🚑 BETA TESTERS NEEDED
Help test upcoming A&E: Under Pressure updates before release!
🧪 Test new features
🐛 Find bugs
💡 Give feedback
Join 👇
https://t.co/DWPxma4csm
@navisuu_ Free assets are great, but “there's no excuse” ignores why people use different tools. Free assets might not fit what someone needs, and custom art isn't affordable for everyone. I'd rather judge whether AI art was used responsibly than pretend every situation is identical.
@Noir_FaeVT@Steam Wanting a filter is fair, people should curate what they buy. I just disagree that any AI involvement means it isn't “actual human work.” A developer can use AI for one small part and still spend years designing, coding and building the game.
@Bug1987Eyelash Sometimes, sure. But “a human could do it” doesn't mean using a tool is pointless. Humans can do calculations, translate text and debug code too. We still use tools because they can make those things quicker or help us learn.
@Freyja321 I think that's because “using AI” gets treated like one single action when it obviously isn't. Asking it to explain a coding error and generating someone's art without permission aren't ethically identical just because both involve AI. Context matters.
@ItsJustAJohnOnX I mean you're welcome, but since you aren't Premium+ you don't get anything from the engagement, so I'm not entirely sure why you're thanking me for it lol
@HellRiserShuVT@TheHugWizard That's a massive leap from what I said. Supporting responsible AI doesn't mean supporting CSAM or environmental harm. Those are serious issues. That's why I'd rather discuss specific uses and harms than reduce everything to “AI bad.”
@mobxgames@Mika_Akatsuka Yeah, agreed with the general point. I'd just much rather judge the actual use of AI than dismiss an entire game, but apparently not everyone thinks like that.
@TheDryhtscipe I think that's probably true for some people, but I'd be careful making it the explanation for most criticism. There are genuine concerns around jobs, copyright, consent and the environment alongside the more emotional reaction to what AI can now do.
@bluelazemusic Yeah this is fair. AI can be useful for finding or understanding something, but if you're trying to prove a factual point in a debate, link the actual source. An AI overview or generated image isn't evidence.
@DmgAtTurnEnd The environmental impact of AI is a legitimate concern, but jumping from “AI uses water and energy” to “there'll be no drinkable water and all plants will die” isn't a serious way to discuss it. We can acknowledge the impact without turning it into an apocalypse scenario.
@FenexTK This trend feels so performative lol. Putting "manifesting the downfall of generative AI" in a tweet doesn't actually contribute anything to the genuinely important conversations around AI.
@Livi_Danielle I think that's way too broad. The general public already uses AI for learning, accessibility, coding, translation and everyday problem solving. I'd rather focus on preventing harmful uses than decide ordinary people shouldn't have access to the technology at all.
The Blocked Wall of Fame has officially reached 3 members 😭
Make your point, argue with me, then block me before I can reply and you too could earn a spot.
Full collection is linked in my bio lol
@technicalDecoy I feel like we've reached the point where simply saying "I used ChatGPT" tells you basically nothing lol. They could've generated pointless slop, or they could've asked it to explain an Excel formula. Context matters.
@tommy_stella Shaming someone for literally any use of AI seems way more performative than principled. There's a massive difference between replacing someone's work with AI and using it to explain a concept, debug code or help you learn something.
@itchio This is so cool. I genuinely miss games that looked like this, so I'm really glad people are bringing the old-school style back. There's something about it that modern graphics just don't replicate.