That article should've been titled "FEEL FUD WITH ME" looser reactionist.

that sounds like an ethics problem, the solution to most of those is to get rid of ethics

Probably some new dog whistle. Triple parentheses has been a racist dog whistle for a while so i wouldn’t be surprised if triple quotes are something similar.

I don't really care? Is that allowed? ‍ I'm old enough to remember when computers started to be used for art, and how traditional artists were complaining about how soulless the end product would be, and how unskilled people could 'fake' being good artists because the computer does most of the work for them. I mean the undo function of a computer on its own is putting incredible creative power into the hands of even the most useless digital artist, power that da Vinci himself would have creamed his little loincloth over. And the copy & paste function - and all of the other everyday functions all PC users depend on - cut down the production time by orders of magnitude compared to traditional painting/drawing. This isn't even getting into the incredible transformation tools on offer in Photoshop (or even MS Paint 1.0). Remember matte painters who painted incredible photorealistic chunks of the screen in films? Do Photoshop users of today feel any qualms about having extincted the fuck outta those people? Would they have even entertained the woes of those artists if they were around at the time? Would they have been calling for government intervention to prevent non-traditional matte painters from taking those jobs? What about sculptors and stop-motion pros? Movies have been riddled with worse-looking CGI replacements for those things for half a century. Any shits given about those artists who spent their lives perfecting their craft only to be supplanted overnight by a cunt with a Pentium who produces objectively worse results? AI is just the latest sabot-magnet disruption, and it won't be the last, despite the apocalyptic language around it. Either find a way to live with it and exploit it, or lay down in the Artists of Christmas Past mass grave and pull the clay in over yourselves. Or, you know, go ahead and try to uninvent it or whatever it is you're proposing And if you really wanna go hardcore, uninstall all of your digital art tools, get yourself an easel and see what you can do in the "real world" with your "real talents" without recourse to time-saving, labour-deleting, instantaneous bespoke-brush-manifesting technology.

Getting really tired of this moral performance people put on to look cool to their peers.

Surprising amount of comments that are OK with this and completely missing the point that Steam requires disclosure of AI asset usage. The devs neglected to tag it as such and people are rightly getting refunds for it.

Wait really? I use (((triple parentheses))) quite often to indicate sarcastic emphasis on a word. Damn racists ruining my punctuation >

What? No. It’s just the online left is just a mass of contradictions so I like to emphasize that.

What is the oversimplification? The tech exists, once it’s out there you can’t stop it so you might as well find how to put it to good use, and this is a good use. Protecting jobs is not an argument, it’s just reacting to perceived threats emotionally.

It was all bad anyways so we might as well make it efficient. Games are products. If you want art go to an art gallery.

They’re not translating Brothers Kamarazov here, you can chill.

Exactly, this.

The personal touch was underpaid workers doing cookie cutter work that was hardly better than AI does but more expensive. I don’t see actual talented artists complaining all that much about AI it’s always the assembly line video game artists or even worst some furry fucker who didn’t even have their own style to begin with with. Ie the people who AI was created to replace because they bring nothing to the table.

Are you okay with AAA studios using GenAI that was trained only on licensed works?

To me there's a difference between using assets that were generated by AI and a game using generative AI to create assets. A person hired as an artist to make dialogue portraits could have shoveled some slop to meet a deadline. That's a production issue. But if the games are being integrated with a generative AI model to cover minor assets, that's a fundamental development issue and I can possibly see how that's good for anything.

I'm not OK with any business practices of AAA studios, and I don't think there's a way for them to get enough educated consent for creations (i.e. not just someone accepting a shitty TOS on deviantart 6 years ago) to make a good GenAI model. But if I were to put aside the first part and assume a magical reality where the second could manifest without coercion and lies, I would theoretically be OK with it.

It sounds like we disagree on some fundamentals here, so I'm happy to bow out. Have a good midweek! ️

Hard to convince a studio to embrace it if this article is the kneejerk response to some PNGs. Which leads the loudest complainers to act vindicated, because what could it possibly be good for, except the few PNGs they notice?

Huh, it's almost like this new tool is fine for placeholder art, and placeholders can be good enough to ship. Did you know The Rolling Stones' "Satisfaction" was supposed to have a brass section? That driving riff with the fuzzbox guitar was a placeholder. They released it as-is, the song hit #1, and distortion became mainstream. At what point do we stop lamenting all the horn players who were robbed?

> It sucks that players are having to scour every asset and line of dialogue Im sorry. But this is pathetic if it's true. And I mean that on part of the players.