Skip to main content

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

I think everyone is really bored about the constant debate about AI or not AI.

But just consider that you may not be a full AI user or a full-manual-traditional or digital-natural-painting user.

You may use all available tools that exist in the moment you live, and mix it all together, using one at a certain step of creation, others later. That's what most people will be doing in a few years (others will stay with what they use of course).

You can start by an AI image, then paint over it, recycle it again through AI, then return to paint on it. 
You can even use the part of the datasets that have to do with public domain classical styles.
You can also use AIs that are ethical in all its stages as Microsoft's Bing.
Or Mitsue-diffusion that only uses CC0 or Public Domain, donations, etc.
And you can train your own styles.
Or create them from your own images, colors, combinations of your works.

You can do all that. 
Then what are you? What will be the majority of creators in let's say 5 years? They will be AI users to you, or won't be artists? They may be using AI + all their other skills together. Then what sense will have to separate or tag them?

On the other side, for assets, I am all agreeing with that, as there is always a bunch of people sending bad stuff flooding everything. That should have its limits.
But on a final product, a game, I think there is no sense in that.

I think the focus should be in no-flooding, and not in no-AI.

(+3)

Well said. Especially software developers adopted the tech. And if you use Photoshop to create digital art, they do not only have procedural filters and effects, they also have generative llm stuff at work. I do not know how those models were created, but a thing like generative fill to enlarge the background around an object or when cutting out an object, is just too good a tool to ignore.

I wonder how "paper & canvas" artists think about digital artists. You can do things with gradient color schemes and a buncha digital effects that are very hard to do with actual paint on a physical object. Same for sketching and overlays and filling out shapes with color. Or a thing like undo.

Sure, using gen ai lowers the entry skill bar a lot. But if you lack the skills to edit the ai output, you have a bit of a problem.

I guess it is the worst with assets. Maybe that is the reason why there are so many ai assets. Creating a consistent character is hard with ai. Creating a standalone background or an icon is quite easy in comparison.

Currently, most AI games did not impress me much. The usage of AI (art) would rather degrade the game, than enhance it. But those games probably would not have been made at all, without AI. So, whatever, as there are a lot of non AI games that did not impress me too.

As for declarations, I would welcome a declaration about human art and other things as well: was it done by underpaid, overworked, exploited artists or even children in a sweat shop? Made with AI is a bit short sighted, as there are a lot of different AI. Was there not this anectode about the British wanting to have those cheap stuff that was made in Germany in the 19th century be declared as well to avoid it? Funny how that turned out.