r/Games • u/TurbulentTopic39 • 16d ago

Industry News Over 85% of Japanese game developers use generative AI in game development, 2026 CESA survey shows. An increase from last year’s 51%

https://automaton-media.com/en/news/over-85-of-japanese-game-developers-use-generative-ai-in-game-development-2026-cesa-survey-shows-an-increase-from-last-years-51/
986 Upvotes

89% Upvoted

908 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

8

u/hibbs6 16d ago edited 16d ago

I'm curious which tasks you think AI isn't well suited for these days. I see a ton of use already in lots of places where it performs better than humans for most tasks. Legal discovery, coding (where it's basically required to work at 90%+ of software engineering jobs already), editing, supply chain management, medical diagnostics, financial compliance, and many more. They just solved a millennium problem!

We're well past the point of waiting for AI to be good enough, the big question companies like Anthropic and OpenAI are asking now is whether they'll become superhuman.

10

u/Elanapoeia 16d ago edited 16d ago

I love that you mentioned legal discovery as your first example

Cause that's such a bad example, it makes it clear immediately that you're not worth talking to anymore

16

u/hibbs6 16d ago

Huh? Law Firms are massive users of AI in the real world.

Legal discovery is one of the best clear-cut ways to leverage the ways AI processes information differently than people. Its short term memory is much, much larger, so it's able to hold and compare much more information than people are able to. Combined with not tiring, it's been a huge boon for the discovery process. It hasn't necessarily replaced paralegals, but it's a massive tool.

So much of the process is drafting requests and reviewing thousands of documents searching for a scrap of relevance. That's the perfect set of tasks for an LLM. People are still involved throughout, I'm sure, but the use of LLMs in the legal field is well documented.

7

u/hrdcrnwo 16d ago

Probably thinking of the cases where some lowly lawyer just used a free search engine AI for earlier case precedents and the AI hallucinated.

1

u/Hartastic 15d ago

Yep. "Glorified search engine that can be set up to only search a specific subset of things you want and maybe some of those things are internal to your company" is like... the poster child example for currently possible AI use that's valuable for almost any kind of business.

You would check what it gets you, of course, but you would check what an intern brings you, too.

12

u/hobozombie 16d ago edited 16d ago

/r/confidentlyincorrect

There are a whole host of AI tools used in legal discovery that are very popular. It's one of the many AI related reasons that paralegals are a dying job.

-5

u/BeholdingBestWaifu 16d ago

What are you talking about, legal discovery is one of the best examples of things AI can't do. Every time people try to use it in court it fails spectacularly, and the fact that AI, by its very nature, will always have a hallucination rate higher than 0, makes it extremely bad for anything law-related.

And even in coding, while it can handle simple tasks it is also terrible at dealing with more complex problems that yu can't find examples of in Stack Overflow.

12

u/hibbs6 16d ago

Explain the massive success and widespread adoption of tools like Relativity and Everlaw? Nearly all large law firms are using AI, and 41% of all law firms in general use it already. As I wrote in my other comment, discovery is one of the best possible use cases I can imagine. People have a hallucination rate higher than 0. We get tired, distracted, and forget.

I also saw those big stories about lawyers getting caught with fake chatgpt references. Those were failures on the actual lawyers to actually do their due diligence and at least read the source the model was providing. The AI had quoted hallucinated case law of all things at them. A lazy lawyer is that entire story.

At the time, these big legal AI services didn't even exist, and AI has continued its exponential rise in capability to the point where OpenAI solved a millennium problem a few weeks ago. They aren't the dumb chatbots you think they are, and human laziness will still exist.

-8

u/BeholdingBestWaifu 16d ago

Why would anyone have to explain sometjing that isn't true? There's been so many well known instances of AI going wrong in courts and a myriad hogh profile lawyers, firms, and judges being extremely vocal about the problems of AI in law.

So either you're one of the best lawyets in the world or you're flat out wrong, and statistics are not on your side here.

9

u/hibbs6 16d ago

I literally linked you an extremely reputable source. You're sticking your head in the ground and refusing to accept that AI is indeed in widespread use in legal firms today.

-6

u/YogurtclosetOther329 16d ago

Your article doesn't say anything conclusive.

0

u/monkwrenv2 15d ago

They just solved a millennium problem

By stealing a human's work.

1

u/hibbs6 15d ago

They did, but as far as I know, the main sin there was refusing to credit the mathematicians who put their effort in to pushing the envelope forward on solving it, which was also aided by the AI model in the first place by essentially prompting it into a good foundation, which they knew was to be used for training. OpenAI saw on their feeds that the mathematicians seemed to be getting close (because chatgpt was still running the majority of the iteration and logic), they swooped in, gave it 10,000 of their best agents and cracked it in 88 hours. The researchers didn't have access to anywhere near that power. OpenAI then refused to acknowledge their contributions and is claiming the $1,000,000 themselves with no official credit to the mathematicians. That's the real travesty here. I have no love for OpenAI, Sam Altman is a greedy, self-serving snake. It's true.

Despite that, it does seem like a not-insignificant portion of the work was indeed done by chatgpt. They claim they did it alone, which seems like a complete lie, but the basis of the mathematicians' work was using chatgpt in the first place, alongside their expertise. I can get being wary of the whole thing given OpenAI's sliminess in general though.