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

WorldClaw Agentic 3D open-world generation at scale

tencent-hunyuan.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 101 posts

Re: WorldClaw Agentic 3D open-world generation at scale

#91

Post by nater5000 »

matsemann wrote: post #72
smlacy wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> When you see an elegantly designed building ...was that really made by a human or did the AI generate it as part of a much larger generation step? Does it matter? Why?

There are millions of games. When choosing which one to play, you've normally chosen one that looks polished over one that does not, because of what it signals. Now that signal is gone, can't easily discern what's a sloppy crappy game vs one that's actually fun to play.

As if this has been the case in decades. AAA studios are constantly producing polished slop while indie devs are producing great products that arguably look like shit.

If you're making decisions about what games you're playing based on how good they look, then you've been slurpin' up pure slop for a while.

Re: WorldClaw Agentic 3D open-world generation at scale

#92

Post by nater5000 »

smlacy wrote: post #24
2001zhaozhao wrote: post #22

This kind of content generation can be quite cool to enable new game ideas for indie developers that were only possible with AAA before. But it also makes it hard to gauge the amount of human work that went into the game. When you see an elegantly designed building, environment or easter egg in the game, was that really made by a human (or even prompted by a human), or did the AI generate it autonomously as part of a…

> When you see an elegantly designed building ...was that really made by a human or did the AI generate it as part of a much larger generation step? Does it matter? Why?

I love that most of the responses to this are just begging the question lol

Re: WorldClaw Agentic 3D open-world generation at scale

#93

Post by Zarathruster »

svachalek wrote: post #82
silvester23 wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you point to some aspects of the style that are typical of ChatGPT? I have never done any story generation and after reading the first couple of paragraphs, I could not tell whether this was AI-generated or not.

AI tends to really like staccato writing, a series of sentences that are too short and simple. It's evident here, although broken up with really long sentences. Tortured and near-miss metaphors are another thing it likes and it's loaded here. "groaned like a drumskin too tight for the heat" sounds cool but then you think, do drum skins "groan"? And what does heat have to do with it? Or "breath of hills holding their…

| do drum skins "groan"?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mmlK94QvwiA

Re: WorldClaw Agentic 3D open-world generation at scale

#94

Post by Forgeties79 »

altmanaltman wrote: post #90
Forgeties79 wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And I think what people don’t appreciate is that when people write/make something, they generally don’t just throw it out there and expect praise. They edit and sculpt it for public release or abandon it. But for some reason when it’s made with an LLM there is this assumption that you need to put it out there because everyone would be so excited to see it. Then when people say it’s not good, everyone starts getting i…

Yes, we like tinkering because the process itself is rewarding. The outcome is usually not that important as long as the process is fun. But with AI, the process cannot be fun (because one technically skips it) if one uses it as a way to just spam out content/code. I still say there is a good argument to be made that ai can help in the process of tinkering as well but approach matters a lot and obviously the showcase…

Completely agree. I run 27B qwen 3.6 regularly at home with web search tool calls for simple script kiddy stuff and troubleshooting. I have occasionally made something that actually really did help me out, but I am under no illusion that it will be particularly useful to other people. They’re usually pretty specific to what I need and would fall apart at the moment they touch a different machine, mainly because the scripts themselves are straight up just referencing my file structure.

I am not a coder, I am not an engineer, I do not know how to make something that can be applied to a bunch of different machines with different hardware and software and configs. I can just barely put together something that specifically works for me in that moment. I needed to use ChatGPT to finish setting up idrive once ffs. Why on earth would I share that with other people lmao I mean let’s be real, all I’ve built is some crappy clone of something that already exists most likely. But making a quick script on my computer is faster than using Google’s increasingly degraded search to try and find the thing that will work for me, so here we are, me tinkering and screwing around for a couple of hours every month and occasionally getting something that helps me out. That’s enough!

Re: WorldClaw Agentic 3D open-world generation at scale

#95

Post by Forgeties79 »

dd8601fn wrote: post #57
Forgeties79 wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You know what's also good at storytelling? AI Writing a coherent story =/= good at storytelling

It’s better than most video games. Including some of the best selling.

Is that really the bar we’re going for here? Crappy video game writing? That’s the Creative Revolution:tm: AI is bringing us?

Re: WorldClaw Agentic 3D open-world generation at scale

#96

Post by Forgeties79 »

9dev wrote: post #68
dd8601fn wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s better than most video games. Including some of the best selling.

But that isn’t because most game writers are bad at their job, but the vast majority of the target audience don’t really care about a good story - they want to shoot the baddies and be a cool hero. Just look what happened when a studio tries to do a bold move and have a sequel where the protagonist of the first game gets tortured and killed out of revenge, by the daughter of one of the many characters he killed in th…

The bar for game writing is very low. Most of them are competent writers but that’s not enough to make a good, memorable story. A lot of games simply do not prioritize the time and budget for quality writing.

