Let me guess it's 3am and you have been staring at a CRT for too long

sorry the pic did not load.

kolderman wrote on 2026-02-22, 12:46:

Let me guess it's 3am and you have been staring at a CRT for too long

not since 2002. But seriously, is this a waste of time or are nobody wants to actually learn or see. The ai can autonomously do this now.

They can parse the asses in the original files, make superior versions of dox-box and wraper and much more. I do not get the hostile response.

WHat is this post about?

Using AI to Resurrect Old Games: From Resolution Patches to Full Remakes

just to be clear here: it is working and play tested my self. No one wants to see or try? An AI swarm fixing a game in real time? if no i can just fuck off else were.

ok fine. This is madnes.

Its OK to disagree with usage of AI, but several members need to remember the community standards here on VOGONS.

1235 wrote on 2026-02-22, 13:20:

just to be clear here: it is working and play tested my self. No one wants to see or try? An AI swarm fixing a game in real time? if no i can just fuck off else were.

do you have an online article or youtube walkthrough?

i'm not against the idea, depending on the approach though it is somewhere between running an old game, recreating parts of an old game, or generating a new games that is very similar to an old game. interesting at least

I missed out the original thread. Conceptually I have no issue using AI to patch older games. The part that started to concern me was when you talked about budget. I get that AI time isn't free, if someone wanted to spend their own money that's their choice. Although you didnt say it, I feel the next step would be charging money for the patch and I don't like that idea. I never used Loew's Win98 patch because I dislike the idea of profiting off a minor change to someone else work.

BinaryDemon wrote on 2026-02-23, 13:47:

I missed out the original thread. Conceptually I have no issue using AI to patch older games. The part that started to concern me was when you talked about budget. I get that AI time isn't free, if someone wanted to spend their own money that's their choice. Although you didnt say it, I feel the next step would be charging money for the patch and I don't like that idea. I never used Loew's Win98 patch because I dislike the idea of profiting off a minor change to someone else work.

Either it's just an LLM bot, or he's copy-pasting from it, wasting everyone's time, for laughs probably.

eddman wrote on 2026-02-23, 14:58:

Either it's just an LLM bot, or he's copy-pasting from it, wasting everyone's time, for laughs probably.

That was my impression of the other thread. Especially the one reply which had a bunch of em dashes in it. That's a hallmark of AI generated text.

The whole thing also seems to completely miss the mark. The whole idea of video game preservation is to preserve the works of human creation. Using generative AI tools to recreate those works is the antithesis of that.

BinaryDemon wrote on 2026-02-23, 13:47:

I never used Loew's Win98 patch because I dislike the idea of profiting off a minor change to someone else work.

Especially if they're just using AI to produce the patches and don't even bother to learn what is being modified, then charging for it...

Student project?