When the breadth of the content is just about infinite, will they care about repeated playthroughs? I think they could capture quite a few people just keen to explore and see what's around each successive corner.

I think they could do things like check the response to some areas and favour those to weed others out.

I remember spending time in RDR2 exploring the landscape, and finding the variety of moments that spawned (hunters, animal attacks, peril and whatever else). I think AI can get close enough to that quality of environment to satisfy people. As it was, the level designers were clearly inspired by the natural world which was not generated by human game designers.

Again, I'm not against people trying. I just have low confidence. It doesn't feel much different from many ideas I've experienced.

All said, the hubris of new attempts accomplishes a ton.

> When the breadth of the content is just about infinite, will they care about repeated playthroughs?

Read about the launch and the development of No Man's Land.

I dunno, it feels like when content tends towards infinite it also tends towards meaningless.

> Procedurally generated levels tend to not invite repeated playthroughs.

I agree with your broader point about low confidence in an AI-powered quantum leap, but in my experience this point about repeated playthroughs is actually backwards. Lots of the most popular and/or heralded games in recent years use procedural generation to enable repeated playthroughs as a core mechanic. Balatro, Hades, Slay the Spire, Diablo, Helldivers, Civilization, etc etc. Even things like drafting in MtG or board layouts in Settlers of Catan use procedural generation to increase replayability.

Hades is proceduralish. More randomized stitching together of created rooms. Some of the ones you name are not exploration, at all, though. Balatro and spire are tough to call procedurally generated? Literally static encounters randomly chosen.

Fair, though, that there are some that are closer than a straight read of my post would imply. Minecraft would be a good counterpoint. Those tend to be sandbox style. And nothing wrong with that.

AI isn't the same as procedural, but anyways, I think there are a lot of interesting possibilities. Maybe a long ways off though.

Fair it is technically different. I question by how much? This is a lot like ML not being statistics. Somewhat true, but also largely not.