By Ian Hollidae, 05/23/2025

If you need any more evidence that the AI video generation age is being pushed forward, look no further than the steady stream of announcements. Googles recent event was full of the normal demos and the web was full of the normal end of the world comments.

But if you watch closely, there is something else that seems to be emerging. Has anyone noticed that none of these products promise *better* video/film creation than what's available through traditional means? Was there anything done in "Freelancers" (one of the demos) that can't be done today? For all the technological advances suposedly being made, I would think these announcements would present more than the predictable platitudes of "new chapters in creativity".

Now I get that video AI might settle down as a tool, and these tools need to be in the right hands, but these services don't seem to be offering better video even on a purely technical level. I find this odd mainly because all one has to do is dig up a video from decades ago to see just how much video, technically, has improved without the use of AI. Higher resolution screens, better means of video recording, a whole slew of new codecs, the list goes on. Even in the old days, there was never any question about the quality of video improving moving forward.

I think regardless of what happens next, it's clear the only value video generation has is to cut production costs. And that's only if the model somehow manages to create what you want before reaching your monthly service limit. Don't get me wrong, costs do matter. But if AI isn't really improving creativity, and the cost savings aren't realized under real world situations, then none of this will move forward for very long.