Do Gamers Hate AI? Indie Game Awards Disqualifies 'Clair Obscur' Over GenAI Usage (insider-gaming.com) 94
"Perhaps no group of fans, industry workers, and consumers is more intense about AI use than gamers...." writes New York magazine's "Intelligencer" column:
Just this month, the latest Postal game was axed by its publisher, which was "overwhelmed with negative responses"
from the "concerned Postal community" after fans spotted
AI-generated material in the game's trailer. The developers of Arc
Raiders were accused
of using AI instead of voice actors, leading to calls for boycotts,
while the developers of the Call of Duty franchise were
called out for AI-generated assets that players found strewn across
Black Ops 7.Games that weren't developed with
generative AI are getting caught
up in accusations anyway, while workers at Electronic Arts are
going
to the press to describe pressure from bosses to adopt AI tools.
Nintendo has sworn off using generative AI, as has the company behind
the Cyberpunk series. Valve, the company that operates
Steam, now requires AI disclosures on listed games and surveys
all submitters. Perhaps sensing the emergence of a new
constituency, California congressman Ro Khanna responded in November
to the Call of Duty backlash:"We need
regulations that prevent companies from using AI to eliminate jobs to
extract greater profits," he posted
on X....
AI is often seen as a tool for managers to extract more productivity and justify layoffs. Among players, it can foster a sense that gamers are being tricked or ripped off, while also dovetailing with more general objections to generative AI. It can sometimes be hard to tell whether gamer backlash is a bellwether or an outlier, an early signal from our youngest major creative industry or a localized and unique fit of rage. The sheer number of incidents here suggests the former, which foretells bitter, messy, and confusing fights to come in entertainment beyond gaming — where, notably, technologies referred to as "AI" have previously been embraced with open arms.
And now "the price of the sort of memory PC gamers most want to buy has skyrocketed" (per Tom's Hardware). "The rush to build data centers is making it much more expensive to game. Nobody's going to be happy about that."
Insider Gaming shares another example of anti-AI sentiment in the gaming industry: The Indie Game Awards took place on December 18, and, as many could assume, Clair Obscur: Expedition 33 took home the awards for Game of the Year and Debut Game. However, things have changed and The Indie Game Awards are making a big decision to strip the Clair Obscur and developer Sandfall Interactive of their awards over the use of gen AI in the game.
In an announcement made on Saturday afternoon, Six One Indie, the creators of the show, said that it's removal comes after the discovery after voting was done, and the show was recorded. "The Indie Game Awards have a hard stance on the use of gen AI throughout the nomination process and during the ceremony itself," the statement reads. "When it was submitted for consideration, representatives of Sandfall Interactive agreed that no gen AI was used in the development of Clair Obscur: Expedition 33.
Polygon notes the award-stripping is "due to inclusion of generative AI assets at launch that were quickly patched out." Quotes from earlier in the year from Sandfall Interactive's FranÃois Meurisse made the rounds on social media last week amid a news cycle caught up in the use of generative AI in games... In June, the Spanish outlet El País published a story including an interview conducted around Clair Obscur's launch, in which Meurisse admitted that Sandfall used a minimal amount generative AI in some form during the game's development... Clair Obscur: Expedition 33 launched with what some suspected to be AI-generated textures that, as it clarified to El País, were then replaced with custom assets in a swift patch five days after release.
AI is often seen as a tool for managers to extract more productivity and justify layoffs. Among players, it can foster a sense that gamers are being tricked or ripped off, while also dovetailing with more general objections to generative AI. It can sometimes be hard to tell whether gamer backlash is a bellwether or an outlier, an early signal from our youngest major creative industry or a localized and unique fit of rage. The sheer number of incidents here suggests the former, which foretells bitter, messy, and confusing fights to come in entertainment beyond gaming — where, notably, technologies referred to as "AI" have previously been embraced with open arms.
And now "the price of the sort of memory PC gamers most want to buy has skyrocketed" (per Tom's Hardware). "The rush to build data centers is making it much more expensive to game. Nobody's going to be happy about that."
