This is basically how evolution works. It’s goal is not necessarily ‘better’ or some goal- it’s just iterating forward. Always just forward. Sometimes better, sometimes worse, always forward.
Upper management decides the direction. Selective pressure determines if ‘forward’ is good or bad. In the absence of competition, selective pressure is eliminated and the only pressure is maximuze profit- leading to enshittification.
So- this would potentially render in-game cosmetics useless. You could just DLSS some cosmetic over your character for ‘free’ and skip paying for in-game cosmetic items. You could retexture or skin a model into something else with this tech, theoretically.
Heck, this could be a banned feature for online competitive games if you DLSS enemies to be easier to see.
Non-gaming applications of such tech are kinda frightening, but good to be aware of the possibility. AI swapping of characters has been something they’ve been working on. I’m guessing it will be sold as some kinda feature where you can give the AI some model of yourself, and it swaps the main character of a show or movie for your likeness. People will find it neat and try it and it will sorta work, but mostly just be a novelty. Then you’ll see that data get used for advertising, where they swap out the character in the Ad for you to catch your attention. If they try to catalog every person, this could be valuable and used to maliciously scam people by cloning your voice to mimic you and do all sorts of terrible things.
I imagine in a few years after some major scams and such that we’ll need some new verification systems to try to ensure that transactions are between real people and not just AI with your information. Yes, it will be intrusive and tracking, but will be required to maintain online commerce. Online marketplaces will struggle and possibly collapse without some way to authenticate a transaction. Hey, we may see a return to physical stores and doing everything in person again!
That makes sense. Microsoft didn’t enter the console market for gamers or gaming- they entered it to beat sony. The PS2 had a linux distro you could load on it to try to sell it as a computer to circumvent luxury import taxes. If it WAS a computer, it would compete with Microsoft Windows. They were worried that a console could just sell software instead of games and be a competitor, so they threw a ton of money trying to run Sony out of business.
Microsoft never really wanted to win gaming. The war was against an enemy that wasn’t really a threat. So not killing off a console wasn’t really a “loss”.
Older games are also meant to be beaten. I remember games that had reviews saying, “This game will take 40-60 hours to complete”, and that was it. You could replay it if you wanted, but it was just an experience.
The new idea is live service games. Games you can never really beat, you just grind at it forever. That or they have a bunch of add on things to make the game take a lot longer so you keep playing the same thing over and over again. I’m not saying they’re not fun, just that they lack a satisfying conclusion and variety.
Political bots- well maybe, but it’s not that far fetched. Astroturfing is very real and has been a thing for a good while now. It’s honestly not difficult to think that the same techniques and practices, enhance by AI now, could be used to shape political will of the people.
If you say, “NO! MY party wouldn’t do that!”. Maybe not, but the other side might. Or even other countries. Honestly, as a boring ass citizen -I- have the ability to VPN into another country and AI shitpost bad ideas onto their political boards. If I was in a foreign country employed in some goverment capacity for counterintelligence operations and I WASN’T employong such tools and actions- I’d just be terrible at my job.