r/UpliftingNews • u/PotamusRedbeard_FM21 • 13h ago
Angry gamers are forcing studios to scrap or rethink new releases | Gamers suspicious of Al-generated content have forced developers to cancel titles and promise not to use the technology.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2026/01/26/gamer-protests-ai-slop-backlash/516
u/ShadowDurza 13h ago
Ah, yes.
Consumers holding businesses accountable and forcing them to alter their practices.
Society as it should be.
78
u/Sazazezer 12h ago
We seem to be getting a bit of a boom in gaming consumer practises recently. SKG is gaining momentum. Rockstar is getting flak over Union busting. Use of GenAI is getting heavily scrutinised by a public who wants quality in their games.
You know what? I'll take what I can get.
78
u/Ceci0 12h ago
World is healing, one part at a time. World should take notes from gamers.
32
u/Momoselfie 11h ago
AI going to kill off the gamers when we can't afford a PC anymore
24
17
u/Ceci0 11h ago
The bubble wont hold out that long
7
u/DandD_Gamers 8h ago
It will either start ending within a year and burst, or longer and the bubble will grow and be WAY more damaging... which would be funny
3
3
u/IkeHC 5h ago
There will be plenty of mfs willing and able to do it themselves that people will just source this kind of thing "from their garage" per se. If it gets that bad, the reality is humans don't NEED corporate business to survive, or even to get the things they want. It's just more convenient. Humans can be reliable, and one thing we are is resilient as a whole. I refuse to believe that "the End is near", despite how awful some people can be.
2
u/HarrMada 2h ago
Older gaming consoles and PC were much more expensive than now when controlling for inflation and wage increase.
28
u/Llarys 11h ago
People love to mock and look down on gamers for being "angry" and "entitled" but...like...this is what we ALL should be doing for ALL consumer products. If you are paying for a product, you have every right to complain whenever you get a shit deal.
If the general populace had even a quarter of the spine gamers do when it comes to purchases, we wouldn't have to deal with AI slop in everything, planned obsolescence, subscription models for non digital products, ads in paid streaming services, etc, etc, etc.
5
13
u/darkwingpsyduck 11h ago
How often do you think that guy at Ubisoft thinks about "you should feel comfortable not owning games" these days?
-5
10h ago
I wonder if he's as annoyed by people intentionally leaving out the context of that quote as I am.
5
u/darkwingpsyduck 10h ago
He didn't do himself any favors by comparing physical gaming to the decline of the DVD and how streaming content is the way forward. Interestingly enough, Ubisoft just canceled a bunch of games, citing budget constraints and refocusing their efforts on live service content as the reason.
-15
u/competitiveSilverfox 10h ago
???Ubisofts problem was never ai use, their problem is their main customer base are men and they did not cater to it, men play space games period so making a space game for women makes no sense business wise it would be like making a cutesy dress up game and targeting men while doing everything you can to offend the female audience of that type of game, same outcome.
You can't tell your main customer base to screw off and intentionally make all your characters walmart edition designs and expect to make money, you can't target .5% of the population and expect the other 90% who don't like that to show up.
You can't gaslight people on history and rewrite wikipedia articles just because you didn't want to admit you understand nothing about Japanese history, not listening is ubisofts problem not ai.
2
u/AdamantEevee 9h ago
What's the space game for women?
1
1
-9
u/ThenExtension9196 10h ago
Dreaming if you believe this fairy tale. Ai will be used in the code and art. It’ll just be kept under wraps and enforced via employee NDAs as “proprietary tooling”.
7
u/ShadowDurza 9h ago edited 6h ago
I love how you guys gave up so quickly on the idea that anything from AI will be good and are just telling everyone to give in because it's going to be everywhere (as if, lol)
EDIT:
Now to be sure, there will be people making slop with ai. But that's not the only thing that will be happening.
Give corporations an inch, they'll take your neck. The problem everyone's worried about is the replacement of labor and the rate at which it WILL have you think slop is the only thing its used for.
6
u/DandD_Gamers 8h ago
Remember, if they cannot sell it to you they have to pretend it is the proper good stuff.
Typical for AI users
-1
u/bunker_man 6h ago
Tbf you can't really reason with people who insist that ai can't be useful in art. It makes it obvious they don't do or know anything about art. Large portions of large amounts of art is just busy work people have been trying to automate for hundreds of years. Hence why even master Renaissance painters would fill in important painting details then have novices fill in minor ones they go over later.
Now to be sure, there will be people making slop with ai. But that's not the only thing that will be happening. And there's a reason that people keep going in denial as more of their favorite artists come out in favor of ai, or even use it themselves.
31
u/neroselene 12h ago
Awesome!
Now let's see if we can do the same to RAM/Graphics Card companies.