Insider Gaming shares another example of anti-AI sentiment in the gaming industry: The Indie Game Awards took place on December 18, and, as many could assume, Clair Obscur: Expedition 33 took home the awards for Game of the Year and Debut Game. However, things have changed and The Indie Game Awards are making a big decision to strip the Clair Obscur and developer Sandfall Interactive of their awards over the use of gen AI in the game.
In an announcement made on Saturday afternoon, Six One Indie, the creators of the show, said that it's removal comes after the discovery after voting was done, and the show was recorded. "The Indie Game Awards have a hard stance on the use of gen AI throughout the nomination process and during the ceremony itself," the statement reads. "When it was submitted for consideration, representatives of Sandfall Interactive agreed that no gen AI was used in the development of Clair Obscur: Expedition 33.
Polygon notes the award-stripping is "due to inclusion of generative AI assets at launch that were quickly patched out." Quotes from earlier in the year from Sandfall Interactive's FranÃois Meurisse made the rounds on social media last week amid a news cycle caught up in the use of generative AI in games... In June, the Spanish outlet El País published a story including an interview conducted around Clair Obscur's launch, in which Meurisse admitted that Sandfall used a minimal amount generative AI in some form during the game's development... Clair Obscur: Expedition 33 launched with what some suspected to be AI-generated textures that, as it clarified to El País, were then replaced with custom assets in a swift patch five days after release.
We Hate You Because GPUs and RAM (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
rsilvergun says he's a gamer too and he sure seems to hate AI.
He obviously is an AI. Not actual person could be that full of shit, so he must be. The self hatred means he's a bit more advanced than most, sure, but everything that comes from his is still slop.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Some people have no social skills. You seem to be responding to one of those.
Of course we do, the bubble is strangling consumer (Score:2)
Re:Of course we do, the bubble is strangling consu (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
As if the topic here was chicks with dicks now, or perhaps "trans women", rather than AI in gaming. We can't know if your post was hate speech, but we can know it was grossly inappropriate both for how sensitive the topic is and how unsuitable your analogy is.
Re: A Gen-AI game is like a chick with a dick... (Score:2)
Unless you want to have kids.
Re:A Gen-AI game is like a chick with a dick... (Score:5, Insightful)
So I must ask this. We're talking about video games and artificial intelligence and the first thing on your mind is "chicks with dicks"?
Re: (Score:2)
I used to think "They're scared a crossdresser might hit on them", and the -phobe suffix, was an exaggeration and ad hominem.
But after reading the grandparent post, I'm convinced. They do spend time, each day, wargaming through that scenario. "And then I'd have to adopt, and then..."
One of the saddest posts I've seen in a while.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
I used to think "They're scared a crossdresser might hit on them", and the -phobe suffix, was an exaggeration and ad hominem.
But after reading the grandparent post, I'm convinced. They do spend time, each day, wargaming through that scenario. "And then I'd have to adopt, and then..."
One of the saddest posts I've seen in a while.
Nope. I just actually actually spend time listening to trans women in my life....including hearing about their struggles and fears. I take the time to get to know them as a person instead of their identity. For me, it's not fear, but empathy...yet fully accept that my joke came off much uglier than expected and take ownership for the failing.
Re: (Score:1)
"I just actually actually spend time listening to trans women in my life....including hearing about their struggles and fears."
And then judging their behaviors and making ugly public posts about them.
"...yet fully accept that my joke came off much uglier than expected and take ownership for the failing."
If true, that's one thing you have over Trump, although no one believes it was a joke or that it was written with empathy.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So I must ask this. We're talking about video games and artificial intelligence and the first thing on your mind is "chicks with dicks"?
Erm hate to break it to them... but Saints Row 2 came out 17 years ago where the player-character could be trans... then we have Cyberpunk 2077.
If that's what they're scared of with AI... that ship sailed a long time ago, reached another port and came back with a full cargo of "go fuck yourself".
Now for the sane and stable amongst us, there are two issues with AI.
