Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

На главную

Claude Opus 4.7 vs GPT 5.4 (2/7) Testing how well these models do with cloth physics simulation, and honestly I'm quite disappointed to see how poorly GPT 5.4 performed here. Performance was pretty bad... it added all the functionality (panning, cutting, dragging the curtain) under one mouse event, causing...

developedbyed's profile picture

Dev Ed

74,772 subscribers

43,668 просмотров • 5 месяцев назад •via X (Twitter)

LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

Комментарии: 0

Нет доступных комментариев

Здесь появятся комментарии из оригинального поста

Похожие видео

Opus 4.6 vs GPT 5.4 (High) (1/9) prompt: Build a single-file HTML/CSS/JS (no libs) demo that uses SVG to simulate a plant growing: stem extends, leaves sprout + unfurl with springy/windy “physics”, then seamlessly loops forever. For the initial impressions I'm really impressed by GPT, for speed they both felt about the same, but gpt was still half cheaper than opus. I also much prefer the design and animation that gpt produced, physics on the leaves are super cool and it also loops pretty nicely whilst opus just fades out the plant. Still got a bunch of tests to run but this is really exciting.
0:10

Opus 4.6 vs GPT 5.4 (High) (1/9) prompt: Build a single-file HTML/CSS/JS (no libs) demo that uses SVG to simulate a plant growing: stem extends, leaves sprout + unfurl with springy/windy “physics”, then seamlessly loops forever. For the initial impressions I'm really impressed by GPT, for speed they both felt about the same, but gpt was still half cheaper than opus. I also much prefer the design and animation that gpt produced, physics on the leaves are super cool and it also loops pretty nicely whilst opus just fades out the plant. Still got a bunch of tests to run but this is really exciting.

Dev Ed

660,154 просмотров • 6 месяцев назад

Opus 4.6 vs GPT-5.4 (4/9) prompt: Build a production-quality 3D flight-tracking web app using React + Vite + Three.js (react-three-fiber + drei) that visualizes live OpenSky aircraft data on a rotatable 3D Earth, with real-time plane motion, smooth interpolation, altitude-accurate positioning, and polished lighting/post-processing. Both models did really well on this one and honestly I’m impressed with both. GPT-5.4 had the nicer post-processing out of the box. I really liked the subtle light shimmer on the airplanes when rotating the planet, and the camera work when clicking a plane felt better overall. Opus 4.6 though had a few details I liked more. It automatically went and found a much nicer Earth texture on GitHub, while with GPT-5.4 I had to reprompt it to go look for a better one. I also preferred Opus’s plane model overall, it just looked more polished, whereas GPT-5.4’s plane asset looked a bit funny. One thing I noticed with GPT-5.4 is that when you click into the plane, the camera sometimes clips through the planet, which breaks the effect a bit. Opus handled that part more cleanly. Overall this felt like a strong result from both, just with different strengths. GPT-5.4 felt better on presentation and post-processing, while Opus had better asset choices and a more premium-looking Earth/plane combo.
0:15

Opus 4.6 vs GPT-5.4 (4/9) prompt: Build a production-quality 3D flight-tracking web app using React + Vite + Three.js (react-three-fiber + drei) that visualizes live OpenSky aircraft data on a rotatable 3D Earth, with real-time plane motion, smooth interpolation, altitude-accurate positioning, and polished lighting/post-processing. Both models did really well on this one and honestly I’m impressed with both. GPT-5.4 had the nicer post-processing out of the box. I really liked the subtle light shimmer on the airplanes when rotating the planet, and the camera work when clicking a plane felt better overall. Opus 4.6 though had a few details I liked more. It automatically went and found a much nicer Earth texture on GitHub, while with GPT-5.4 I had to reprompt it to go look for a better one. I also preferred Opus’s plane model overall, it just looked more polished, whereas GPT-5.4’s plane asset looked a bit funny. One thing I noticed with GPT-5.4 is that when you click into the plane, the camera sometimes clips through the planet, which breaks the effect a bit. Opus handled that part more cleanly. Overall this felt like a strong result from both, just with different strengths. GPT-5.4 felt better on presentation and post-processing, while Opus had better asset choices and a more premium-looking Earth/plane combo.

