Currently Archicad AI is just a useless gimmick

[Wlad222]

The current AI feature for selecting fills in Archicad is not practical because it requires an overly precise description every time, including specifying things like foreground color pen and giving exact pen numbers. The main advantage of AI should be its flexibility and ability to understand natural speech, but right now, if one types "select red fill," the AI fails unless the full criteria are spelled out in technical detail. The regular Find command already does this well enough without AI—there’s no point in using AI if it does not make the workflow faster, easier, or more efficient.

True AI should understand and convert everyday language into the right commands automatically. Users shouldn’t have to memorize and specify all parameter names or numeric values. This rigid workflow defeats the purpose and convenience that AI is supposed to bring, and currently, it only complicates the process instead of simplifying it.

3/10 disappointed.

[Wlad222]

I great feature would be to select all text elements below or above fills... Not capable of doing that yet...

[Wlad222]

Another example where I have to specify EXACTLY what to select... AI is supposed to be smart and help me get the right layer. Even if I said only layer general, it should figure it out...

[Barry Kelly]

---

@Wlad222 wrote:

Even if I said only layer general, it should figure it out...

---

You need to say 'select text in layer .... ', not just 'select text in annotation general'.

Otherwise it could be a storey name or an elevation name, etc.

I agree though it should not be so picky with capitalisation.

Barry.

[vistasp]

I think it was the lack of a hyphen that stumped the "AI" at first. 😂

This is early days... it should improve.

[Bricklyne Clarence]

Oh my Gosh!!!!!

Are you seriously telling me that GS released yet another new version with a half-baked and 'not-quite-ready-for-actual-use' new feature tool, ...which they just happen to be heavily using to promote this new version?

I don't believe it!!

Not for one second.

That would be totally TOTALLY unlike them to do such a thing. Or to waste....er...... I mean....to spend invaluable (...and we're told,.....'limited'....) development resources to develop a tool and feature that wasn't particularly requested that highly in the wishlist forums .....or elsewhere - and only because they wanted to get in on the whole "AI" fad and bandwagon, that everyone currently is on - all while ignoring actual highly requested and popularly voted for wishes and tool improvements in the wishlist section.

And by "ignore", ...I  mean, actively neglecting by placing the majority of them "ON HOLD"*.

Don't believe me? Pay a visit to the ("New and Improved!) Wishlist Section, and take a look for yourselves. They were never serious about that whole Wishlist spring-cleaning initiative anymore than they were about the Roadmap that now just looks like an internal company memo that has nothing to do with what users actually want improved.

(* "ON HOLD"  disturbingly feels a whole lot like the wishlist section digital equivalent of, "Thank you for your patience. Currently all our representatives are unavailable but please stay on the line (and listen to this mind-numbing earworm elevator music) and one of our human technicians will be with you shortly to assist you. (...if you have several hours to waste with your phone at your ear)")

But let's give those users another shiny sparkly jangly jingling toy (AI Assistant, Vision Pro, ) to play with and distract them from the fact that we're not actually addressing what they need addressed in the program, nor do we plan to any time soon. As long as you a categorize it as a "Beta" tool or "Experimental feature" it's allowed to be as half-baked as it needs be and unusable as all hell (but they still won't hesitate to use them to promote the new versions in their marketing, ....for lack of other actual tool improvements to use to promote it).

And if we're really really lucky, after a few versions, they'll just abandon improving those "experimental" tools altogether and move on to their next shiny jangly thing - leaving those old toys in the vast graveyard of half-baked Archicad "new tools" that were introduced with a plethora of issues and problems but never revistied to be improved or in some cases just re-witten altogether for lack of functionality.

But hey, at least we can now customize the footings and handles on our cabinets in 10 millions ways, while also being able to rotate them perpendicularly 90 degrees with a keystroke command (something that their competitor rival software have been able to do for the better part of the last 15 years or more).

Oh, and Dark mode. YAAAAAY!!!!...

YES!!!

Finally!!!! (*Fist pump*)

Oh wait.....

I have to be on a Mac for that.

Never mind.

[laembert]

No way!

[Alison_007]

Sad reality, that's exactly what they do, insignificant resources for an annual update. In recent years, this software has become an endless beta version; they add tools, don't continue development, and simply abandon them. Want an example?

GDL EDITOR, PARAM-O, PYTHON, REALISTIC 3D PBR, MEP, CINERENDER, MESH, FOLDERS/SERCH, GRAPHIC OVERWRITE COLOR INTERFACE (MORE THAN 2 YEARS IN BETA FOR MAC), etc... For years Client as been asking for a layer palette, components, and much more basic tool, and they don't listen to anyone. IMPROVE WHAT'S WRONG FIRST. 