1. They're taking all the GPU and RAM. Forcing prices up for ordinary gamers.
2. I don't really have any issues with AI generated content p
Re: (Score:2)
I am curious what motivates you to make that analogy, especially considering how poor it is? Sexual body parts are central to sex itself and to people's preferences, tools used to create games are not central to the game experience itself. It would seem you just wanted to talk about chicks with dicks.
It's automated plagiarism (Score:1, Insightful)
Specifically AI copies and regurgitates and when companies start using it what's going to happen is everything ends up turning into slop like all those shitty mobile games that all look the same.
Apart from AI devouring all the RAM and drives and electricity and jobs the reality is if you use it to make games your games are going to look like crap because the AI is going to spit out a rough approximation of everything that was used as an input result
And also mark by words because (Score:1)
Of AI pretty soon everybody is going to get their electricity cut off. It is absolutely crazy that we are all very very soon going to lose access to electricity because it's all going to go to grift and robots replacing all our jobs. Billionaires got private armies to protect them and they're working on robots & automation to render the consumers they depend on for their wealth moot. Do a bit of googling and you will find a study showing that 70% of the middle class jobs in this country were taken by ro
Re: (Score:1)
Aren't the mobile games you cited the best proof the slop can exist without AI?
Re: (Score:2)
AI he's worse because it's very tempting to slopify because of the huge cost savings. Where before they would at least do the pre-production work by hand now they want to do it with AI slop.
Re:It's automated plagiarism (Score:4, Interesting)
You mean because it learns just like people do from our common cultural heritage?
Remember, the point of intellectual property is to incentivize creation not to allow authors to block the creation of new works. That's why it's only supposed to be a limited time and we have exceptions for sufficiently transformative uses.
Re: (Score:1)
Give me a break. AI doesn't have feelings or emotions, and all non-deterministic behavior needs to be specially programmed. AI doesn't even remotely learn the same way we do.
Re: (Score:1)
You mean because it learns just like people do from our common cultural heritage?
No, because it flagrantly violates copyright in a way that normal humans are not allowed to do.
Remember, the point of intellectual property is to incentivize creation not to allow authors to block the creation of new works.
Why can't I publish Star Wars fanfiction, while OpenAi can? Why are we automating the fun parts of life, like artistic creation, while humans are stuck doing the miserable, tedious labour? Copyright is meant to incentivize creation by people because only the creative output of people has value.
Only bad one (Score:5, Interesting)
One can clearly see the three phases in image and video generation.
First everyone finds its cute, because it makes funny mistakes and doesn't look like something serious. Then everyone gets upset if the machine that can literally produce and image from a text prompt doesn't get the number of fingers right and the hate ensues. And now we get into the phase that it is as good or better than human made content and people start saying things like "Who said there could be no good AI slop" when they laugh about a high quality result.
I'd say it's the uncanny valley that's hated. Better than the average human (thinking of the art field) but still with obvious and obviously non human flaws is hated, funny incapable ai is cute and "perfect" AI is what Adobe adopts in Photoshop.
For text generation it doesn't seem that clear. Many people adopted it early, even ignoring glaring flaws. I think the uncanny curve works differently there. When ChatGPT was new, everyone was impressed by how good the text (even with phrases we know recognize as slop) sounded and humans were convinced by such texts.
The quality was bad in comparison, but without knowing later models one didn't notice it too much. And when reading only one text, the slop is not slop, but high-quality English. It only becomes slop because of the overuse of the phrases. An em-dash was a sign of someone knowing their grammar and ChatGPT uses it correctly. But when every text contains one, one has read it too often when encountering the next text with it.
Now we're getting there with games. Early one there were a few tech demos and people were impressed things compiled and were a playable game, but it was cute and nothing one would play more than for one test drive. Then there was a lot of mediocre content produced with automation showing repetitive, too simple, or not well thought out mechanisms. And now we get into the phase when AI starts to get it right and possibly when its users start to understand when to follow AI and when not.
