] »

rschiavone wrote: post #195
maiybe wrote: post #192

A point of wild speculation. This is likely to be the slow decline of Godot. As someone with 2 years of Godot experience (which seems like a lot given their lifespan), the underlying infra isn't strong enough to ward off the many competitors that will embrace AI at the heart of the engine. Ironically, the best engine right now for AI-assisted coding is Godot! It has plain text scene files, and Opus does a half decent…

This is exactly what will make Godot shine in 2 years while the rest of the world will be busy cleaning up inefficient code.

[deleted]

Re: Godot will no longer accept AI-authored code contributions

#237

Post by krainboltgreene »

julianlam wrote: post #230
mort96 wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And who pays for the (likely significant, and controllable by everyone) tokens such a system would use?

A small 4-9B model would be able to run cheaply for this sort of work.

What question do you think you're answering?

Re: Godot will no longer accept AI-authored code contributions

#238

Post by optionalsquid »

fzeroracer wrote: post #188
nkrisc wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They want people who will be around to maintain the features as well. There have been several areas of the project that have languished at times because no current maintainer had the capacity or familiarity to move it forward. Also, what drama?

The drama is in a nutshell someone made a really stupid post claiming only the woke use game engines. Godot community manager said guess that makes us woke (paraphrased), conservatives went batshit, got blocked on Twitter or elsewhere for going insane and a few innocent tweets got caught in the crossfire. Someone went off and made a fork of Godot as a 'non-political version' which went in the only obvious direction i…

The fork also had its own drama, resulting in one of the more active developers of the fork, plus the guy who helped kick off the original drama, splitting off to create yet another fork. Both forks are still active, I believe. It was all very silly

Re: Godot will no longer accept AI-authored code contributions

#239

Post by maiybe »

bloomca wrote: post #197
maiybe wrote: post #192

A point of wild speculation. This is likely to be the slow decline of Godot. As someone with 2 years of Godot experience (which seems like a lot given their lifespan), the underlying infra isn't strong enough to ward off the many competitors that will embrace AI at the heart of the engine. Ironically, the best engine right now for AI-assisted coding is Godot! It has plain text scene files, and Opus does a half decent…

> the underlying infra isn't strong enough to ward off the many competitors that will embrace AI at the heart of the engine Who are the competitors? Something lower level like bevvy? The way I see it even with vibe coding you need to do a lot of infrastructure work to make editing easy, and anybody except Unity is far off from them.

Godot has a few elements going for it.

GUI Editor is not one I'd list.

Internal tooling stood up a GUI Editor clone within a few weeks that was targeted towards our specific use case. Their editor isn't uniquely ergonomic. In fact, for about 3 releases, one of the highest requested objects was multiple tabs at the same time. A rather standard feature in an editor and especially a modern code editor.

My argument isn't totally about individual devs making engines (though it is actually feasible on a Max plan), I'm imagining a very small team competitor that embraces AI-assisted PRs, internally and externally, along with vibecoding directly baked into the app itself (MCP or more direct claude code scripting language integration). That would be able to match or exceed the functionality in Godot, probably with more common and performant scripting languages (Rust + Luau for example).

Re: Godot will no longer accept AI-authored code contributions

#240

Post by krainboltgreene »

mexicocitinluez wrote: post #217
dspillett wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I personally wouldn't care if it was AI-generated or not, as long as the content fit the latter category. The problem is that a lot of AI contributions are lazily produced without review. Those that have been properly reviewed for correctness (tested to ensure actually working with no obvious undesirable side effects, tweaked where needed to be readable and understandable, fitting the other guidelines of the projec…

> The problem is that a lot of AI contributions are lazily produced without review. That sounds like a contributor problem. Not an AI problem. I still don't understand a "no AI" policy whose only purpose is to weed out bad PRs. You should be weeding out bad PR's regardless of their source. I don't see why treating a purely human-authored, but bad, piece of code should be treated any differently than an AI-authored on…

Probably because a human authored contribution, no matter how bad, can be trained to make it good and also improves the community.
Post reply on HN