Strauss Zelnick: “Doing something from scratch, that’s challenging.”

Let's get out the crystal ball for a minute.

AI.

I know you got some interesting views.

How should we think about it and its impact?

The technology that people are calling AI is, it is a massive step forward in digital technology.

But at the end of the day, it's still an array of digital tools that minimally create productivity, which is what digital tools have always done.

And I think the productivity opportunities are really quite significant.

But let's not confuse digital tools with the singularity, which in my opinion is utter nonsense.

That's the merging of human brain power with digital brain power.

To the extent you can distinguish a human being from a machine, the machine will be superior.

And that is not going to occur because at the end of the day, machines are machines that work on data and data sets are backward looking and backward looking data is only going to get you so far.

Now, there's no doubt that backward looking data that is used in a robust way, can answer a lot of questions.

So when you see people sort of, as they have in the last few years, say, oh, it's incredible, like AI programs can ace the LSAT.

It's like, well, I'm sorry, machines have been beating human beings at chess for 15 years.

Like, why are you surprised? The LSATs are completely based on data.

Of course, machines that are data-driven and good computational engines are going to beat the human mind in anything that's based on data.

But there are a bunch of things that machines are highly unlikely ever to do because data driving a predictive model isn't going to answer human questions.

Creativity applied to the entertainment business, which is the little world in which I live, relies upon the unexpected for its biggest hits.

The biggest hits are by their nature unexpected.

So sure, storytelling is informed by Shakespeare data, but great, great stories well told reflect human genius that data sets simply can't replicate.

So in my world of storytelling, interactive entertainment development, will coding be much more efficient because of generative AI? Unquestionably.

It's already happening.

But will coding replace human genius? Or more pointedly, will someone with, you know, chat, GPT-73, be able to push a button and make a competitor to GTA 6? No, and I can say that unequivocally.

Equally, are all things AI going to reduce employment? Well, I don't know.

The history of technology, which is a thousand years old, and of the technology we understand to be technology a hundred years old, has been that technology creates productivity, productivity drives GDP, GDP growth drives employment.

Let's get out the crystal ball for a minute.

AI.

I know you got some interesting views.

How should we think about it and its impact?

The technology that people are calling AI is, it is a massive step forward in digital technology.

But at the end of the day, it's still an array of digital tools that minimally create productivity, which is what digital tools have always done.

And I think the productivity opportunities are really quite significant.

But let's not confuse digital tools with the singularity, which in my opinion is utter nonsense.

That's the merging of human brain power with digital brain power.

To the extent you can distinguish a human being from a machine, the machine will be superior.

And that is not going to occur because at the end of the day, machines are machines that work on data and data sets are backward looking and backward looking data is only going to get you so far.

Now, there's no doubt that backward looking data that is used in a robust way, can answer a lot of questions.

So when you see people sort of, as they have in the last few years, say, oh, it's incredible, like AI programs can ace the LSAT.

It's like, well, I'm sorry, machines have been beating human beings at chess for 15 years.

Like, why are you surprised? The LSATs are completely based on data.

Of course, machines that are data-driven and good computational engines are going to beat the human mind in anything that's based on data.

But there are a bunch of things that machines are highly unlikely ever to do because data driving a predictive model isn't going to answer human questions.

Creativity applied to the entertainment business, which is the little world in which I live, relies upon the unexpected for its biggest hits.

The biggest hits are by their nature unexpected.

So sure, storytelling is informed by Shakespeare data, but great, great stories well told reflect human genius that data sets simply can't replicate.

So in my world of storytelling, interactive entertainment development, will coding be much more efficient because of generative AI? Unquestionably.

It's already happening.

But will coding replace human genius? Or more pointedly, will someone with, you know, chat, GPT-73, be able to push a button and make a competitor to GTA 6? No, and I can say that unequivocally.

Equally, are all things AI going to reduce employment? Well, I don't know.

The history of technology, which is a thousand years old, and of the technology we understand to be technology a hundred years old, has been that technology creates productivity, productivity drives GDP, GDP growth drives employment.