7,818 titles on Steam disclose generative AI usage, or 7% of Steam's total library of 114,126 games, up from ~1,000 titles in April 2024
-
I really don't care if they use AI. If it lets a smaller studios have voice over or more than three lines for Skyrim guards it's great. If it allows for more sprites or portraits for people and items to be unique that's cool.
I care. I'd rather the money they make go to someone who actually made a game
-
It is still very funny to me that Ai image generators don’t get how human hands work.
They've been able to generate hands for years now. AI image and text generation has basically passed the Turing test at this point. Any media you consume could have been entirely AI generated. That's the main reason I avoid talking about how AI slop is necessarily technically inferior to anything a human made. It's possible for it to make high quality shit, and that doesn't make it okay to use
-
Okay, but in the case of a scientific report on an alien encounter and dissection, why would you include it if you don't want to write it?
wrote last edited by [email protected]I want to include paintings as decoration on my walls where I live. But I don't want to paint them.
I want a bed to sleep in, but I don't want to build it.
I want food to eat. But I don't want to grow it myself, nor would I like to raise, feed, care, and slaughter the animals I eat.
So... Maybe I want some trivia, an easter egg if you'd like, about something weird and funny. Despite not wanting to write it myself.
-
I care. I'd rather the money they make go to someone who actually made a game
They actually made a game. These tools aren't magical enough to just do it.
-
But you do have four years to learn the whole of the skills from scratch. Who's forcing a deadline on you? What's the point of engaging in a creative process if you're offloading the creativity onto a machine? When you take the creativity out of the creative process, you're left with just a process.
The point of a welding is to join two pieces of metal together. The quality of the work is quantifiable, and there is no artistic input. Unlike the creation of art, there is no value in the human input. Woodworking is a different story—I would pay more for a piece of art that was carved by a human than a chunk of wood that was cut by a robot, even if they were indistinguishable to me. The human input is what gives the art meaning. Unless all I'm buying is, like, a bedside table. That shares my welding take
So I've got a few points on this. The smallest is that welding is very much an art. Any dingus can stick two pieces of metal together. A consistent bead, a steady hand, it's all on par with painting but no one considers that because it's used practically instead of aesthetically.
That segways to my next point, art isn't just the pictures. I don't have 4 years to learn how to make the art because I'm not passionate about that. I love the mechanics of the game, my creativity is in balancing and abilities, loot tables and incremental growth rates. You wouldn't say the people who decide the spray pattern of digital guns or the appropriate damage for level 12 don't deserve to be in video games because they didn't paint the skyboxes.
I love a story about a single guy making a game from scratch over twenty years as much as the next guy, but it's unreasonable to say that everyone has to do it that way or it doesn't count. Just as unreasonable as saying someone's idea for a game doesn't deserve to exist because they can't pay a team to make it.
To be clear, I'm not defending the slop. There's probably plenty of games on steam that are AI garbage to grab a quick buck. That's fine to hate. But all the people out there that put their hear into the work and wrapped it in the wallpaper of AI, they deserve to be seen. We can't all be good at everything and that doesn't make what we do any less valid.
-
I’m not even into this use of AI.
Before, you knew that every single asset was placed by hand, and even if it was a prebuilt asset. A human was directly involved with every piece of artwork, dialogue, text, etc.
Now, you might come across dozens of random text documents or images that are seemingly and vaguely related to the story. How do I as the player know what’s actually relevant? Maybe the AI generated text sends me down a rabbit hole that has nothing to do with the game because it wasn’t proofread.
These were tasks that, even when menial, allowed for the artist to express themselves all the more. I’m imagining a painter being handed a premixed palette or a sculptor having someone apply the finishing touches for them.
It just feels like giving up at the finish line. Why do we need a bunch of unrelated text and images of the game stands fine without them?
wrote last edited by [email protected]You can make the same argument if the dev pays someone on fiver to type in some random crap and not proofread their work. But atleast it's not AI^tm^, right? Low effort is still low effort no matter the source.