Re:Only bad one (Score:4, Insightful)
What your missing is the fact that lots of people use it responsibly and no one notices. If you are using it right, e.g., to help you write a bunch of documents (it helped immeasurably with the right tone and suggesting phrases for all the paperwork for my wife's tenure application) no one notices because you use it responsibly and don't just copy paste whatever it does. Exactly *because* people are so hostile, everyone using it in a responsible way doesn't get noticed and all you hear about are the idiots who copy paste it without thinking.
For instance, if you look closely you can see all sorts of great uses on youtube where suddenly channels have great animations helping explain what they are talking about (e.g. for continental drift or engine parts) but those aren't noticed and everyone complains about the slop.
Re: (Score:2)
That falls somewhere into the "not the uncanny valley" part, but on the "before it was good" AI it is a combination of you fixing it (In particular the ChatGPT phrases) and in the current part you not overusing it, I guess. The first time I used ChatGPT to writes something "more serious and convincing" I had to tone it down massively afterward. If you don't do it, it can become a caricature of what you wanted. A long "business English" text sounds very convincing. But when it is not plausible for your curre
There are always plenty of loud morons (Score:2, Interesting)
While I am no fan of attributing powers to generative AI that it really does not have. But it certainly has its uses in prototyping, generating mock-ups and experiments or adjusting parameters. Hence it is absolutely no problem using it there. Using it for final assets that then get carefully reviewed and adjusted by real, competent artists (that also did the prompting) is also absolutely no problem.
Of course, any king of "slop" is not acceptable, whether AI generated or generated by incompetent humans. But
It is how AI is used... (Score:2, Insightful)
AI has been in games, since games have been around. Find the path algorithms, procedural generation, tuning encounter difficulty.
The problem is how AI's use has changed. Instead of helping with the mechanics, it is used to replace the art and storytelling of a game. We all know the plot of Wizardry 1-3, and the Ultima series. Having subsequent games just be randomly written cheapens the experience.
The big thing is that AI is used to get rid of all the game designers, artists, and other people who breath
Re:It is how AI is used... (Score:4, Interesting)
Gen AI in games is just at the beginning. Expect worlds to become a lot more realistic. NPCs with own will, unique dialogues with them, side quests that are not programmed but arise from interactions with NPC (and between NPCs) and more. The problem is that it is highly non-trivial to balance such things and building them will be all but Slop, because you need to tune a lot how they should and should not act to create a plausible world instead of a caricature or comic. But I am sure the big studios will create some impressive things with that technologies.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
There are different things that have been called "AI" throughout the years.
In computing's early days, pretty much all interesting algorithms used to deduce or infer something fell under the "AI" umbrella.
All algorithms that control non-player characters in games have been called AI, regardless of what their origin is.
Procedural generation in games is most of the time just based on
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
No... no one uses it, except those that dont know what they are doing. And instead of using it to LEARN, they use it as a replacement, making what they do worth less to consumers, causing more power draw to process bad and inefficient code, and chunking on other peoples work to produce the artists work without contributing anything to the artist.
"AI" use doesnt discount a game, or reduce prices. That is a false statement.
The bubble is coming soon, your stock is at risk.
Re:Welcome home (Score:4, Insightful)
The best part about this denialist screeeching is that it doesn't matter even if you manage to claw back some of the progress and temporarily stall it.
Chinese are coming. They already showed how good they are. And they're all in on AI, just like all of the good studios are. And as we've seen with your ilk publishing the "very optimized, very efficient decolonization simulators" like the latest installment in Assassin's Creed that killed not just the studio that made it, not just the franchise, but got the entire parent company chopped up so that everything that is still of value in it could be sold to... Chinese.
Welcome home.
You can rage. You can moan. You can scream. You can deploy SIGN (Shame, Insults, Guilt, Need to be right) language. None of it matters. Consumers have already chosen. All the elite pressure groups you can muster cannot change it.
Good studios that deploy the latest technologies and build on good vision will stand. The rest will die to lack of income because their raging hatred will be unable to even break even to pay for their time spent ranting here and on bluesky.