Dev Ed

279,565 просмотров • 6 месяцев назад

GPT-5.5 by Reasoning Effort: I've asked it in Codex to create a physics-based visualisation of RL cycles for different sized models (70b, 1t, 10t), to demonstrate how the amount of RL you can do differs by model size. My assessment of each: - Low: weird slop - Medium: kinda cooked - High: sort of tried but ultimately incoherent - Extra High: elite - really nice idea and well executed Obviously this is just one shot, but worth trying different reasoning levels for the new models, medium seems to be pretty good for GPT-5.5 and it was really bad for many previous GPT models.
0:15

GPT-5.5 by Reasoning Effort: I've asked it in Codex to create a physics-based visualisation of RL cycles for different sized models (70b, 1t, 10t), to demonstrate how the amount of RL you can do differs by model size. My assessment of each: - Low: weird slop - Medium: kinda cooked - High: sort of tried but ultimately incoherent - Extra High: elite - really nice idea and well executed Obviously this is just one shot, but worth trying different reasoning levels for the new models, medium seems to be pretty good for GPT-5.5 and it was really bad for many previous GPT models.

Peter Gostev (SF: 22-26 June)

209,258 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад

BREAKING: Anthropic just dropped Opus 4.8—and it is a MONSTER We've been testing for about a week Every 📧 and our verdict is they could've just called it Opus 5, it's that good. Here's our vibe check: - Beats GPT-5.5 on Senior Engineer bench. On our toughest benchmark Opus 4.8 scores a 63—a hair higher than GPT-5.5's score of 62, and a full 30 points higher than Opus 4.7. It tackled a ground-up rewrite of a production codebase, and actually built something that works. HOWEVER: Coding performance varied a lot at different reasoning levels. We recommend using it on xhigh for best results. - Incredibly good writer. Opus 4.8 scored a 79.6 on our writing benchmark—measuring models on real-world writing tasks we do all of the time like essay writing, promo email writing, and more. It beats GPT-5.5 by 6 points. It produces well-written prose with fewer "AI-isms". It's also very good at writing in your voice given the right context. HOWEVER: Writing performance also varied with reasoning levels. Medium reasoning had higher incidence of AI-isms—we found best results with high. - Beast at knowledge work. Opus 4.8 is very good at general knowledge work tasks like report creation, research and more. It produced the best PowerPoint one-shot we've ever seen on our deck generation benchmark. - Emotionally intelligent, willing to question the frame. I've also found it to be quite good at talking through psychological or interpersonal issues. It has a high EQ, and it's also good at not glazing and helping to expand your perspective. Its thought process feels extremely rich and dynamic. THE BAD: These days a model is only as good as its harness, and Codex is still a far superior harness to the Claude Desktop app. This has kept me using Codex + GPT-5.5 as my daily driver, but I am flipping back and forth a lot more between Codex and Claude. Anthropic is back baby! Read the rest on Every 📧:
0:11

BREAKING: Anthropic just dropped Opus 4.8—and it is a MONSTER We've been testing for about a week Every 📧 and our verdict is they could've just called it Opus 5, it's that good. Here's our vibe check: - Beats GPT-5.5 on Senior Engineer bench. On our toughest benchmark Opus 4.8 scores a 63—a hair higher than GPT-5.5's score of 62, and a full 30 points higher than Opus 4.7. It tackled a ground-up rewrite of a production codebase, and actually built something that works. HOWEVER: Coding performance varied a lot at different reasoning levels. We recommend using it on xhigh for best results. - Incredibly good writer. Opus 4.8 scored a 79.6 on our writing benchmark—measuring models on real-world writing tasks we do all of the time like essay writing, promo email writing, and more. It beats GPT-5.5 by 6 points. It produces well-written prose with fewer "AI-isms". It's also very good at writing in your voice given the right context. HOWEVER: Writing performance also varied with reasoning levels. Medium reasoning had higher incidence of AI-isms—we found best results with high. - Beast at knowledge work. Opus 4.8 is very good at general knowledge work tasks like report creation, research and more. It produced the best PowerPoint one-shot we've ever seen on our deck generation benchmark. - Emotionally intelligent, willing to question the frame. I've also found it to be quite good at talking through psychological or interpersonal issues. It has a high EQ, and it's also good at not glazing and helping to expand your perspective. Its thought process feels extremely rich and dynamic. THE BAD: These days a model is only as good as its harness, and Codex is still a far superior harness to the Claude Desktop app. This has kept me using Codex + GPT-5.5 as my daily driver, but I am flipping back and forth a lot more between Codex and Claude. Anthropic is back baby! Read the rest on Every 📧:

Dan Shipper

354,673 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

We released physics-intern: a simple harness for science problems! It gets models like Gemini 3.1 Pro to go from 17.7 -> 31.4, thus beating GPT 5.5 Pro. The physics-intern harness can wrap any model and via dedicated subagent boost the performance of the vanilla reasoning models. While I think more and more of these harness capability gains will be absorbed into the models (like prompting tricks disappeared over time) there is a lot to be gained right now by building good scaffolds for those models and integrating tools well. Interestingly, the exception we found that GPT 5.5 Pro actually didn't benefit from the physics-intern harness! Read more about it here: PS: I think the Harness[Model] notation is kind of nice.
0:12