Now they've decided to separate ArchiCAD and MEP (sad, sad, sad). What is MEP design besides a copy of ArchiCAD with MEP tools (which they'll exclude from ArchiCAD itself)??? SHAMEFUL. They decided to copy other companies by having intermediate updates between annual releases like AC 26.1, 26.2, 26.3 until the next version, but look at this version, what useful features have they included? NOTHING!!

[Kamil Dylo]

Besides the fact that no one asked for this functionality, and that it seems like it will be delivered in a half-baked way, it makes me wonder: is this really how we’ll be using software in the future?

I keep hearing that future software won’t require an interface anymore, and that we’ll all be operating it through AI text prompts. What do you guys think about that?
Personally, I can’t imagine this approach being more efficient for an architect’s daily work than using mouse clicks and keyboard shortcuts, especially when we consider software with a well-designed, customizable interface (like Archicad). I’m curious what made Graphisoft decide to go in this direction.

[jl_lt]

others are doing it, so they said "why not?"

currently the tool is still on the sphincter retentiveness stage, that is why it needs you to specify everything you need it to specify. Give it time    (about a decade should be enough).

[Lee Hankins]

I personally have found it quite useful during testing. Yes, it’s basic at the moment and you have to learn how to specifically ask it to do things such as selecting elements but I am sure it will develop and be enhanced very quickly.

[joaomourao]

Been using it for a couple hours and already finding it useful... find and select is what is does mostly, for now, but writing things down can be much easier and straight forward than f&s. Yes it does not unselect yet but this will surely evolve quickly, thus my question... By using it more and more, results will be better but what can WE do besides using it and confirming that WE like or dislike when using a prompt? I am already fixing some shortcuts for naming but there could be more documentation about this Ai assistant... Anyone knows about it besides this link?

https://community.graphisoft.com/t5/AI-Solutions/gh-p/aisolutions

Cheers!

[mthd]

Google search AI is quite good at present. The AI needs a bit of training or to get into the AC users language, once that happens it will get better.

Yes I certainly do not want to waste time telling AI all the specifics and details. AI should be able to read the file we are working on and all the data associated with it, like the layers, pen weights etc etc.

It seems to me that when you suffer from “CCS” or Chronic Complaining Syndrome everyone wants to hit the like button lol. We should all have Constructive Criticism in a positive tone and not using sarcasm but my making wishes that address the problems we are having in using AC. That is if we can spare the time to do so ?

But hey some like to entertain us with sarcasm and yes I did find @Bricklyne Clarence’s post quite funny. Yes there are basic things to work on in AC and some need urgent attention. Yes “AI” is the current buzz word and a craze and that toy that will sit in the basket and be taken for granted.

I wouldn’t waste my time complaining. We have a saying in Australia, when someone asks you how you are going ? We usually say “I can’t complain, nobody listens”. That is true to some extent.

I don’t know how it is in your country but it might be entertaining to find out though ?

[Bricklyne Clarence]

It feels like that previous post was a swipe or a sideswipe against me. Perhaps it wasn't, but that's certainly what it felt like seeing as you went out of your way to tag me.

I'm going to go the benefit of doubt route and assume it wasn't, and even go as far as state that probably ten of fifteen years ago I might have gone the route you're suggesting in "positively" and "constructively" criticizing and contributing - possibly even providing illustrated examples of what I mean when I suggest improvements.

I might even have gone to the Wishlist section and post those well-detailed and explained wishes and then quietly sit back with my hands folded, like a good little boy and wait patiently and hopefully for Graphisoft to one day see it. I would even encourage others to vote for those wishes to get it to their attention and hopefully push it up their priority list.
And even when they placed that wish...."ON HOLD"......like has happened with a lot of other popularly voted on wishes right now, I STILL wouldn't complain or go the negative route - because that would be unproductive.

No, I would wait.
Patiently and with good cheer.
Even if it took another 10 or 15 years for them to finally get to it, like it took for the new "Rotate" command that's been sitting on the Wishlist section for the better part of......(**Checks notes**).....15 or more years.
I STILL wouldn't be negative.
Not even then.

Because that's not productive and doesn't help further the positive discourse at all....(..in so far as anyone's actually listening as would happen in an actual discourse).

I would instead be grateful and thankful that they've seen fit to grant us these gifts ( ...and no, I refuse to call them "crumbs". I simply won't) that we hardly deserve.

