I voted for less AI features, but not because I'm intrinsically against AI features. If someone presented a use case well aligned with Entropia's basic principles, then I would be all for it. It's just that I haven't been able to think of anything.
The AI content isn't truly a new problem. It's just an automated expression of problems we've been facing for over a decade. We don't have an AI slop problem; we have a content slop problem. Entropians are fundamentally colonists, materializing the frontier of an unfathomably rich intersection of consumption good and capital good spanning at the very least the domains of video game, casino, business, and financial market, utilizing a platform of systems and features designed to seed user experiences of radical agency, transformative creativity, personal growth, and decentralized value creation.
Instead, due in large part to incentives induced by the planet partner model, but also to the unsuitable absorption of generic philosophies and "best practices" from genre-shallow game clusterings and broader trends across general live service game design (many of which are likely unproblematic for games with short player retention expectations, but in acute tension with cultivating the virtues amenable to the decades-long player lifespans Entropia needs in order to actualize the massive potential synergy between the consumption good and capital good paradigms rather than bifurcating into independent "high time preference player" and "low time preference investor" user experience paradigms which fail to connect or add value to each other).
Thus we find ourselves with multiple mission systems all of which amount to an endless array of pop-up ads directly informing Entropians of which activities in the universe they're "supposed" to be doing, a far lower-dimensional strategy space than is required to realize the radical agency, transformative creativity, personal growth, and decentralized value creation at Entropia's core. We find ourselves looking back at a history of Entropia more clearly delineated by developer updates than Entropians' innovations. We find new players in Port Atlantis complaining that they can't find AI Lieutenant Buckensmitherheigensworth purportedly because the city is so large and intricate, frustrated by precisely the richness of opportunity set which is desperately needed to realize the depth of user experience Entropia has to offer. And then we recall a time before the pop-up ad bombardment era when new players would explore Port Atlantis elated, without any top-down imposed goal in mind, marveling at the freedom afforded by the size and structure of the city and of the universe. The trap is to take the complaint at face value and conclude that some structure is too intricate or complicated because it doesn't mesh with the linear content delivery framework of a sender (developer) communicating entertainment value (message) through code (channel) to a receiver (player). The solution is to acknowledge the sharp tension between the two, but observe that it is the linear, top-down model of value creation, the manufactured voice in the player's head front-running and disincentivizing the formation of their own individual ideas and goals, which falls short of what Entropia fundamentally is.
To a far lesser extent, but perhaps in a similar vein, the value of AI generated waypoints is unclear. It would be trivial for MindArk to just integrate all mob spawns, resources, etc., into the in-world map, rendering exploration and community-developed information sources unnecessary. They could even have alphabetized lists of everything for easy searching. Yet this would seem to be an intrusion by the developer into the role of the Entropian, and appears to fall out of a false belief that the "real" Entropian experience is cycling and everything related to information sets is a disposable means to that end.