I haven't been a part of this forum as long as a lot of people here, but I would like to say that the members, especially Kawa, were invaluable in helping piece together what I know about SCI and AGI. Honestly, the interactions weren't always pleasant or didn't always solve the problems I was struggled with, but they did point me in the right direction.
I'm not a programmer by profession, but working with these games has taught me things I didn't think it was possible for me to learn. I now feel fortunate that I was able to experience that journey in my own way, while having direct access to many of the amazing people who did the RE work to make that even possible.
I've used LLMs recently on some non-SCI projects in an effort to learn more about a technology that, as much as I dislike it, probably isn't going away. In addition to several other complaints, I really feel that its use took away a lot of what I love about programming as a hobby.
It's not right for me to gatekeep, and if LLMs make game design more accessible to people who don't want to invest thousands of hours learning a dead interpreter scripting language, that's probably a good thing.
However, I'm very empathetic to Kawa's point. There have always been alternatives; Adventure Game Studio is the first to spring to mind. Not that AGS is wrong or bad, but it's not SCI/AGI, and agentic LLMs feels the same. I didn't join this forum to create a point and click game, I joined it to learn how to create something myself in SCI/AGI.
If LLMs are driving people like Kawa away from the community I'll have to say that it's a net loss.