We released physics-intern: a simple harness for science problems! It gets models like Gemini 3.1 Pro to go from 17.7 -> 31.4, thus beating GPT 5.5 Pro. The physics-intern harness can wrap any model and via dedicated subagent boost the performance of the vanilla reasoning models. While I think more and more of these harness capability gains will be absorbed into the models (like prompting tricks disappeared over time) there is a lot to be gained right now by building good scaffolds for those models and integrating tools well. Interestingly, the exception we found that GPT 5.5 Pro actually didn't benefit from the physics-intern harness! Read more about it here: PS: I think the Harness[Model] notation is kind of nice.

Leandro von Werra

97,504 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

This is genuinely insane 🤯 I sent the same prompt to 2 Claude Opus 5 agents 1 agent used no MCPs 1 agent used 2 MCPS the goal was to clone a very famous game, that has over 4 billion downloads and the results are scary.. The 1st agents game looks pretty basic. but has all the mechanics in place and even has power ups. The 2nd agents game looks polished especially for 1 single prompt. the 2nd agent used higgsfield mcp to create images for all of the assets then sent those images to Meshy AI with a prompt to create them it also generated all the UI elements. the results speak for themselves. you need to start MCP maxxing
0:17

This is genuinely insane 🤯 I sent the same prompt to 2 Claude Opus 5 agents 1 agent used no MCPs 1 agent used 2 MCPS the goal was to clone a very famous game, that has over 4 billion downloads and the results are scary.. The 1st agents game looks pretty basic. but has all the mechanics in place and even has power ups. The 2nd agents game looks polished especially for 1 single prompt. the 2nd agent used higgsfield mcp to create images for all of the assets then sent those images to Meshy AI with a prompt to create them it also generated all the UI elements. the results speak for themselves. you need to start MCP maxxing

Ernesto Lopez

70,384 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

Gemini Omni is changing video creation and most people still don't know what it can actually do. Here are 7 things you can do with it right now: 1. Image to Video in multiple styles: Upload a photo. describe the style. Gemini Omni turns it into a video. cinematic, anime, realistic. 2. Reimagine camera angles: Take any image and visualize it from a completely different angle. no reshooting. just describe it. 3. Change backgrounds: Swap the background of any video through plain conversation. no green screen. no editing software. 4. Change hairstyle: Describe a new hairstyle. Gemini Omni applies it. characters stay consistent across every frame. 5. visualize with moodboards: feed it a moodboard, audio, and a brief. it builds the video around the full creative reference — not just a text prompt. 6. swap characters and objects mid-scene: replace people, props, and objects in an existing video. the scene stays consistent. the physics hold up. 7. edit physics: describe how you want things to move. Gemini Omni adjusts the physics of the scene through conversation.
0:18

Gemini Omni is changing video creation and most people still don't know what it can actually do. Here are 7 things you can do with it right now: 1. Image to Video in multiple styles: Upload a photo. describe the style. Gemini Omni turns it into a video. cinematic, anime, realistic. 2. Reimagine camera angles: Take any image and visualize it from a completely different angle. no reshooting. just describe it. 3. Change backgrounds: Swap the background of any video through plain conversation. no green screen. no editing software. 4. Change hairstyle: Describe a new hairstyle. Gemini Omni applies it. characters stay consistent across every frame. 5. visualize with moodboards: feed it a moodboard, audio, and a brief. it builds the video around the full creative reference — not just a text prompt. 6. swap characters and objects mid-scene: replace people, props, and objects in an existing video. the scene stays consistent. the physics hold up. 7. edit physics: describe how you want things to move. Gemini Omni adjusts the physics of the scene through conversation.

Poonam Soni

11,682 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

Fable 5 totally crushed our new contest, but it cost 6x more than Opus 4.8! We gave 4 models the same prompt: build three self-contained HTML5 canvas scenes with real physics demos Prompts: — A train derailing off a broken bridge into the water — Two cars jumping off ramps and colliding mid-air over a canyon — A monster truck crushing a row of parked cars Outputs: Fable 5: 62,158 tokens, $3.12 GPT 5.5: 37,753 tokens, $1.14 Opus 4.8: 22,280 tokens, $0.56 GLM 5.2: 36,246 tokens, $0.08 Fable 5 did all three scenes at A+. The crashes looked real, things fell and broke the right way, and nothing went through the ground or floated. GPT 5.5 was the closest to Fable. In the Bigfoot show, we think GPT was even a little better. GLM 5.2 did not win any scene, but it was the cheapest by far. Fable is the best pick for quality, but you pay more for it.
0:16