Re: (Score:1)
You can brow beat, berate, and false premise all you want on the internet. But your lies will catch up to you.
Now do me a favor and look up how to uninstall Linux, then perform that action.
Re: (Score:2)
We're in agreement on lies catching up to people. They already have caught up to your types in music. Suno.ai won. Anti-AI liars lost. Relevant Majors are now all invested in AI. Mainline artists all use Suno for everything from figuring out a specific tune, to testing out how certain things could be done with specific voices under specific conditions. It's done and there's no going back.
We're well in progress of same being done the same to movie industry and gaming. Every single one of the activists will h
Re: (Score:2)
No, anti-AI luddites lost. Suno won.
It's not even a competition any more. Basically everyone in music uses Suno for everything from helping them with lyrics, to testing out tunes, to making entire compositions. Doesn't matter if you're a massively successful artist, or a kid just starting his music hobby.
They all use Suno now. It won.
Re: (Score:2)
Chinese are coming.
So is Jesus. I'm not particularly worried about either one.
Nope (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Yep, pretty much. And a good game means AI use will be very limited. And then the problem will go away.
Given that LLMs and GenAI in general cannot really do anything a tiny bit complicated or original, that may happen anyways, because the current AI hype is still missing a sustainable business model, several years in. A dramatic crash and then very limited special-purpose use is the most likely future. Same as the last few AI hypes, only that the crash will be a lot larger.
Stop companies using AI to replace jobs (Score:4, Insightful)
I am sad for the artists who are now rapidly losing their jobs to AI. I'm sorry for the code monkeys. I expect to lose my job (systems engineer) in the next 2-5 years.
This is a freight train that no one is going to stop. If you regulate it in the US, they'll just lose more ground to China.
The real question is how you're going to change the world's economic model so that the benefits from AI are not being distilled into the hands of the top 1%.
Re: (Score:2)
And it would be pretty hypocritical to try and stop it now after we've been insisting that people who work with their hands accept the fact that technology might cost them their jobs for hundreds of years. But yes, the question of whether we are going to use the resulting productivity gains to improve the general welfare or to further empower the wealthy is a big one. I'm hoping this time we can get it right.
Re: (Score:2)
At this time, it is pretty unclear whether there are any actual productivity gains. Producing more slop will likely just increase costs overall.
Re: (Score:3)
The better artists are not losing their jobs. The better code monkeys are not either or only very temporarily. AI code is full of bugs and vulnerabilities that are hard to fix. It makes coders _slower_: https://mikelovesrobots.substa... [substack.com]
So while you may loser your job for a time while this straw-fire burns itself out, you may well get re-hired at an increased salary not that much later.
Ridiculous Politics (Score:5, Insightful)
Why not strip an award because the creator has the wrong political affiliation or anything else you don't like. Game awards should just evaluate the quality of the game not make political statements.
If you are really convinced generative AI makes games shitty then what's the problem? Presumably those games won't get the awards because they suck. The only reason for this policy is because you think it *will* make for good games but you want to stop its use anyway.
Re: (Score:3)
They set criteria to win the award. The game didn't meet the criteria.
I could ask you what makes that a "political statement", but I'd probably get one in return.
Re: (Score:3)
They set criteria to win the award. The game didn't meet the criteria.
Yes they did. The point is the criteria is bullshit, especially considering how little AI gen content was in the game in the first place (and that it was patched out after launch with zero effect on the game itself).
The criteria itself now shows it has zero to do with the actual title of the award. No different from left vs right politics which ceased being about the content of policy and has become almost exclusively about who passed it.
Re: (Score:2)
Given that this is the Indie Game Awards, I would assume the foundational idea is to limit it to games developed with (and without) certain resources and methods. Not the best game overall.
There are 3 or 4 other large annual game award shows; they are probably closer to what you are looking for. I personally don't follow any of them.