Re: WorldClaw Agentic 3D open-world generation at scale

#97

Post by Forgeties79 »

letmevoteplease wrote: post #44
Forgeties79 wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1 unverified example with quite the unique, if true, circumstances against the undoubtedly countless dismissed attempts (not to mention those never submitted because they’re trash) hardly meets the bar being established here.

Even if 99% of generations are trash, why does that matter? Just throw out the failures and keep the good ones, like any writer. Here is the text of the winning story: https://granta.com/the-serpent-in-the-grove/ If you've ever used ChatGPT to generate stories, you will find the style unmistakable. It's cloying to me, but it did manage to fool some stuffy literary judges.

It matters because when people hack out a rough draft of a short story overnight or a few days, typically they don’t push it out to the world and expect to be praised for their writing. They edit, they refine, they turn into something that is actually of some quality. Yet for some strange reason when people try a few prompts and an LLM spits out something maybe vaguely passable after 30 minutes of effort, that expectation goes out the window. They publish it for all the world to see and get upset when people aren’t thrilled at the results.

Why? Why on earth do the rules suddenly change when the effort is even less than something they wouldn’t publish to the world for review? They can barely even call it their own work. I refuse to believe that a short story you generated in 30 minutes represents anything resembling quality work. It’s vacuous, repetitive trash that I would be embarrassed to say represents my skills as a writer. Yet here we are, people constantly doing it. Code, writing, music, whatever.

Re: WorldClaw Agentic 3D open-world generation at scale

#98

Post by mparramon »

Forgeties79 wrote: post #81
mparramon wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So the artist simply accepts the AI generated wooden house. Might it be possible that he does not? Furthermore, before AI, artists also used assets that came from other creators, accepting them wholesale. No intention, then? The issue I see here is that we're judging the tool, not the artist. It reminds me so much of the digital photography backlash. But here we are.

Digital photography is completely different. The principles do not change whether you’re shooting film or digital. You have to frame the shot. You have to make sure the exposure is what you want. You have to set f-stop. Even if you try to argue that automatic settings on cameras negate all of that, which I don’t agree with but let’s allow it, at the end of the day you have to pick the focal distance and frame, which…

That's the issue with metaphors, they are always different. Try steelmanning the issue and see what you think. I'm not here to prove a point, and I hope you're not either. I'm here to learn.

And what I'm learning is, artists are happy.

Re: WorldClaw Agentic 3D open-world generation at scale

#99

Post by Forgeties79 »

mparramon wrote: post #98
Forgeties79 wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Digital photography is completely different. The principles do not change whether you’re shooting film or digital. You have to frame the shot. You have to make sure the exposure is what you want. You have to set f-stop. Even if you try to argue that automatic settings on cameras negate all of that, which I don’t agree with but let’s allow it, at the end of the day you have to pick the focal distance and frame, which…

That's the issue with metaphors, they are always different. Try steelmanning the issue and see what you think. I'm not here to prove a point, and I hope you're not either. I'm here to learn. And what I'm learning is, artists are happy.

This is rather patronizing and does not foster dialogue/learning. Nobody trying to learn talks down to somebody like this with such confidence that they are right.

This is a topic I know very intimately and have strong feelings on. You are welcome to disagree with me, I am not the god of cameras and therefore always right, but I also should not be so quickly dismissed when it comes to this topic simply because you disagree with my take on AI generated “photography.” I use air quotes not to mock you but to emphasize that I do not consider it photography. It’s a different process and medium, it’s a different tool and result. None of this is a reflection of its merits or the people who utilize it.

I believe your metaphor was a very poor one so I expressed it. If you think it’s appropriate than feel free to explain it, but IMO, prompting an image and shooting it with a camera in your hands is not the same thing. So don’t start talking down to me and lecturing me on “being willing to learn” simply because I explained my reasoning on this.

Re: WorldClaw Agentic 3D open-world generation at scale

#100

Post by deterministic »

avaer wrote: post #6

In case it's not obvious, this isn't a model, this is python scripts that call out to models (code not available). It's mostly "did you know you can attach an LLM to a PCG system?", but there is one idea here you don't see much of: an image model performs the composition (which image models are really good at), and then you extract the objects into 3d via things like SAM3D before placing them in the world, which is p…

> most people don't realize how good LLMs are at 3D these days

It seems to work well generating static 3D models. However typically with way too many triangles and no skeleton unless it is a human.

That's my experience anyway. I would be happy to be proven wrong.

Post reply on HN