Nah you're all wrong, GPT-5 is a leap I'm 100% doubling down here I didn't want to post too fast and regret it again, but it just solved a bunch of very, very hard debugging prompts that were previously unsolved (by AI), and then designed a gorgeous pixelated Gameboy game with a level of detail and quality that is clearly beyond anything else I've ever seen. There is no way this model is bad. I think you're all traumatized of benchmaxxers, and over-compensating against a model that is actually good. I also think you're underestimating gpt-oss's strengths (but yeah my last post was rushed) I still don't know if it is usable for serious programming though (o3 wasn't), but it seems so? A coding model as reliable as Opus, yet smarter than o3, would completely change my workflow. Opus doesn't need thinking to be great though, so, that might weight in its favor. For what it is worth, I only really used 3 models: - Opus 4.1 for coding - Gemini 2.5 very rarely for coding when Opus fails - o3 for everything but coding
How People Are Using AI For Developing Games
Builders are vibe-coding full prototypes—multiplayer loops, chatty NPCs with memory, shaders—by prompting, letting AI write servers, generate art, and live-debug so solo devs (and kids) ship in hours, not weeks. In 2025, “world models” can spin text/images into interactive 3D spaces, hinting at a game-engine-as-model future. Users gush about speed and creativity; experts celebrate the trajectory but flag physics gaps, bias, and maintainability—so AI is the turbo for prototyping while human design/testing harden production.
🤖 ai summary based on 28 tweets
Stories from AI users. WhatsNextForAI curates public sources. No product affiliations. Opinions are the authors.