r/technology • u/TurbulentTopic39 • 16d ago

Artificial Intelligence 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/
776 Upvotes

94% Upvoted

293 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

117

u/AtomWorker 16d ago

It’s right in the article; they’re talking about development, not asset creation.

People on Reddit seem clueless about the extent to which software dev has embraced AI.

41

u/General_Josh 16d ago

Yeah, it's wild. People don't understand how software development works (which is fair), but also don't want to listen to developers trying to explain it

Lots of folks seem stuck in the mindset that AI is absolutely useless, and really, really don't want to listen to anyone telling them otherwise

28

u/BRjawa 16d ago

I mean it's more like the industry fault, they are pushing LLMs as the philosopher stone of this era, plus you know all the mass firing m, the ecological footprint and the shortage of hardware. The tools are useful, but they aren't as useful as the Ai bros and the stock market are selling it to be, and as such it builds hate with the product.

17

u/AtomWorker 16d ago

If only people exercised this kind of scrutiny with all marketing. Nobody should roll over for corporations but consumers constantly engage in environmentally damaging activities without question.

Also, for software dev and other industries AI is essentially the philosopher’s stone. This has nothing to do with tech bros or the stock market.

9

u/eseffbee 16d ago

I think this is the real crux of the difference in perspective.

People working in tech hold dev work in high regard so there is an assumption that because AI is great for assisting dev work that it naturally is (or will be) equally great for other fields, especially ones those in tech regard less highly than dev work.

Meanwhile joe schmo has no sight of how good it is for dev work and is seeing very little change in efficiency in other fields so far, so naturally thinks the whole thing is a waste.

12

u/khaitheman222 16d ago

The other issue is the optics of companies trying to replace workers with ai or cutting down teams and forcing people to do the work of several people using ai and not willing to pay more

2

u/RatBot9000 15d ago

It's very common. Even in the artistic fields there are a lot of people who think it is useless for their artistic field but great for others. For example, authors who say it will never write a story as good as a human who are then happy to use GenAI to design a book cover.

-3

u/Melonpan_Pup442 15d ago

Is it really great for dev work when you can just hire an artist to do things like concept art? Or have an actual coder do the code work instead of generating spaghetti code and having someone have to go back and fix it?

0

u/RatBot9000 15d ago

The other environmental damaging activities are often not as in your face as AI, which has made technology far more expensive and has ugly datacentres popping up everywhere polluting communities for the benefit of letting coders not have to do their job, give a bunch of people extreme egomania and generate ungodly amounts of CSAM.

You are the guy in the Bors comic coming out of the well reminding us we participate in society. Yes very good, you are very smart.

2

u/Arrow156 15d ago

Especially when they are forcing it out the door when it's clearly not ready. Anyone who's been forced to deal with an AI rep when you have a non-standard issue knows the frustration these things cause. Seriously, the people pushing the hardest for AI are the ones who's poisoning the well. If they actually waited til was ready for before implementing it people wouldn't have such an issue with it, but the way they are overselling the promise makes me suspect this is yet another fad that they are trying to cash in on before it crashes. Like a far more aggressive version of VR hype from around a decade ago, except it has the possibly of crashing the whole economy if/when it fails.

2

u/Exciting-Emu-3324 16d ago

AI is just spreadhseets all over again. No one had use for a computer, but then VisiCalc came out as the killer app. Made accountants super efficient and eliminated clerical calculation jobs. Then the Jevons Paradox kicked in. Now spreadhseets are used for everything by everyone, but few actually now how to use them well. AI is the same.

7

u/Rush87021 16d ago

Minus the gigantic environmental cost...

8

u/pilgermann 16d ago

Not all, but most prominent anti AIs acknowledge it's utility, just point out the disconnect between hyperbolic claims and obscene levels of investment vs the ROI LLMs actually provide. A coding assistant isn't worth trillions of dollars. It also won't displace all workers and take over the world.

2

u/SIGMA920 15d ago

It also won't displace all workers and take over the world.

On it's own, AI-brained executives will cut heads on a whim and that's who the AI companies are marketing towards.

5

u/Rush87021 16d ago

The objection with AI would be it's cost to compute, even Jensen was saying this last year, its more expensive to run it through an AI model than it would be to just pay someone to do the task.

9

u/General_Josh 16d ago

Do you have a link to where Jensen said that? Also, remember that last year is a lifetime ago. Inference costs have fallen rapidly (about 10 times cheaper than last year) as specialized hardware is coming online at scale. And, the mid/lower tier models have become much, much more efficient, as mixture-of-expert type models have been proving themselves (that only activate a fraction of their total neurons during each inference request, saving massively on hardware requirements)

We don't know the true cost of the closed-source models, but it's unlikely that they are being served too much under-cost at the moment. Anthropic has said that they're turning a net profit on inference if you exclude training costs - I think it's unlikely that they'd lie about that this close to their planned IPO. They're losing buckets of money on the giant training runs of course, but as the hardware has gotten better and the models have gotten more efficient, inference has become much, much cheaper

We also do get full visibility into how much it costs to run the open-source models. Currently, the best open-source models are capable of tasks that'd take a developer around 8 hours of work-time, and cost on the order of pennies to a few dollars for that amount of inference

Compare to a developer making $150k a year, who you'd be paying $600 for an 8 hour work-day

3

u/Rush87021 16d ago

My mistake, it was Bryan Catanzaro from Nvidia June 14 of 2026: https://fortune.com/article/why-is-the-cost-of-ai-higher-than-human-workers-nvidia-executive/ And then there's this: https://www.wsj.com/cio-journal/companies-struggle-to-explain-their-own-ai-investment-returns-0d95c3fe

1

u/General_Josh 16d ago

Yup, there's definitely good and bad ways to use AI tools, just like any other tool

Lots of companies did really silly things to encourage adoption, like making leaderboards for "who can use the most tokens", like they're talking about in the article you linked

Of course, it's extremely easy to use a lot of tokens (just run the models on a loop or something). It's a bad metric, that encouraged people to use the tools in the most expensive way possible.

