Comment on Clair Obscur: Expedition 33 loses Game of the Year from the Indie Game Awards
zbyte64@awful.systems 1 day agoDid genAI help you write this response? Because that would explain not understanding the difference between using tools to be creative and using tools to plagiarize.
korendian@lemmy.zip 1 day ago
So you’re telling me that no artist in history has looked at the work of others and used that for inspiration? Really?
zbyte64@awful.systems 1 day ago
Yeah, that’s exactly what I am saying 🙄
korendian@lemmy.zip 1 day ago
It kind of is. They didn’t use the final model in the game, just for prototyping. How is that different from pulling together different models as inspiration, or using a premade asset as a placeholder? How is it plagiarizing to use an algorithm that synthesizes different things together to get the ball rolling on the creative process? These are all different approaches to doing the same thing, but apparently using AI is a sin so bad that the entire game is now condemned for it?
zbyte64@awful.systems 1 day ago
I would say that this is conflating different issues. The original issue is whether or not the entry followed the stated rules, they did not. Then you brought up whether using any tool at all is cheating or plagiarizing, obviously it is not. Now we are on a 3rd issue which is whether using genAI for placeholders is actually creative, obviously it is not because it isn’t part of the final creative product. And a 4th issue as to whether using AI is a “sin” or not, that is less obvious not because it depends on one’s moral framework and their values. For instance, if one values authenticity then they would likely agree using AI as part of the process makes a less authentic product, while someone who values profit or time more than authenticity would not see an issue with its use.