it depends.
Some approaches are that if a programmer uses an AI to help assist coding they need to understand the code, be able to explain it, and they take ownership and they are responsible for it.
But when it comes to games coded on Amstrad in this way as we have seen, no idea.
EDIT: As legal becomes more involved that starts to defines who is responsible.
AI doesn’t hallucinate as much as it used to but also it depends on what model and if you’d paid or not as free are often much less capable then paid.
Depending on prompt it may give both options or one or the other.
But isn’t the “if you paid or not” a bit arbitrary? Not long ago I was reading that a provider (I think Open AI) would switch between models depending on cost / user usage without the user actually knowing it and even downgrade the models used on paid subscriptions… or not upgrade them to the next frontier model and introduce another more expensive tier… I don’t remember the exact case, but the bottomline is, does the user know what he even subscribes to and what this subscription buys him?? I mean, today it’s ‘make 20 potatoes’, tomorrow it may be ‘make 2’?
When I said if it was paid for or not I was saying that from my experience the free models (including search in google, bing etc, chatgpt.com chat) are purposely less capable than the paid for models. I can’t say for free models run locally. It is my distinction about capabilities.
Paid for also have tiers where the information you supply to the AI is contained within your subscription, you are also paying for a coding specific models and the ability for those to build, run code, debug etc and run agents. Those are the things they mention.
When it comes to how much each token gives, difficult to measure, and you can only do specific things to try and maximise the usage but how much an operation takes is not clear. So yeah it could be one day 20 potatoes and next day 2. There was certainly a change where the amount of work tokens would give became significantly more expensive and people did notice.
By the way, has anyone tried anything else than Claude?
I do have access to Claude (and the €200 ChatGPT tier) through my wife, but I only have (and use) Gemini pro myself.
Somehow the ‘my wife has big boobs’ seems to have fallen out of fashion! O tempora, o mores! 
With AI you can do ANYTHING.
I think the AI slop will disappear over time for the retro scene, but slop i mean 100% prompt driven, those today producing slop will get bored and move on to other things.
I think its kinda like back in the day, i was absolutely blown away with The Shoot 'em Up Construction Kit on the C64, being able to create a vertical shooter without any code seemed amazing but after a while seeing others creations you realise all the games by it are the same hence the comparison to AI slop/getting bored as the end result isn’t impressive and anyone could do the same thing differing only by quality of the text prompts.
I think AI as a tool is fantastic for development, but as “a tool”, and i think it will be a great aid in retro creations.
At finish as i have curiosity i have tell Claude try to import game to the gx4000.
Take as base the amiga z80 disassembly in github.
One prompt nothing. I have problems with the hardware scroll and the horizontal Split line. At least in winape. And the first versión he made was do funny the car was invisible and with flashing graphics.
At least he get 59fps.
Really not sure, again, if this belongs in this thread but anyhow.
The problem is that what you say about people sharing a hobby etc, may sound correct but doesn’t stand; here we see people nobody heard of before (and I’m not talking about for the CPCWiki) who decided it’s their moment in the spotlight and flood us with utter slop.
The debate about to restrict announcement of vibe-coded games may sound like an arbitrary one, but it has real merit and stems for the above: if they don’t care to present and promote/defend their work, we should do something against this flood.
On another note:
I have the habit of paying for almost all CPC releases on itch, regardless of how much I like them in the end, just to show some measure of support to the developers.
Well, today, after having gone through a succession of AI releases about which I had not the slightest interest, I came upon a real one. And I was tired at that point, so I thought, “nahhh” and closed the tab. I only realised a bit later what happened.
So the drowning out of real releases with an onslaught of purely coded AI crap is real.
I’ve seen a few people make comments like that in various forums and, to be brutally honest, I think it’s part of the problem. A small subset of people who are pretty much guaranteed to pay a small amount for anything released creates an incentive for people to release as many things as possible with the minimum amount of effort. It’s essentially free money.
You saw the same thing on Amazon when self publishing a book pretty much guaranteed Amazon themselves would pay for one copy - people just pointed a PDF creator and every topic on Wikipedia and had it collate all “related” pages into a book.
Did I say I was buying anything released?
I took “paying for almost all CPC releases on itch” to mean that, yes. Perhaps I was not clear that I meant anything for the CPC?
“almost all”=every release that shows that effort has been put in it, with some quality, even though I may not enjoy that particular genre. For instance, a Spanish text adventure that’s been well put together but a. I can’t play Spanish text adventures and b. I don’t have the time to.
Auto-reply chat-bot when? I was already too lazy to read all posts, now gotten too lazy to reply myself.
Well, easy to do, but you’ll still need to do a minimal prompting.
Surprised nobody has mentioned this yet:
https://tech-insider.org/claude-code-blocks-existing-game-recreation-tengu-heron-brook-2026/
I wonder how this goes…
I often hear the phrase: “AI is just a tool!” But it is not. The bigger models are a service, and the provider may change price, quality, and availability whenever they want.
Here it seems that adding a single sentence in the rules could change the entire thing our community is discussing about for weeks.
But that doesn’t remove the fact it’s a tool. Sure it’ll be a PITA if you’re using the tool and then the people supplying it add some changes and it breaks the way you were using it, but we’re talking about playing around making games for old computers here. None of this really matters.
A tool, once acquired, is yours until it breaks. A service needs to be paid for again and again, giving you no certainty for the future.
Working with a CPC is a nice hobby. But it nevertheless shows what is going on in more or less all other areas affected by AI. Problems we are discussing here also arise elsewhere, similar, but probably in a different shape.