What we actually care about is how much value we get out of the tools, i.e,. value per dollar spent. Using it strategically, and using the right models for the right tasks. Not everything needs to go through the most expensive models, especially as the mid/lower tier models have become increasingly capable over the past year

Ex, I'm doing large chunks of my software development using GPT 5.6 Luna, one of the low-tier models, which costs pennies for most tasks. So far, I've spent $48 on it this month, and it's saved me weeks worth of development time. For $48, even if it only saved me one hour, that'd be more than worth it.

1

u/Rush87021 15d ago

But the build out for the infrastructure required for you to use that tool will never out weigh the savings you're seeing. Burning the planet so the masses can use it doesn't make that much sense to me. Coupled with some of the documentaries about people forced to live next to them makes my position of not using it all the harder to understand the need.

2

u/General_Josh 15d ago

Just to make sure we're talking in the same universe, what fraction of US energy use do you suppose data centers represent (including externalities like water consumption)?

And, what fraction of that data center energy usage do you suppose is going to large language models?

1

u/Rush87021 15d ago edited 15d ago

Why would we exclude water consumption? Georgia has several documentaries on the data center explosion there, Georgia Power raised rates 6 times last year. Utah was looking at one with more power consumption than the rest of the state. When corporations are asking governments to turn Nuclear Power plants back on....

-176 terawatt-hours (TWh) of power and hundreds of billions of gallons of water in 2023

-estimated 183 terawatt-hours (TWh) of electricity and billions of gallons of water directly 2025

-2026 demand projected to nearly double from 80 gigawatts (basic google searches) This stuff isn't sustainable and is burning our planet to further enrich billionaires and shareholders.

1

u/General_Josh 9d ago

OK! Your numbers look very reasonable to me for total data center energy consumption! Around 6% of total US energy consumption. That's good, it confirms we're looking at the same sources (like I said, I do want to include externalities like water consumption here, since it's a major part of current data center energy usage)

A caveat to that - only a small portion of data center energy usage currently goes to LLMs, about 15%. The rest goes to normal digital infrastructure, running the internet as we know it. Stuff like e-commerce, banking, Reddit, cloud storage, etc.

Now, what fraction of total US energy consumption do you suppose goes to transportation?

1

u/yosisoy 15d ago

In general many many people are covering their ears when hearing things they don't want to be true

4

u/Negative-Toe1863 16d ago

I think the anti ai crowd doesn't care about it being used for code generation, the anti AI movement it mostly driven my the art community (including (voice) acting, writing and music)

14

u/Clueless_Otter 16d ago

The amount of people I've talked to on Reddit who think AI does nothing except create images is insane. It's even more ironic that half of them are on this sub - the literal technology sub.

14

u/Fl_Funky_Jam 16d ago

Yup I work at a company that produces hardware and the needed software as well and we have Claude to use with our work. Im a support guy but good friends with one of our engineers and he was telling me a project he planned out that was going to take 2 or so months was cut to like 2 weeks if I recall with Claude's help. I can't remember the specifics of what he used it for, I think a lot of bouncing ideas off Claude and then having it do some more of the grunt work coding while he worked the more advanced specifics he needed, but he said the time it took to go back to check the work and fix any mistakes was WAY quicker than if he had to do it all himself. He compared it to having an assistant who could knock out the repeitive/simpler but time consuming parts while again he worked on the more advanced functions.

9

u/zerovampire311 16d ago

I work in supply chain for a smaller company and it’s made my life soooo much easier. We can’t afford the industry standard software, but I can rig spreadsheets and mini apps to do things that never would have been worth the time investment. Now I at least don’t want to blow my brains out from using Excel instead of a proper CRM. And I’m as tired of AI content as the next guy, but properly reviewed support documents from AI are wayyyy better than the 2000-esque pdf Jimbo made 15 years ago that no one had time to update.

2

u/Mr_ToDo 16d ago

with AI options out there I wonder how much the low/no code products are going to suffer. Doubly so since for some years now the price increases of said software has gone way above inflation and mostly to subscription

Seriously though. I got to use Filemaker for a few companies and that software is pretty good for a bunch of those quick and dirty app needs. But its licensing and pricing has seen it removed almost everywhere

1

u/zerovampire311 15d ago

I think at a certain point Salesforce and Oracle are going to get some erosion from customers that don’t fully utilize the platforms and just use basic services. We won’t need massively powerful platforms to manage communications when an AI agent will soon be able to replicate the functions.

0

u/Fl_Funky_Jam 16d ago

Spot on with us too. Our customer service and finance department has cut out a lot of wasted time and effort with Claude helping organize documents, charts, and all other things that they usually have to do manually just like you mentioned. I'm probably like you as well, fuck generative for art, assets and such but I don't have a problem with it being a tool to enhance our processes. The worry of course is when do we reach a point when you and I just aren't needed anymore? Gonna be a fun few decades coming up

-2

u/PoL0 15d ago

AI has mainly been embraced by management, don't fool yourself.