Re: (Score:2)
They didn't win the Indie game awards, they won Game of the Year, and Debut of the year at the Indie game awards. They made a great game (as decided by the judges), it was their debut game and they are objectively an indie studio by every metric and definition.
Incidentally (despite the fact I disagree with generative AI) being an indie studio they may stand to benefit greatly from using tools that would reduce the need for hiring expensive art teams.
You were trying to play stupid word games to justify this
Re: (Score:1)
eat shit, clanker.
Re: (Score:2)
Why not strip an award because the creator has the wrong political affiliation or anything else you don't like. Game awards should just evaluate the quality of the game not make political statements.
If you are really convinced generative AI makes games shitty then what's the problem? Presumably those games won't get the awards because they suck. The only reason for this policy is because you think it *will* make for good games but you want to stop its use anyway.
I'm not certain I agree with that standpoint. If a company puts out a game that is technically, thematically, and visually excellent, they're worth of awards, granted. But if it then comes out that the company itself funds a nation-wide program called Terror for Toddlers, where people drive by daycares with pictures of disturbing-but-legal things, I'd reconsider that award. I'm trying to generate an example of some position or act that is reprehensible but not punishable by law, which unfortunately is su
Re: Ridiculous Politics (Score:3)
Curiously enough, you hit the nail on the head. Sandfall and their fantastic game has become somewhat of a political partisan battleground, where the other side full of performative DEI-wokeness is triple-A and quad-A failures and the usual useful-idiots latching on to corpo-speak when it hails their fav messages and kow-tows.
Sandfall instead just made a great game, but I guess using a synth or a keyboard or a tool like AI to help in the process means it is not pure enough, and finally the corrupt indiegame
Re: (Score:2)
Game awards should just evaluate the quality of the game not make political statements.
Sounds like you should make your own game awards. It is, in fact, the prerogative of the award organizer to decide their selection criteria.
Re: (Score:2)
If you are really convinced generative AI makes games shitty then what's the problem? Presumably those games won't get the awards because they suck. The only reason for this policy is because you think it *will* make for good games but you want to stop its use anyway.
Yep, exactly.
Ohh Now It's Your Job It's Different? (Score:3)
Lots of this anger seems to stem from the fear that AI will take the jobs of programmers and artists. And while I sympathize (it might destroy my vocation as well) for centuries we've been asking craftspeople and those who do manual labor to accept the fact that their careers can be upended in the name of economic progress. The original sabotage is (supposedly) a term that arose out of the anger about automatic looms hundreds of years ago. Now the same kind of automation that took jobs from people who worked with their hands is coming for white collar jobs and it would be pretty hypocritical to suddenly call a halt now.
But maybe this time we can actually try and make the economic benefits work for the welfare of society as a whole, e.g., by using taxes to distribute the benefits.
Re: (Score:2)
It is particularly hypocritical for computer programmers and computer artists to complain. Automating away manual jobs is what programmers do. The artists are the ones who adopted new tools and put their brush and pencil predecessors out of work.
Counterargument (Score:4, Interesting)
If Expedition 33 was made with GenAI, and is one of the best games many of us have played in about a decade, maybe GenAI isnt so bad.
Re: (Score:2)
Also the GenAI components were patched out shortly after launch and the game was still awesome. This doesn't sound like it's about GenAI, it sounds like the president of the local HoA is the person running the game awards, applying bullshit reasoning to punish people using bullshit rules.
Ridiculous (Score:2)
First of all, Sandfall publicly disclosed the use of AI during the development process and months before it's original launch. So, I don't believe that Six One Indie didn't know about it.
Secondly, this awards show means nothing and is hosted by morons that have never had success like CO:33.
Re: (Score:2)
I could honestly believe that they thought the "no generative AI" rule was about using it in the final product. The IGA clarifying that the rule means that you can't use genAI during the course of the whole game's *development* is insane since any developer using GitHub Copilot instantly disqualifies the game. I would bet that most of the entrants should technically be disqualified, but you'll never see anybody cop to using Copilot.
What about ray tracing? (Score:2)
Do they think that's real light?
