If we’re banning games over how they make concept art… I’m not sure how you expect to enforce that. How could you possibly audit that?
Are you putting coding tools in this bucket?
Comment on Indie Game Awards Disqualifies Clair Obscur: Expedition 33 Due To Gen AI Usage
VerseAndVermin@lemmy.world 1 day ago
They replaced the art later, but shouldn’t the bar be high like this? Otherwise, the caution won’t be there. It also could be abused, like games only getting adjusted post-launch if a certain measure of success hits. Plus the final product is not the only part of matters in the was-AI-used discussion, it is also about the process. If AI is the product of stolen human artwork being fed into a machine, and then that machine is used during creation, then AI has been used in the process that led to the final product no less than the concept art that may not be seen in game but was important in steering the ship.
Maybe someone can share there thoughts though. I’m still formulating mine and this is where I am at the moment.
brucethemoose@lemmy.world 1 day ago
Katana314@lemmy.world 20 hours ago
Same way you’d celebrate a studio for “No workplace abuse.” People would have to come forward to testify about it, as concept art generation is very likely to arise from hiring fewer artists.
halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world 21 hours ago
They didn’t just replace the art later. It was intended to be placeholder art from the beginning. And was replaced 5 days after release. That tells me that they just missed replacing those temporary assets among tens of thousands of assets before release.
Using GenAI for something temporary that’s not intended to be final seems like the perfect use case for it. Especially on a small team where artist time is much better spent working on the final assets.
novibe@lemmy.ml 18 hours ago
No AI is the product of any theft. If we’re talking about piracy, piracy is NOT theft. I thought we all agreed on this already.
kazerniel@lemmy.world 14 hours ago
For me it boils down to: were the artists, whose work was used to build the large commercial models, asked about this and agreed to it? No.
Piracy only affects existing work, genAI affects all the future artwork they would try to make a living from. See AI hitting cultural sector hard: Fifth of freelance artists have lost income, work | NL Times
SlurpingPus@lemmy.world 7 minutes ago
Piracy only affects existing work, genAI affects all the future artwork they would try to make a living from.
This is certifiable baloney.
novibe@lemmy.ml 12 hours ago
Still not theft? Things can be bad without being theft.
SalamenceFury@lemmy.world 1 day ago
There is no use of Gen AI in an indie game that should be tolerated. Period.
brucethemoose@lemmy.world 1 day ago
That’s just not going to happen.
Nearly any game with more than a few people involved is going have someone use cursor code completion, or use one for reference or something. They could pull in libraries with a little AI code in them, or use an Adobe filter they didn’t realize is technically GenAI, or commission an artist that uses a tiny bit in their workflow.
SalamenceFury@lemmy.world 18 hours ago
Doesn’t matter. AI literally hallucinates 90% of the bullshit it spews and it steals from artists.
warm@kbin.earth 1 day ago
In any game, not just indies.
SalamenceFury@lemmy.world 18 hours ago
True but I don’t expect AAA studio business suits to understand that.
warm@kbin.earth 16 hours ago
Of course not, big games were ruined before the AI craze, but that doesnt mean they are getting a pass of any kind.
Psionicsickness@reddthat.com 1 day ago
Your categorically wrong.
njm1314@lemmy.world 1 day ago
His categorically wrong what?
tomalley8342@lemmy.world 1 day ago
His grammarly.ai subscription must have ran out.