Unfortunately we're not at 10 or 15 years ago.
Because 10 or 15 years ago, we (mostly) didn't know any better.

(....okay, probably more like 20-25 years ago)

We actually thought they gave a cr**p about what we thought and how we felt the program can be improved, or should be improved, and that our hopes for improvement were somewhat in alignment with their long-term vision and plans for the software.

We now know better,....

....sadly.

They add new features that no one asked for, and which were neither in the Wishlist section (.....because.....you see.......no one asked for them.....) .....or on the Roadmap ( in the pre- pre-revision state),.....and when that's pointed out, they ipso facto, post-facto add it to the Roadmap (....clumsily, I might add) .
As if this was something that had long been requested or clamored for.

Kind of makes a mockery of this whole "be constructive and positive, and good things will come to those who wait" stance.

Oh darn it!!
I did it again didn't I?
I got all that sarcasm spilled all over my new shoes and over this exquisite terrazzo floor and velvety lush Persian carpet.

Dagnabit!!!

I'll go get some wet wipes to clean it all up.

[mthd]

Hey @Bricklyne Clarence, I just recognise your talent with words and you shouldn’t give up trying to help GS improve its product just because some of our suggestions are binned.

I by no means take a swipe at you or any others here for complaining. It’s ok to complain or make suggestions in a reasonable respectful manner and to add humour too. I have complained many times and have not been careful with my speech at times. I just know that when we use our speech carefully we get better results. We all understand this when we are in the process of attracting new clientele. So I am hoping they will listen to us more if we are careful about our speech, that’s all I am saying.

[Alison_007]

On this case, I believe the issue isn't that people only complain; the issue is that there are very basic things that are wrong, and people have been asking for them for decades, if not more. So, yes, I think people should complain, especially if they spend money on it, and the worst part is being completely ignored. Now, it's one thing to complain when you have plenty, especially when everything is being delivered. A good challenge would be to compare the same "basic" tools today with those from 10 years ago and see the evolution or capabilities of Archicad itself in relation to other BIM tools; we would then have a better understanding.

[mthd]

Nothing wrong with asking for improvements even if they fall on deaf ears at times. I am just saying that it is better to spend our time providing detailed explanations with diagrams on what we want implemented and improved in Archicad. We use the Wishlist for that and when we do that in a respectful dignified way, we are more likely to be taken seriously and listened to.

[vlahtinen]

In the Finnish version of Archicad, even the built-in example prompt doesn’t work. That makes the situation especially frustrating. It’s hard to offer more “constructive” criticism when the feature doesn’t function at the most basic level.

If the AI assistant can’t handle the sample use cases provided by Graphisoft, it’s difficult to view it as anything other than a yet another half-baked implementation. Before expecting users to refine their feedback, the tool itself needs to reach a point where it can actually be tested.

[gpowless]

IMO, this is typical of all Graphisoft development in the last 10 years.

They can't intelligently, test and refine the upgrades and tools and are under pressure to have a release as soon as possible.

So, they make the release of buggy and non-functioning code and expect the users to report back their issues - even installing backdoor reporting tools - to make you do their jobs. Instead of ensuring that new or revamped tools are complete and fully usable, they instead make small releases of half-baked functionality. MEP comes to mind. Engineering Tools comes to mind. And of course, backward functionality is thrown out the window.

The problem with AI being incorporated into ARCHICAD is the fact that it too was rushed, in order to "beat" competing software from claiming it first. The problem with all AI is that its "intelligence" has to be populated and instead of taking the time it requires to fundamentally fill the datasets with intelligent meaning, they rushed it. So, what is happening is that they are using YOU - the users - to make up for their laziness. Every time you use it, you are teaching it (which is true of all AI released on the market today). All your frustration and time delay at company expense is being wasted on doing something that Graphisoft should have done before its release.

And to make matters worse, AI can't self check or self correct. While you might get a response, it won't always be accurate since those that end up teaching and correcting it could be wrong. The very basic adage of computer programming comes to mind: GIGO. Garbage In = Garbage Out. (and by the way this is a concept that I not only challenged Monica Lam, a pioneer of AI when AI was in its infancy in the 1990s, but also ChatGTP5, which acknowledged its own failures.) AI is not the future.

"Shall we play a game?" says HAL. For those that might be old enough to remember, we all know how that turned out!

[Eduardo Rolon]

Nit picky - It wasn't HAL it was WOPR (WarGames).

HAL was "I can't do that Dave…"

--

which proves the GIGO point.

[torben_wadlinger]

Nope, WOPR was the computer's name, Joshua was the login and the name of the software, which ran the war simulation game.