Re: (Score:2)
Just to set the record straight (Score:2)
Goonswarm says they did not use Ai in making the trailer or the game. But RWS cancelled it immediately, apparently without even looking for evidence. This speaks poorly of them as a publisher far more that it says about the game devs, and it speaks poorly of the gamer culture that merely speculates loudly and ruins people's projects.
Some people like artisanal furniture - (Score:3)
Some people like Ikea
Other people like mass produced no name furniture.
Some people like their glasses and cups hand made by artisans
Some people like mass produced glasses
Some people like to use the free glasses that were the containers for Jamm and marmelade.
Some people (like me) like a combination. My bedroom bed and nightstands were made by artisans, by specific commision (rustic Venezuelan Style, locally sourced 4 blocks from my home), meanwhile, the visitor's room furniture was mass produced.
I have machine made glassware for visitors, and use the glasses that had Marmelade before for daily use.
So, if the game used AI or not, is irrelevant for me, as long as I end up enjoying the game (Like S.O.M.A or Robocop).
If I do ragequit (Like Tomb Raider) or get stuck (like Shadow of the Tomb Raider), it does not does me any good that the game has 0% AI.
Carmack and Romero used millimetred paper to do sprites in Doom, how dare them use Blender to make 3D models in quake?!?!?!? Stop making CAD slop! I want my games hand crafted!!!
Do y'all hear how ridiculous that sounds?
Re: (Score:2)
Right, and what is it about "gamers" that suggests they know how stuff is made anyway? The use of that category is stupid, gamers are a diverse group, united by an interest that is not affected my AI.
Re: (Score:2)
Some people like Ikea Other people like mass produced no name furniture.
That is an excellent analogy and I appreciate it.
My biggest long-term concern about AI is the long-term Ikea-ification of "everything" (books, movies, TV, music etc). I grant that 90% of "everything" is already highly derivative. Movie plots are highly recycled. Musicians are always "deeply inspired" by someone.
But then there's those gems... the handful of guitarists that can be identified in a few bars just because of the distinct, unique, special way. The handful of authors like Douglas Adams who
Gamers don't hate AI, game journalists do. (Score:2)
Game journalists won't stop trying to convince everyone that they hate AI, even when most people literally don't care.
To each his own (Score:1)
I understand it's very important for some people, but personally I'm not someone who values art in a video game. In fact, I think art often hinders gameplay. So I'll take without hesitation a good game with mediocre art over a mediocre game with good art. If that art is done by an AI, I don't care at all.
I am a gamer and YES .. (Score:2)
.. I hate the fake ai we have today. Games made with ai aren't a true work op art. Lazyassbitches!
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know where the line should be drawn.
What if there was a game about being trapped in an AI-generated world that actually was AI-generated? Would that be wrong or brilliant? I'm leaning towards the latter.
Ob South Park (Score:1)
I don't think so (Score:2)
"Perhaps no group of fans, industry workers, and consumers is more intense about AI use than gamers...." writes New York magazine's "Intelligencer" column
Perhaps, but I don't think so. Off the top if my head, judges and doctors are most certainly more adamantly opposed, but any group who puts their lives on the line would care more than "gamers". In fact, in a poll of who would care most, gamers wouldn't crack the top 10, through maybe they would be "intense" about it. That's obvious the "out" here, and
What about procedural generation? (Score:2)
I don't care that much about this. I play a game (early access) that uses AI generated voices, which they say will be replaced with voice actors later in development. I play another that I wish was doing that.
I play a lot of games from small developers, often made by just one guy. I'm not even remotely bothered by the idea of them using AI generated textures, models, environments or voices. I think you get better quality from human hands, but when the dev team only has 2-8 han
Media assets only? (Score:2)
But what about the *code*? I guarantee you every single programmer is using AI in the code development process. Does that have to be disclosed? At which point, every single game will have the disclosure so what's the point? Why are AI art assets somehow more objectionable than AI code?
And finally, what about the latest generation upscalers like AMD FS
Bought it because of this news item (Score:1)