Fable 5 totally crushed our new contest, but it cost 6x more than Opus 4.8! We gave 4 models the same prompt: build three self-contained HTML5 canvas scenes with real physics demos Prompts: — A train derailing off a broken bridge into the water — Two cars jumping off ramps and colliding mid-air over a canyon — A monster truck crushing a row of parked cars Outputs: Fable 5: 62,158 tokens, $3.12 GPT 5.5: 37,753 tokens, $1.14 Opus 4.8: 22,280 tokens, $0.56 GLM 5.2: 36,246 tokens, $0.08 Fable 5 did all three scenes at A+. The crashes looked real, things fell and broke the right way, and nothing went through the ground or floated. GPT 5.5 was the closest to Fable. In the Bigfoot show, we think GPT was even a little better. GLM 5.2 did not win any scene, but it was the cheapest by far. Fable is the best pick for quality, but you pay more for it.

atomic.chat

2,840,649 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

Beauty ads just changed forever. Free Claude Opus 4.8 + GPT Image 2 + Seedance 2.0 workflow to spin up 100s of video ads. No studio, no model, no macro lens, no shoot day. Here's what nobody in beauty marketing wants to say out loud. That glossy lip shot. The droplet hitting the surface in slow motion. The whip-pan into the next scene. The crystalline product splash. All the stuff that used to need a real set, a real camera op, and a full shoot day. You can generate every frame of it from a text prompt now, and stitch it into a finished ad before your coffee goes cold. The workflow is almost stupidly simple: → Tell Claude Opus 4.8 the beauty shot you want (dewy skin macro, gloss-on-lips contact, ripple transition, the works) → Claude turns it into a shot-by-shot storyboard plus a prompt for every frame → GPT Image 2 generates the photoreal stills, frame by frame → Seedance 2.0 animates each one into a clip with that buttery slow-mo glide → You drop the clips into HeyOz and assemble the full ad in one place The real unlock is volume. This isn't one hero video. Once the workflow is dialed, you spin up hundreds of variations. Different shades, different models, different hooks, different transitions. The exact creative volume Meta rewards, minus the production cost that used to make it impossible. Old way: one shoot, one look, $10k+, weeks of waiting. New way: a hundred angles, any look, a few dollars each, same afternoon. I wrote up the entire workflow. The Claude storyboard prompt, the GPT Image 2 frame prompts, the Seedance motion settings, the full assembly flow. Completely free, no email gate. Want it? Comment "GLOSS" and I'll send it straight over. (make sure you're following so it can actually reach you)
0:18

Beauty ads just changed forever. Free Claude Opus 4.8 + GPT Image 2 + Seedance 2.0 workflow to spin up 100s of video ads. No studio, no model, no macro lens, no shoot day. Here's what nobody in beauty marketing wants to say out loud. That glossy lip shot. The droplet hitting the surface in slow motion. The whip-pan into the next scene. The crystalline product splash. All the stuff that used to need a real set, a real camera op, and a full shoot day. You can generate every frame of it from a text prompt now, and stitch it into a finished ad before your coffee goes cold. The workflow is almost stupidly simple: → Tell Claude Opus 4.8 the beauty shot you want (dewy skin macro, gloss-on-lips contact, ripple transition, the works) → Claude turns it into a shot-by-shot storyboard plus a prompt for every frame → GPT Image 2 generates the photoreal stills, frame by frame → Seedance 2.0 animates each one into a clip with that buttery slow-mo glide → You drop the clips into HeyOz and assemble the full ad in one place The real unlock is volume. This isn't one hero video. Once the workflow is dialed, you spin up hundreds of variations. Different shades, different models, different hooks, different transitions. The exact creative volume Meta rewards, minus the production cost that used to make it impossible. Old way: one shoot, one look, $10k+, weeks of waiting. New way: a hundred angles, any look, a few dollars each, same afternoon. I wrote up the entire workflow. The Claude storyboard prompt, the GPT Image 2 frame prompts, the Seedance motion settings, the full assembly flow. Completely free, no email gate. Want it? Comment "GLOSS" and I'll send it straight over. (make sure you're following so it can actually reach you)

Ahad Shams | AI Ads Guy

11,288 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

Create a short film like this in just 1 minute with GPT Image 2.0 + Seedance 2.0. GPT Image 2.0 can naturally combine multiple photos into one single image, while Seedance 2.0 can use that image as a reference to automatically separate the scenes, generate a coherent video sequence, and add suitable background music. This workflow greatly improves the overall creative efficiency. When using this method, simply provide the merged image as a reference for Seedance 2.0 and briefly describe each scene with a simple prompt. This can significantly increase the success rate of the final video. All of the above was created on GPT Image Prompt: Seedance Prompt:
0:10

