I’m struggling to find a good balance between the usage of AI and working in the Engine. I’m trying to use to implement some of the parts of the game, and I’m trying to focus on the:
- Request a plan of action for feature
- Review the plan of action
- Ask for the execution of the plan
But the plan is already broken, dozens of issues in the planning already. I can see some good ideas, some good principles, but a deeper look and I can see the flaws in the plan. Should I invest more time the planning? Or invest more time refining on the implementation of the plan?
From those who use this type of tooling, what is the workflow that gives the 100x productivity boost that is claimed.
From those who use this type of tooling, what is the workflow that gives the 100x productivity boost that is claimed.
You don’t. As your own testing has shown that number is a lie
I know that on the empirical knowledge and testing I’m not seeing this benefit and speed.
But for some reason people are claiming that. And it feels like I’m left behind.
Even if the real number is a 10% speed boost, I want to know where and how to apply this to benefit from this tools. It’s the same as the LSP, people can complain about it, and be like DHH that says that LSP aren’t worth it. But on my own usage it’s a good tool to add on my set of tooling.
The speed boost is only seen when AI is used by people who are already very skilled at whatever they are trying to use AI to assist them with. Code assist/generation LLMs only help in a meaningful, effective and efficient way when the user is proficient enough at coding to write specifically worded prompts and knowledgeable in the coding language to properly audit the output.
The trick to getting a speed and efficiency boost from AI is to already be good at what you’re asking it to do.
I’m not an expert in Game Dev, but I can see “good” code and “bad” code.
And yet, I can’t see the meaningful benefit, I can see the cracks, it’s never “fully” there, it’s always a couple details that aren’t correct in the planing, it’s always something that bothers, or some misleading thing that looks “ok”, but when you think little bit more it’s not trully correct.
Oh. I didn’t say it is useful for full human code writing replacement. Just that ANY speed boost would only be achievable by someone who already has the skills required to do the job quickly and accurately.
But for some reason people are claiming that. And it feels like I’m left behind.
Classic FOMO, and that’s a large part of how they’re selling this snake oil.
