There are many artists using AI. Also many painters, that generate references with it, or animate their own paintings in digital, and many mixed media artists, or hybrid artists. They all can draw and paint, as myself.
In one year or less, as public domain fully public sourced models appear and people identify the ones that are ethical, everyone will use it, except a few.
I marked my game with the AI tag, gladly. I hope the name changes to "ai usage", but it will be obvious that my work is a mix of traditional and generated skills as soon as people see it, so I don't really care. It's impossible to make a half decent game solely on AI.
The confusion about licenses, copyright, and polemizing on all this subject, fueled by the media, has damaged everyone. I understand the hate about the flooding of crap, but I hope it also becomes an old issue (exactly as when people got tired of DSL cameras and stopped annoying everyone making photos all day long).
Louis Dubois
Creator of
Recent community posts
It's your right to do as you wish and that's why the tag is there. I don't wish to debate more about this. It depends on if you think that training is theft or not, or if you think all the work is done by the machine or not. I haven't a simple point of view on any of those aspects, and distinguish shades of gray.
But there's already many ais that were trained and work ethically, and in 2025 there will be a major release of at least one that is fully trained, not on donations or similar, but on public domain images (classical art). So this is a debate that is already becoming old, soon will have no sense at all, and I think the existance of a tag has full sense so everyone does as they wish.
But about that: I think quality is important and I value more to avoid flooding of crap than how something is done. Anything with quality involves human work, no matter what tools were used. I saw sites completely flooded by crap that were not ai at all, and others flooded by ai. I value quality, inspiration and work. That's why.
"no-ai-usage and ai-usage." That sounds more precise and right, IMHO.
I actually use Microsoft Copilot as assistant. It behaves like a person. It makes mistakes, bad coding, and all. But it's great for ideas, for formatting, and when you don't remember how something was done it tells you an unusable example that you have to adapt.
So I suppose I have to use the ai coding tag, if it existed. Or not? As you see the real life practice is not at all as people think.
Then the ai art part. It also means making source images from scratch, then using my own styles, then rendering concepts and people I've created, then retouch and possibly iterations, paint parts, paint on top, recreating other parts by hand... Not at all as people think.
So the use is more like ai-usage than ai-generated. I know many other people work this same way, specially if they already had artistic and coding skills before ai.
So in my opinion that is how the tag should be named, exactly as you suggest.
I have seen that in the "ai generated" tag, once you deactivate the NSFW display at your settings (because otherwise you will scroll through an endless list of that), there are many good games that use ai at some point.
I cannot tell in what part they use ai, except in very few cases. The quality is good, and there are very original ideas and creativity. It seems the community is not restrictive or doesn't care.
So I understand that if some people need the tag because they don't want to browse games that use ai in some way, it's their right.
So when I upload mine I'll use the tag. But it may be good that it is named in a different way. If you don't change the name, it's OK, as the community understands it the right way.
But "ai generated" sounds like most of the work is randomly generated by ai. That's not the case of the games I see there, except maybe the graphics of the NSFW visual novels (most of them NSFW).
Some name may be "ai assisted", which reflects the reality of people using ai as a tool of the box for parts of their work.
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.
I think everyone here is asking the same thing, and I do too:
- Do you mean that using AI in any part of my creative process (coding, art, ....) means that I have to tag it as "AI generated" ?
Because that is what the first message says: "if your project contains the results of generative AI. " (....) "your page will automatically receive the AI Generated tag."
So if I use AI in some point, no matter the amount or if it's purely generated or mixed with other skills, it becomes all "AI Generated" to the eyes of everyone, as if we had put zero effort in doing it, and it was only the result of random clicking a button or writing a prompt.
I mean, that I use AI doesn't mean that my work is "AI generated". It means that there are parts that are generative, but I may put more work on it, and use it as a base or as a combination of other existing skills.
I understand that you want to ban AI on assets, because it will overflood everything if you don't do, just because some people posting lots of crap.
But force games to be considered all AI generated for using it in some parts... that's crazy.
Between using the output of an AI generator without alterations, and doing all handmade, there is a wide spectrum.
Thank you for your reply and links :)
I saw this: https://support.google.com/googleplay/android-developer/answer/9859372?hl=en&utm...
It says Play Store hosts 1.5 Gb of resources? Or am I understanding it wrong?
Hi,
I'm developing a roguelike game, that will have lots of 2D graphics. They are pngs that are not too heavy, but as there's 111 monsters and 40 levels, each one with a quantity of graphics (probably about 25), it may become heavy about 1 gb or so.
I've been already several months making the monsters and it may take me more to make the scenes, and the protagonist pics. But I also have to think on how to put it all in the game.
I am looking at info of marketplaces like Play Store, reading that the main apk can reach 200 mb, and it's already 187 for me. But they allow to have big asset packs.
On other places without those limitations, like here in Itch.io, it may be good anyway to have the main apk small, and load resources from other files.
So my questions:
- Are Unity's asset bundles for packaging graphics and load/unload them ? So I could load the assets for the current level on runtime, then release them and load the next level ones?
- If not, how do you handle situations like this for publishing your game on Play Store, or similar places?
- And are these assets hosted on Play Store or do I have to own a server to host them?
Thank you! :)