Create a short film like this in just 1 minute with GPT Image 2.0 + Seedance 2.0. GPT Image 2.0 can naturally combine multiple photos into one single image, while Seedance 2.0 can use that image as a reference to automatically separate the scenes, generate a coherent video sequence, and add suitable background music. This workflow greatly improves the overall creative efficiency. When using this method, simply provide the merged image as a reference for Seedance 2.0 and briefly describe each scene with a simple prompt. This can significantly increase the success rate of the final video. All of the above was created on GPT Image Prompt: Seedance Prompt:

Midjourney Sref and prompt Library

40,572 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад

MiniMax H3 Instead of sharing the prompts for each of these videos, I thought it would be more useful to share how I created that prompts. All of the videos were generated with text-to-video. First, find an image with the kind of scene, composition and mood you want to recreate. I used a few YouTube playlist thumbnails as references but Pinterest is also a great place to find inspiration. You can even use your own old or nostalgic photographs. Then upload the image to ChatGPT and ask it to describe the scene. The description it gives you can essentially become your text-to-video prompt. From there, you can generate completely new scenes with a similar composition, atmosphere and cinematic language. You can of course use the reference image directly with image-to-video or as a first frame. But if the original image isn't yours, I prefer using it only as visual inspiration and recreating the scene through text-to-video. This is the prompt I use with ChatGPT: "Describe the scene in this image in English, focusing primarily on what is happening, the characters, their actions and body language, the setting and the overall atmosphere. Also briefly describe the composition, framing, camera angle, approximate lens choice, lighting, color palette and cinematic aesthetic. Keep it concise and scene-focused rather than overly technical."
0:15

MiniMax H3 Instead of sharing the prompts for each of these videos, I thought it would be more useful to share how I created that prompts. All of the videos were generated with text-to-video. First, find an image with the kind of scene, composition and mood you want to recreate. I used a few YouTube playlist thumbnails as references but Pinterest is also a great place to find inspiration. You can even use your own old or nostalgic photographs. Then upload the image to ChatGPT and ask it to describe the scene. The description it gives you can essentially become your text-to-video prompt. From there, you can generate completely new scenes with a similar composition, atmosphere and cinematic language. You can of course use the reference image directly with image-to-video or as a first frame. But if the original image isn't yours, I prefer using it only as visual inspiration and recreating the scene through text-to-video. This is the prompt I use with ChatGPT: "Describe the scene in this image in English, focusing primarily on what is happening, the characters, their actions and body language, the setting and the overall atmosphere. Also briefly describe the composition, framing, camera angle, approximate lens choice, lighting, color palette and cinematic aesthetic. Keep it concise and scene-focused rather than overly technical."

Kōda

55,398 просмотров • 29 дней назад

1-bit Kimi K3 performs at Opus 5 level on 3D physics! We ran our Atomic Chat quant of Kimi K3 locally on 4x B200 against three cloud models and gave them all the same task, to build a giant anvil drop test as a single HTML file with real physics Outputs: K3 1bit (local): 15.8K tokens, $0 API cost Kimi K3 (API): 15.3K tokens, $0.30 API cost Opus 5: 22.8K tokens, $0.77 API cost GPT 5.6: 14.5K tokens, $0.72 API cost All four got the physics right. But only Kimi made a working winch. The drum turns and the chain drags the flat car off the pad. Opus 5 drew the most detail, road markings and sparks on the hit. And you can run a model at this level on your own box now. That still feels insane to us
0:15

1-bit Kimi K3 performs at Opus 5 level on 3D physics! We ran our Atomic Chat quant of Kimi K3 locally on 4x B200 against three cloud models and gave them all the same task, to build a giant anvil drop test as a single HTML file with real physics Outputs: K3 1bit (local): 15.8K tokens, $0 API cost Kimi K3 (API): 15.3K tokens, $0.30 API cost Opus 5: 22.8K tokens, $0.77 API cost GPT 5.6: 14.5K tokens, $0.72 API cost All four got the physics right. But only Kimi made a working winch. The drum turns and the chain drags the flat car off the pad. Opus 5 drew the most detail, road markings and sparks on the hit. And you can run a model at this level on your own box now. That still feels insane to us

atomic.chat

53,845 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

GPT Image 2 and Seedance 2.0 really show how important storyboards are. The cinematic developing master shot in the quoted post turned out well but it actually took several attempts to get there. Even the final result still didn’t fully follow the prompt. Some important details were missing, like the opening shot, the flag and the person exiting the tavern. Then I generated a storyboard using the exact same prompt and tried again. On the very first attempt, almost every detail appeared exactly as intended. Using storyboards massively increases the chance of getting the result you actually want. It also lets you preview and refine the scene visually before generating the final video.
0:15