-
I want to include paintings as decoration on my walls where I live. But I don't want to paint them.
I want a bed to sleep in, but I don't want to build it.
I want food to eat. But I don't want to grow it myself, nor would I like to raise, feed, care, and slaughter the animals I eat.
So... Maybe I want some trivia, an easter egg if you'd like, about something weird and funny. Despite not wanting to write it myself.
wrote last edited by [email protected]But why do you want these things? Does a painting have value only as an aesthetic placeholder, with no regard to the person who made it? Does it have the same utilitarian value as a bed and food? Does the trivia in your hypothetical game have that same utilitarian value?
I repeat myself. If you take the creativity out of the creative process, you're left with just a process. It's the equivalent of injecting nutrient slurry directly into your veins because you want a meal.
-
So I've got a few points on this. The smallest is that welding is very much an art. Any dingus can stick two pieces of metal together. A consistent bead, a steady hand, it's all on par with painting but no one considers that because it's used practically instead of aesthetically.
That segways to my next point, art isn't just the pictures. I don't have 4 years to learn how to make the art because I'm not passionate about that. I love the mechanics of the game, my creativity is in balancing and abilities, loot tables and incremental growth rates. You wouldn't say the people who decide the spray pattern of digital guns or the appropriate damage for level 12 don't deserve to be in video games because they didn't paint the skyboxes.
I love a story about a single guy making a game from scratch over twenty years as much as the next guy, but it's unreasonable to say that everyone has to do it that way or it doesn't count. Just as unreasonable as saying someone's idea for a game doesn't deserve to exist because they can't pay a team to make it.
To be clear, I'm not defending the slop. There's probably plenty of games on steam that are AI garbage to grab a quick buck. That's fine to hate. But all the people out there that put their hear into the work and wrapped it in the wallpaper of AI, they deserve to be seen. We can't all be good at everything and that doesn't make what we do any less valid.
So join a team. I would say that the guy who makes the spray pattern doesn't deserve to make his game if that was all he made. Literally nobody is suggesting that you should have to develop your game 100% by yourself, what I'm saying is that a) you could develop the art yourself, and b) if you don't, you should work with someone who can. What you shouldn't do is contribute to the industry that's putting those people out of work.
-
But why do you want these things? Does a painting have value only as an aesthetic placeholder, with no regard to the person who made it? Does it have the same utilitarian value as a bed and food? Does the trivia in your hypothetical game have that same utilitarian value?
I repeat myself. If you take the creativity out of the creative process, you're left with just a process. It's the equivalent of injecting nutrient slurry directly into your veins because you want a meal.
Sure. If that's your opinion regarding art that's ok. We don't have to argue about that. It's subjective and will change from person to person.
Regardless if something has utility or not. The point remains the same. You often want things you yourself is unable to create to an acceptable standard.
I'm not an AI fanatic. I do not believe AI makes everything better. But I do believe it can make certain things easier if used correctly. And I also think it's a big difference between someone sloppily making an entire story arc with AI, rather than someone that uses AI to fill in some of blanks.
And again. This is all subjective. But just some food for thought.
Clothes have both utility and artistic expression. But do you really care if a person made your pants, as long as they look good, are comfortable and of high quality?
I'm not trying to change your mind. Just explaining my reasoning behind my opinion.
-
So join a team. I would say that the guy who makes the spray pattern doesn't deserve to make his game if that was all he made. Literally nobody is suggesting that you should have to develop your game 100% by yourself, what I'm saying is that a) you could develop the art yourself, and b) if you don't, you should work with someone who can. What you shouldn't do is contribute to the industry that's putting those people out of work.
And this is where the it comes full circle. To have a team I need to pay the team. To not have a team, I need to do every position provided by a team. Which means if you can't do it or pay for it, you don't deserve it and no matter how well thought out the idea may be it will never happen.
Tell me where the line falls.
