Skip to main content

Indie game storeFree gamesFun gamesHorror games
Game developmentAssetsComics
SalesBundles
Jobs
TagsGame Engines
(+21)(-2)

Hi, thanks for taking the time to write this up.

I would like to address your points here, because I think it's important and I'd like to clarify the stance for others who may be curious. Long response incoming :)

Malic and I did discuss this rule and he was a little more ambivalent about it, it was me who was pushing for it, mainly because there has been an uptick in AI fatigue and derision as of late. I'll go through your points one by one.

I'll preface this by saying my points aren't directed at you or your game, just the premise of using AI going forward in general. Don't take any of this as an attack on you or the projects you've submitted.

1) You can use human-created assets for your game, whether they were made by you or not. We want to see what you create (whether that includes stock assets or not), not what a machine generates for you. I understand that there is also some effort you have to go through to get that generated content into your game, but we feel that effort could be better spent making your own assets or finding assets other people have made. You can kitbash, mishmash, programmer art whatever you want and I'll still be happier that you went through the effort of doing that and learning, rather than got a computer to spit something out.

2) Genuinely, I would rather see a text or systems-based game that has effort put into it than something with AI generated visuals. I would rather see programmer art. I don't believe that AI significantly lowers the barrier of entry. There are plenty of game concepts and systems you can create and design to make a simple game that doesn't require the use of AI. As you said, you were the only person to submit a game that used AI in the last jam. There were other people who had never made a game before who didn't use it, when we didn't have the rule in place. I think a developer's time is better spent making or finding assets than collating and fixing AI generated content, or simply rethinking how to approach a game so that it doesn't require its use.

The sensibilities of the organiser(s) are always going to come into play. You are for the most part free to make your game however you want, but every game jam has its limitations. Some have more, some have less. This one is quite open and isn't judged or ranked in any way. My thinking around this is that we want to see a game that YOU have made. We want you to challenge yourself. 

We also encourage you to work with others, you are free to collaborate with someone else who does have the skills you want. You don't have to do your projects alone -- if you are lacking in one area, I again encourage you to work with someone who can do that area. I reccommend anyone who wants to work collaboratively on a project to make a an open thread with what you're looking for!

This point is getting a bit long, so I'll move on.

3) You are correct in that, given the jam is not judged or ranked, your submission doesn't really affect other people's submissions. Even so, I don't particularly feel that AI generates interesting content. I would rather see programmer art that was made by a human than anything generated by AI even if it's visually stunning. I think people are fairly tired of the overload and overuse of AI content, especially within the last year. I've never read interesting AI-generated TF content, it all sounds the same. Formulaic. Sterile. Generic. When a person who is actually INTO transformation as a concept or trope, it becomes interesting because it is being written through the lens of a person who appreciates it, not through a black box of approximation.

4) I think the better way to frame this is that instead of using AI as a crutch, you should think about novel ways to make systems that don't rely on it. To use your previous submission as an example, you could make a modular sprite system and make a few variations of sprites for different scenarios, and create the rules for how they should combine. I would much rather see that, even if it ends up looking janky. Again, I want people to challenge themselves. It's up to you where you spend time on your project, and you should consider the amount of time and scope your project will need in various areas. There is ample time before the jam starts to come up with ideas to work within the constraints of the jam.

5) It is, at the end of the day, up to you if you want to make a project for the jam. I do want more people to make TF games, but I want to see what humans make, not what a machine makes. Again, you have plenty of time to come up with ways to make a game that works within the jam's rules.

6) I generally feel that the opinion around AI has shifted substantially since even a year ago, as has mine. When it was first cropping up, I enjoyed seeing the weird things it could make that I couldn't devote the time to doing myself. However, as time went on the issues with it increased, and the novelty decreased. My opinion, along with others, shifted. There is a lot more AI fatigue around as of late, people are tired of it. It's usually quite formulaic, and the sentiment is prevalent that it is just stolen content approximated into something 'new'. I would agree with many who are against the use of it due to the fact that it is trained on the work of artists that did not consent to have their work taken wholesale and put 1:1 into training data. Genuinely, just make programmer art instead. It can look bad, but at least it's your original content, or if you use stock or someone else's assets, it's another human's content.