GPT Image 2 and Seedance 2.0 really show how important storyboards are. The cinematic developing master shot in the quoted post turned out well but it actually took several attempts to get there. Even the final result still didn’t fully follow the prompt. Some important details were missing, like the opening shot, the flag and the person exiting the tavern. Then I generated a storyboard using the exact same prompt and tried again. On the very first attempt, almost every detail appeared exactly as intended. Using storyboards massively increases the chance of getting the result you actually want. It also lets you preview and refine the scene visually before generating the final video.

Kōda

126,611 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад

⚔️ Kingdom Come Deliverance first impressions ⚔️ Loving it so far, basically a medieval detective simulator that really doesn't care that you are the main character. And I'm all here for it. ▪️The WORLD is the real star of the show here and even though it's got plenty of jank and lots of copy and paste NPC faces, it just feels so IMMERSIVE. Even the UI just transports me to the times with a bright colourful medieval art style. ▪️The MUSIC I love, absolutely sells the world and basically ASMR as you trot around on your horse through the world. ▪️THE Combat is a real interesting one, it's got quite the learning curve which I actually LIKE, it definitely has some jank to it as well but I really appreciate the attempt at an original and nuanced combat system. (Having to stop your bleeding with bandages is really cool) ▪️The Story has gripped me (19 hours in so far) And while it seems a simple revenge story on the face of it, I think the story is more about Henry making his way through the world after the horrors of Skallitz. The writing quality is top notch as well as the quest design also. ▪️The CHARACTERS are amazing and the humour is top notch. I'm not sure the last time I laughed so much at a game. Henry is great and so well voiced by Tom McKay This really feels like Warhorse Studios have put a lot of love and work into making an authentic medieval world and as a bit of a medieval nerd I can't get enough of this game. A True RPG as well by all accounts, the game really makes me think hard about how to approach situations. Also I can't wait to get to KCD2.
0:12

⚔️ Kingdom Come Deliverance first impressions ⚔️ Loving it so far, basically a medieval detective simulator that really doesn't care that you are the main character. And I'm all here for it. ▪️The WORLD is the real star of the show here and even though it's got plenty of jank and lots of copy and paste NPC faces, it just feels so IMMERSIVE. Even the UI just transports me to the times with a bright colourful medieval art style. ▪️The MUSIC I love, absolutely sells the world and basically ASMR as you trot around on your horse through the world. ▪️THE Combat is a real interesting one, it's got quite the learning curve which I actually LIKE, it definitely has some jank to it as well but I really appreciate the attempt at an original and nuanced combat system. (Having to stop your bleeding with bandages is really cool) ▪️The Story has gripped me (19 hours in so far) And while it seems a simple revenge story on the face of it, I think the story is more about Henry making his way through the world after the horrors of Skallitz. The writing quality is top notch as well as the quest design also. ▪️The CHARACTERS are amazing and the humour is top notch. I'm not sure the last time I laughed so much at a game. Henry is great and so well voiced by Tom McKay This really feels like Warhorse Studios have put a lot of love and work into making an authentic medieval world and as a bit of a medieval nerd I can't get enough of this game. A True RPG as well by all accounts, the game really makes me think hard about how to approach situations. Also I can't wait to get to KCD2.

KJPlays

63,735 просмотров • 8 месяцев назад

Kimi K3 vs GPT-5.6 vs Claude Fable 5 A game is one of the hardest places to fake working code. A web app can hide bugs behind a polished screenshot. A game can't. Bad collision, clipping, jitter, broken physics, awkward controls, or a snowboard sinking into the terrain become obvious within seconds. That's why I like using games to evaluate coding models. I gave Kimi K3 a single prompt to build a snowboard game in Godot, and just 20 seconds of gameplay told me more than a page of benchmark scores ever could. Benchmarks matter, but watching a model build something interactive reveals a different side of its capabilities. If the gameplay feels right, the systems work together, and the experience holds up under real input, that's a much more convincing demonstration than any leaderboard.
0:19

Kimi K3 vs GPT-5.6 vs Claude Fable 5 A game is one of the hardest places to fake working code. A web app can hide bugs behind a polished screenshot. A game can't. Bad collision, clipping, jitter, broken physics, awkward controls, or a snowboard sinking into the terrain become obvious within seconds. That's why I like using games to evaluate coding models. I gave Kimi K3 a single prompt to build a snowboard game in Godot, and just 20 seconds of gameplay told me more than a page of benchmark scores ever could. Benchmarks matter, but watching a model build something interactive reveals a different side of its capabilities. If the gameplay feels right, the systems work together, and the experience holds up under real input, that's a much more convincing demonstration than any leaderboard.

