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

Codex, Opus, Gemini try to build Counter Strike

instantdb.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 144 posts

Re: Codex, Opus, Gemini try to build Counter Strike

#121

Post by stopachka »

parasec wrote: post #49

That's great! Now show us the cost, the time it took, and how much babysit... sorry, "human supervision" was necessary.

Here's the full video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fm-OoCWQlmc

The only time I spent outside of the video was to deploy to Vercel. I made a bunch of speedups in the video, but didn't cut anything. The total time was about 2 hours.

I mentioned it in the post, but there was definitely some hand holding towards the end, where I don't think a non-programmer would have succeeded

Re: Codex, Opus, Gemini try to build Counter Strike

#122

Post by fwip »

gafferongames wrote: post #117
fwip wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many children who play videogames can tell you what a multiplayer FPS is, and most of them don't know how to code it.

I did not say what a multiplayer FPS is. I said "how a multiplayer FPS works". There is a difference.

Right, but you don't need to know how it works to know if it is one. Unless I'm misunderstanding this part: "how can you tell if the AI has actually created one for you or not?"

I interpreted that as "I asked the AI to make me one, and now I have one, so it did it," with the operative question being "is it really a multiplayer FPS?"

Re: Codex, Opus, Gemini try to build Counter Strike

#123

Post by qingcharles »

mgraczyk wrote: post #65
mnau wrote: post #63

This makes me depressed. LLMs will take the most enjoyable part of my job and I will be stuck reviewing or fixing bugs in their "it-compiles" codebase.

On the contrary, coding for me has become more fun than ever since Opus 4.5. I'm working more and genuinely enjoying it a lot more, haven't had this much fum building software in years. (I work at Anthropic but have also tried Gemini, it's also fun)

Same. I've coded professionally my whole life. I've never enjoyed it as much as I'm doing now and I'm the most productive I've ever been.

Re: Codex, Opus, Gemini try to build Counter Strike

#124

Post by imiric »

wnolens wrote: post #114
mgraczyk wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the contrary, coding for me has become more fun than ever since Opus 4.5. I'm working more and genuinely enjoying it a lot more, haven't had this much fum building software in years. (I work at Anthropic but have also tried Gemini, it's also fun)

Same. I've resurrected side projects and done months of work on them overnight, getting to my true end goals. Creating software is fun. Wrangling a bunch of opinionated libraries and plumbing together systems with terrible ergonomics (i.e. webpack, maybe web development generally?) is bs work I'm glad to not have to do.

I have a slightly different take on it.

Creating software is indeed fun, but the most enjoyable aspects are the "a-ha" moments after you overcome a tricky problem, the confidence boost from creating something that works in an efficient and elegant way, and the dopamine hits associated with those events.

"AI" tools can alleviate some of the tedium of working on plumbing and repetitive tasks, but they also get rid of the dopamine hits. I get no enjoyment from running machine-generated code, having to review it, and more often than not having to troubleshoot and fix it myself.

To me, creating software is not as much about the destination, but about the journey. About the process itself. Yes, some of it is not enjoyable, but overall, there is much more I like about it than not.

Re: Codex, Opus, Gemini try to build Counter Strike

#125

Post by SkinTaco »

gilrain wrote: post #115
SkinTaco wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What does 3.500USD mean? Are we bringing back the half-penny?

You’re also not correct even if it were a decimal marker. Three dollars and fifty cents requires no half cent.

Specifying the second 0 implies portions of one cent. Like if I said something costs 10USD, the one dollar bill is implied to exist even if it isn't used (same with 10.00 implying the existence of a penny)

Re: Codex, Opus, Gemini try to build Counter Strike

#126

Post by d-lisp »

mnau wrote: post #63

This makes me depressed. LLMs will take the most enjoyable part of my job and I will be stuck reviewing or fixing bugs in their "it-compiles" codebase.

Will they ? I don't know why -okay- but I am still suspicious about such claims. This is impressive, but I would be more convinced if the codebase was more complex, that is a toy and uninspiring implementation of a _very_ basic game, the most enjoyable part of your job surely lies in a place that is beyond this "pre-prototype" (almost tutorial-y) state.

I could be wrong of course, and it may be true that your work will change very soon. Maybe someone else has better examples to propose ?

Re: Codex, Opus, Gemini try to build Counter Strike

#127

Post by gitpusher »

mgraczyk wrote: post #66
bilekas wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Nobody is going to sue you for using their implementation of a skybox algorithm from 1999, give us break. For personal use maybe not, but that's not the point, the point is it's spitting out licensed code and not even letting you know. Now if you're a business who hire exclusively "vibe" coders with zero experience with enterprise software, now you're on the hook and most likely will be sued.

Do you have any evidence that it is spitting out licensed code? Did you locate an original that it was copied from?

This seems like it could be the source: https://github.com/GPUOpen-LibrariesAndSDKs/Cauldron/blob/ma...

If true, then this usage could violate its MIT License: "The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in all copies or substantial portions of the Software."

The file seems to have been copied verbatim, more or less. But without the copyright info

Re: Codex, Opus, Gemini try to build Counter Strike

#128

Post by mexicocitinluez »

gilrain wrote: post #116
mexicocitinluez wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> man LLMs are the future They are. I know a lot of people don't want to admit this, but they are. They're getting better with each release. > But we're learning it's not economical--this is some of the costliest slop we've ever made. Huh? How on earth would you know whether my usage of LLM's has been worth it or not? > Sometimes slop can be useful; maybe you can shape it into something useful Man, I just spent the l…

> You're guaranteeing I have a job because you refuse to acknowledge the very obvious thing that's happening. I’ll take that bet.

Awesome.

Re: Codex, Opus, Gemini try to build Counter Strike

#129

Post by gafferongames »

fwip wrote: post #122
gafferongames wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I did not say what a multiplayer FPS is. I said "how a multiplayer FPS works". There is a difference.

Right, but you don't need to know how it works to know if it is one. Unless I'm misunderstanding this part: "how can you tell if the AI has actually created one for you or not?" I interpreted that as "I asked the AI to make me one, and now I have one, so it did it," with the operative question being "is it really a multiplayer FPS?"

I'm a professional game developer who has worked on real multiplayer first person shooters. My bar for "is this a real first person shooter" is a lot higher than yours.

My bar is, does this actually work and is it best practice for how first person shooters are made by professional game developers.

Your bar is, does it kinda look a bit like the thing that I play?

Totally different things.

Re: Codex, Opus, Gemini try to build Counter Strike

#130

Post by gafferongames »

stopachka wrote: post #118
gafferongames wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I did not say what a multiplayer FPS is. I said "how a multiplayer FPS works". There is a difference.

I agree that this is not how shooting is implemented in a production competitive shooter, but that wasn't the goal of the post. We wanted to test how far models could go, and I think this current version is the limit in a 2 hour time window.

I think you could have an infinite amount of time and you still wouldn't be able to create a real first person shooter.
Post reply on HN