7) I don't even know how to see the plays of other games in the jam. It wasn't a consideration, I'd forgotten about your submission since last year and the rule's addition was based on wanting to see things a human has made, and challenging participants to be innovative. If I had thought about it earlier, it would have been a rule in TF22 & TF23. It was not added because of your submission.

Again, I encourage you and others to challenge yourselves and collaborate with each other to fill in areas you are weak on, rather than relying on AI just to get a submission out there.

Cheers ^^

(+7)(-25)

Why the outright ban tough? You could instead have made the rule that things with AI generated content have to be tagged with AI assisted or AI generated as tags, without needing the ban on it. People that are against the use of AI for content creation could easily avoid those games then, while playing the rest. It is pretty easy to avoid it since only one game used it last year which is skyes game. 


I really don't see the reason to ban AI outright instead of going for those other options first.

(+4)(-23)

I think that in artist community there is some type of allergy towards AI, but I still think they do not compete with each other, and AI can have a use case. And this jam is a great example, yes theoretically you can be extremely talented in programming, storytelling and art. But in most cases people are not. So yes, theoretically I could commission +800 (for example) pictures from the artists, and they would look great, but no artist will be so fast this would cost a lot of money.

 Still, AI makes mistakes, art looks kidna the same etc etc, but this is a better alternative when you can't afford to commission art. AI art is better than no art at all. And I say this a regular user, there are a lot of text-based games and playing them is very painful for me, I recognize that AI art is not a quality art, but for my brain it's better than nothing. (I have very bad case of aphantasia lol xddddd)

Great example is Redemptions Keep, almost all art there is AI generated, and without it, it would have just a plain text, and only this changes this game for me from "painfully playable" to "very enjoyable". I'm just asking you to look at it from the perspective of people like me.

(+13)(-3)

Personally, I beg to differ. Giving text-based games AI-generated art isn't an improvement. With or without art, it shouldn't be painful if you're using your imagination. I'd assume you have seen more than enough art to visualise what is being written. Regardless, saying AI art is better than no art is entirely untrue because art comes with its own meanings and interpretations and since AI art wasn't specifically made for the game, there will be a disconnect between the art and what's written.

So no, AI isn't better than no art, I would rather just read and imagine it for myself than let a janky AI image determine that for me

(+3)(-8)

That is good, but to outright ban ai instead of like i said have games use the tag of [ai Assisted] gamename or [Ai image generated] gamename


instead of the outright ban would be better, you could still avoid games with AI art or text or other stuff in it that way, without the need to ban it completely, it isn't that big of a deal last year the contest had only one thing with ai in it. In like 20 + games. So it would be easy for people to avoid it.

I think that is a better way to do it then outright banning it outright.

(+8)(-2)

Banning it outright is the better option id say, we don't want to let AI in our community at all, especially when it comes to stuff made to show the creativity of artists.

(1 edit) (-8)

Itch titles / game tags are pretty limited space, but game jam creators can make custom fields, so that'd be a good spot for an AI field

(+2)(-2)

Asking for AI art to be paired with regular art is like putting IRL sports in the same category as Esports. If you want to make an AI game so bad, just make an AI game Jam

(1 edit) (+2)

Reading this comment I realize that I trying to come up with ideas in my head is literally painful. Still gonna do it manually, my brain needs excercise, not gonna use AI, but this is something I should probably talk to my doctor about., probably lack of sleep, I made the mistake of getting an energy drink mix instead of a drink mix

(+10)(-1)

I worked on Redemptions Keep and the game before it Demonlord's Lair as a writer. The creator, Pomi, and I each agreed that AI art was essentially a crutch to lean on since neither of us had the art skills to actually include actual art. Eventually I moved on from the game because I saw how bad AI art was becoming, and slowly he has too. He draws his own art now and has improved because of it, even beginning to turn away from AI and now using hand drawn assets for his games. If he had continued using AI the whole time he'd never have improved on his own personal art skills and would've kept leaning on that crutch the entire time. Is AI art and content easier? Sure, but at the end of the day you're only hurting yourself from improving by using it. A game jam should be an opportunity to improve, and AI doesn't let you do any of that

(+20)(-2)

Thank you so much for standing up against "AI" "art!"