FHILY👑

36,766 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

I asked Leslie Iwerks about her favorite scene in 'Disneyland Handcrafted,' and she pointed to a moment showing workers pulling the Mark Twain that captures both the difficulty of building Disneyland and Walt's determination to make it happen. "My favorite scene is the guys pulling the Mark Twain. Who knows exactly what the issue was, but they were all trying to pull it, and it's a little symbolic scene of just how hard it was and how hard they worked and their teamwork. Also the fact that they were up against all odds. Everyone doubted this could happen, but they were all saying it was an exciting time because Walt willed it to happen. He told everybody it could happen and that they had never done this before, but they could do it. And so it all gave them confidence that they could pull it off, and they all mobilized under Walt's singular vision to get it done. And I think that scene to me is emotional to me because I just feel like it symbolizes the teamwork."
0:16

I asked Leslie Iwerks about her favorite scene in 'Disneyland Handcrafted,' and she pointed to a moment showing workers pulling the Mark Twain that captures both the difficulty of building Disneyland and Walt's determination to make it happen. "My favorite scene is the guys pulling the Mark Twain. Who knows exactly what the issue was, but they were all trying to pull it, and it's a little symbolic scene of just how hard it was and how hard they worked and their teamwork. Also the fact that they were up against all odds. Everyone doubted this could happen, but they were all saying it was an exciting time because Walt willed it to happen. He told everybody it could happen and that they had never done this before, but they could do it. And so it all gave them confidence that they could pull it off, and they all mobilized under Walt's singular vision to get it done. And I think that scene to me is emotional to me because I just feel like it symbolizes the teamwork."

Scott Gustin

55,605 просмотров • 8 месяцев назад

After a few more hours, I think I've figured out Opus 5. Opus 5 is trained to be more agentic than anything I've used. All Claude 5 models are like that. So what changes? The way to interact with Opus 5 or contextualize it won't work the same way as with other models. It loves exploring, so it doesn't need much guidance for it. Unique preferences, artifacts, and references compliment it well and enable cleaner and more effective exploration and execution. Now that it can explore more effectively on its own and understand intent better, the best thing to do is to get out of its way (e.g., it doesn't need examples of your preferences; a clear high-level description of it works best). It's truly agentic in that sense. A good first step to provide better context for Opus 5 is to distinguish between what's situational and what needs persistence. Regardless, persistent system prompts and CLAUDE.MD needs to stay lightweight. Remove memories and tool descriptions from these. CLAUDE.MD is also a great place to tap into progressive disclosure by linking command/skills to it. On the situational side, agent skills and auto-memory can leverage progressive disclosure and the improved ability of the model to use its external context/knowledge. Conflicting and unnecessary instructions, which are common at this layer (mainly to ensure reliability), are going to throw off this model easily. That's the biggest change I had to make. Simple, clean, and clear prompts and skills work best. I had to clean a lot of my skills and system prompts. The way I prompt remains the same (usually clear and well-scoped). MCP tool descriptions are also more descriptive and have been deduped from the system prompt. Anthropic released a guide on the new rules for context engineering, which was helpful here. I started to test the recommendations and created a little artifact with the things that worked along the way. This might feel like a lot of work. Believe me, it has been frustrating. But I think we can expect future frontier models to become more agentic and smarter at figuring out the right context/gaps. The best thing to do is to prepare for that now. Boris Cherny mentioned that Opus 5 is their least prompt-injectable model yet. I am not sure if that was something they intentionally trained for or if it emerged based on how it was trained, which is to be extremely agentic in nature and more direct in execution.
0:15