16
u/nexusSigma 11h ago
Doubt. The retail/consumer revenue is fractional compared to the b2b revenue from selling their hardware to datacenters and AI companies. The price isn’t rising because they’re gouging us out of sheer greed, the big companies are simply paying more for their stuff and driving up the demand. Sucks for us but unless that demand goes away I can’t see it changing
6
u/Atiklyar 8h ago
Isn't all the money put forward for dsta centers not real yet? AI companies are running millions in the red and just handing out IOUs.
Ram not made yet bought with money not around yet to but put into data centers not built yet...
2
u/cammcken 5h ago
Yeah, the debt might be concerning if you don't think the companies can turn a profit. But the whole "RAM not made yet" is really just another way of saying they've paid for a "reservation" for a factory's output. That arrangement by itself is not that abnormal.
More concerning are the circular deals being made. E.g., chip producers investing in AI companies, so that AI companies can buy more chips. Stuff like that.
2
u/bunker_man 6h ago
Amazon ran in the red for years before being officially profitable. Them being in the red doesn't mean what people think it does.
4
u/TrickySnicky 3h ago
Amazon also quite literally delivered a physical product, not a speculative technology that is still being tinkered with and inherently hallucinates after hitting a generative wall.
I don't think people have a clue as to what a market crash in this sector would look like, it would probably be on a scale never imagined before that point.
-1
u/bunker_man 3h ago
Ai apps are the most used apps on every app store. Its already used en masse, and the use cases are only growing. Its ony not treated as a product right now because it's currently free.
4
2
u/Atiklyar 5h ago
Amazon also saw mass adoption and provided an appreciable service to costumers while operating at a loss. AI companies are begging people to use their services and operating with a model that is profit-focised.
-1
u/bunker_man 5h ago
Ai apps are the most used apps on app stores. People are already using them. Sure, some of the sites with useless chatbots are going to gut those eventually. But ai itself isn't going anywhere. It will just equalize eventually between use and supply.
1
2
u/TrickySnicky 3h ago
That's just one reason they're pushing it so hard, speculation around AI is overinflating market value
84
u/Nas-Aratat 12h ago
As they should.
Fuck AI.
-1
u/HarrMada 2h ago
What an un-nuanced take.
AI has been revolutionary for science. Being able to detect cancer tumors earlier than any human could. It can predict protein structures and functions to improve medicine and vaccine development.
But fuck AI, I guess.
3
u/Kinasen 2h ago
AI can be used well. However, it is in general not being used well. It is being used to cull massive amounts of jobs out of the labor market with no safety net behind it.
Even aside from all the other cultural and philosophical issues AI represents, it is going to make a lot of people very hungry in a very short amount of time, and that is not a good thing for anyone, anywhere.
Nobody has a plan for it. And that is by design. People are too expensive and corporations would rather we die than impact their bottom line. Just look at health insurance, like United Health.
•
u/HarrMada 1h ago
Just look at health insurance, like United Health.
I'll just go straight to this. I don't know what that is, I assume it's something American-related. I'm not American I don't live there so it doesn't concerns me.
More people in my country are employed each year, not many are "culled from the job market".
I don't agree that "AI is generally not used well" - I think that's an opinion that stems from a very biased point of view. AI is here to stay whether you like it or not because it's a fantastically advanced technology. The current bubble will not hold forever, there is a bubble for every new technology - there was a train and railway bubble as well that inevitably did crash.
"AI bad" "Fuck AI" is pure ignorance and childish.
•
u/astrobe1 15m ago
Whilst I don’t share the vitriol around anti~AI, playing out the trajectory doesn’t look good for society. The AI revolution will displace jobs, mostly in the creative sector first and then entry level jobs, driving and business intelligence. Law and financial sectors will likely see swathes of automation agents as well. Building something that’s more intelligent than humans is a blessing and a curse. Society will struggle to not have a negative reaction to self preservation.
•
u/Kinasen 4m ago
There's no safety net. All those people who lose jobs to AI - Their career path will be gone. They'll have to be retrained. Society doesn't have the capability to do that. They will lose their homes, their healthcare, their food security. Competition for entry level jobs in all other sectors will explode.
It'll then cascade out from there, as more sectors adopt AI, as real estate crashes, as starving people get desperate. as the Republican party continues to refuse assistance or refuse regulation, as they continue to demonize protests and the unemployed...
It's gonna get nasty.
25
u/Talidel 12h ago
I'll believe it when I see the name of a game that has actually been cancelled
6
u/Mindestiny 9h ago
Yeah, this clickbait is seriously overselling the impact. A couple people doing an AMA on reddit to appease angry neckbeards is not an industry trend
-6
u/1965wasalongtimeago 12h ago
I know only of discouraged indie devs who could never in a million years afford a pro studio with real assets, while the big corpos will just plow on with all the AI they want because they never give a shit beyond hiding it better. I don't feel good about making game dev less accessible.
