@Stealth40k Well yeah, why would they need AI?
They have some of the best artists/musicians/coders in the world, and if they didn't, they could easily afford to get them. They have a warchest big enough to let them take as long as they need to make a game.
So what would AI even offer them?
@coldhealing 50% of this are grifters farming engagement and 50% of this are laymen doing layman things now that it's accessible.
Game design's biggest obstacle has ALWAYS been good ideas, the effort required to execute them just naturally filtered bad ideas out by making them not worth it.
@HuJoeMama Current disclosure ISN'T all or nothing. Steam lets you type in any explanation you want.
It's people's reaction to it that's all or nothing.
@outofbeard@TheVilageIdiot3@aeterponis Of course people do it - look at the download counts for SD plugins on git, or workflow downloads on civit.
Img2img, inpainting, depthmaps, and all sorts of things let you literally control creation down to the pixel. And nothing's stopping you from just opening an output in PS!
@TravisV_YT And if it's all the same, and code generation can create original award-winning games like Big Walk, then logically, that means text/image/video generation can too.
Right?
@Kotetsu_Inc Those people are grifting. Modern discussion isn't about being honest and having an intellectual conversation, it's about getting a reaction and making money off engagement.
@outofbeard@TheVilageIdiot3@aeterponis That's only part of it. Digital art also automates most of that; are vectors not art? Typefonts? Convexes, custom brushes, etc? We're long past freehand drawing.
99% of people admittedly don't bother, but with AI, you can absolutely edit things down to the pixel in the same way.
@GhostOfSocrates Same reason why the invention of the internet providing unlimited free knowledge 24/7 right from your pocket didn't magically make everyone into a freelance STEM major or general tradesman.
@AlienMischief@Goprogabriel@SylvieFlame Well yeah, that's because AI is accessible.
The same is true for cameras now that everyone has one 24/7. We take over 1 trillion (not a typo) photos every year. Do you think most of that isn't terrible and unappealing?
You're not criticizing AI, you're criticizing accessibility.
@john_morseworks Not at all, you just need to press one (1) button on a camera to take a photo. Anyone can do it!
Yes, there are pro photographers that put a lot of effort into their photos, but the same can be said for people who use AI for more than just saving the first thing it spits out.
@TheVilageIdiot3@aeterponis But the same thing is true for other forms of AI.
Yeah, you can type in a prompt and just take the first result it spits out.
Or you can go through hours of steps to make an image where every minuscule detail is hand-picked. Img2img, inpainting, workflows, lora training, etc.
@FlowFGC If AI were released in its exact current state but 20 years ago, there would be virtually 0 controversy and it would be widely accepted in all forms by 99.999% of people.
Modern discourse is pure cancer, and this unfortunately isn't exclusive to AI.