After a few more hours, I think I've figured out Opus 5. Opus 5 is trained to be more agentic than anything I've used. All Claude 5 models are like that. So what changes? The way to interact with Opus 5 or contextualize it won't work the same way as with other models. It loves exploring, so it doesn't need much guidance for it. Unique preferences, artifacts, and references compliment it well and enable cleaner and more effective exploration and execution. Now that it can explore more effectively on its own and understand intent better, the best thing to do is to get out of its way (e.g., it doesn't need examples of your preferences; a clear high-level description of it works best). It's truly agentic in that sense. A good first step to provide better context for Opus 5 is to distinguish between what's situational and what needs persistence. Regardless, persistent system prompts and CLAUDE.MD needs to stay lightweight. Remove memories and tool descriptions from these. CLAUDE.MD is also a great place to tap into progressive disclosure by linking command/skills to it. On the situational side, agent skills and auto-memory can leverage progressive disclosure and the improved ability of the model to use its external context/knowledge. Conflicting and unnecessary instructions, which are common at this layer (mainly to ensure reliability), are going to throw off this model easily. That's the biggest change I had to make. Simple, clean, and clear prompts and skills work best. I had to clean a lot of my skills and system prompts. The way I prompt remains the same (usually clear and well-scoped). MCP tool descriptions are also more descriptive and have been deduped from the system prompt. Anthropic released a guide on the new rules for context engineering, which was helpful here. I started to test the recommendations and created a little artifact with the things that worked along the way. This might feel like a lot of work. Believe me, it has been frustrating. But I think we can expect future frontier models to become more agentic and smarter at figuring out the right context/gaps. The best thing to do is to prepare for that now. Boris Cherny mentioned that Opus 5 is their least prompt-injectable model yet. I am not sure if that was something they intentionally trained for or if it emerged based on how it was trained, which is to be extremely agentic in nature and more direct in execution.

elvis

37,757 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

We are getting absurdly close to the point where “learning Blender” means learning how to direct an AI. A shot like this looks soft and playful on the surface, but under it is the usual 3D pain: modeling, layout, materials, lighting, atmosphere, animation, and endless tiny fixes until the frame stops looking dead. That is why Kimi K3 matters. With Blender MCP, you can describe a scene like a robotic goat walking through a dreamy field and let the model help build the environment, place the camera, shape the materials, script the motion, and iterate inside the real Blender project. The real shift is not text-to-image. It is text-to-workflow. Kimi K3 does not just give you a pretty output and disappear. It can help move the actual scene from rough setup to something that looks art-directed. Soon the hardest part of 3D will not be the software. It will be whether your imagination is good enough to deserve tools like this.
0:12

We are getting absurdly close to the point where “learning Blender” means learning how to direct an AI. A shot like this looks soft and playful on the surface, but under it is the usual 3D pain: modeling, layout, materials, lighting, atmosphere, animation, and endless tiny fixes until the frame stops looking dead. That is why Kimi K3 matters. With Blender MCP, you can describe a scene like a robotic goat walking through a dreamy field and let the model help build the environment, place the camera, shape the materials, script the motion, and iterate inside the real Blender project. The real shift is not text-to-image. It is text-to-workflow. Kimi K3 does not just give you a pretty output and disappear. It can help move the actual scene from rough setup to something that looks art-directed. Soon the hardest part of 3D will not be the software. It will be whether your imagination is good enough to deserve tools like this.

Rina

45,651 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

We just launched Claude Sonnet 4.5 and “Imagine with Claude”, a 5-day preview that creates dynamic experiences for you in real-time (and the first product I’ve worked on at Anthropic!). It pioneers the concept of “model-as-backend”, using a model to not only generate interfaces on the fly but also power all the functionality behind it – all made possible by our newest model, Claude Sonnet 4.5. Here’s a "choose your own adventure" version of my founder journey, as retold by Imagine with Claude:
0:17

We just launched Claude Sonnet 4.5 and “Imagine with Claude”, a 5-day preview that creates dynamic experiences for you in real-time (and the first product I’ve worked on at Anthropic!). It pioneers the concept of “model-as-backend”, using a model to not only generate interfaces on the fly but also power all the functionality behind it – all made possible by our newest model, Claude Sonnet 4.5. Here’s a "choose your own adventure" version of my founder journey, as retold by Imagine with Claude:

Sean Strong

115,693 просмотров • 11 месяцев назад

Here's exactly how to create these 3D Animations in under 5 minutes: 1. Generate character with GPT using this prompt: 9X16 image of a 3D hyper-realistic character of (DESIRED CHARACTER), anthropomorphic with a friendly face and large expressive eyes. Unreal Engine 5 render style. Background is a (DESIRED BACKGROUND) 2. Animate the video with VEO 3 3. Clone the entire entire video's voice with elevenlabs and rewrite the entire audio clip and paste it back in with capcut. Thats it, stop wasting money on 3D artists.
0:12

Here's exactly how to create these 3D Animations in under 5 minutes: 1. Generate character with GPT using this prompt: 9X16 image of a 3D hyper-realistic character of (DESIRED CHARACTER), anthropomorphic with a friendly face and large expressive eyes. Unreal Engine 5 render style. Background is a (DESIRED BACKGROUND) 2. Animate the video with VEO 3 3. Clone the entire entire video's voice with elevenlabs and rewrite the entire audio clip and paste it back in with capcut. Thats it, stop wasting money on 3D artists.

mtvmald

66,085 просмотров • 6 месяцев назад