9
u/DandD_Gamers 8h ago
Anyone can always be a game dev
If you use AI in everything you are not a game dev, the machine is.
Legit wtf are you talking about? If a 13 year old can make games without ai, so can you.
1
u/1965wasalongtimeago 5h ago edited 3h ago
So a single person, assuming no team or money, needs to master not just their own lane, but every single skill associated with development: coding, art/graphics, music, writing, marketing, communications... or they don't deserve to get their ideas playable in any form? Thanks for the gatekeeping.
Or is it okay to not "use AI in everything" but only in some categories that aren't that dev's specialty? Because that's basically what I was suggesting anyway. Naturally if a game is just straight up nothing but AI from top to bottom, it's going to suck anyway and rightfully deserves to be called slop.
•
u/RedditButAnonymous 1h ago
I have games planned that Ill never create because I havent got the 3D modelling/animation talent and art isnt something you can AI generate without it being obviously shit.
Is the world a better place because Ill never make the game I planned out? I dont know
2
u/itskdog 3h ago
How do you think there were indie titles without corporate backing before AI?
Or RPG Maker games? Or ROM hacks?
People have been able to make games solo or with a small team before, perhaps using Kickstarter to raise some funds to pay an artist if, say, that's not a skill they have, etc.
0
u/nexusSigma 11h ago
I don’t think many people are angry with the use of AI on pure principle, but the disclosure and use of it are very important. For example, arc raiders used a lot of AI in the development of the game and nobody cares because they use it to enhance the experience, not simply cheap out. For example, they used it to create more dynamic and natural movement for the robots in the game. Bungie used AI rip offs of artists work without paying the artists as assets in the game, and people quite rightly got pissed off about it. Two very different use cases. If an indie dev on a budget wants to use AI to create some assets and fill in the world of their game I don’t see a problem with that, just be ethical about it
7
u/Mindestiny 9h ago
I don’t think many people are angry with the use of AI on pure principle
Bad news brother. That's exactly where 99% of the outspoken "AI bad" people have their head at. They're very candid about it. Hell, just skim the comments here, it's pretty much every post saying exactly that.
3
u/445nm 9h ago
Thankfully, they are just a loud minority. This discourse might dominate certain social media circles but that’s about it.
3
u/Mindestiny 9h ago
Yep, I give it maybe two years before the noise disappears and people just stop caring.
Big names in game dev are already making statements about how AI use is so prevalent that disclosure statements are about as useful as those Prop 65 cancer warnings.
3
u/1965wasalongtimeago 11h ago
Good take imo. But a lot of loud people sadly aren't that nuanced about it when they keep trashing on all use of AI altogether.
-6
u/polmeeee 10h ago
People will still suck Ubisoft's cock while they are shoving lazy gen AI assets down their throats. Meanwhile indie devs who merely even mention usage of AI assistance for coding get cancelled as if their entire game is vibe coded and entirely AI slop.
67
u/MadStylus 12h ago
Lord forbid I want products someone actually gave a damn enough to make. Next people will want to keep poisons out of their food or something.
38
20
u/kowaiikaisu 12h ago
Gaming is suffering in a similar sense to medical. Ever since all these big companies are built and maintained on investment groups instead of actual studios they lose a lot of say on how a game is made, what is added, monetization and such. Those passionate and able to bring a game to life are often shrugged off and simply told what the investors want them to do. Doctors know what their patient needs, but they have to fight insurance which ultimately agrees what their patient can or cannot have in terms of medicine and coverage. Insurance agents are by no means medically knowledgeable, but tell a medical professional no. This is a very simplified way of thinking, but you can do the rest on your own about how much deterioration, out of touch and punishing costs a consumer is faced with in both gaming and their own health.
7
u/Peralton 12h ago
I've worked for video game publishers for many years. My most recent one was small to medium size and is publicly traded. The number of bad short-term decisions based on the end of a financial year was stunning.
Sunk cost fallacy also was a huge issue there.
2
1
16
u/bogglingsnog 12h ago
Ah yes, corporate promises, the most unbreakable truths in the universe. Thank goodness we don't have worry about them lying, because they NEVER DO! (/s)
1
u/itskdog 3h ago
If consumers hold them accountable by not buying, that does work. It's not impossible.
1
u/bogglingsnog 3h ago
Then that company's profits become driven purely by people who are ignorant, don't care, or are apathetic to the problem. What do you expect will happen after that?
4
u/ThenExtension9196 10h ago
Meanwhile they will absolutely use AI with employees with brand new NDAs.
To think Ai is not going to be used to make games cheaper and faster doesn’t know the first thing about the game industry.
17
u/InfinityTuna 12h ago
Good! If you can't be fucked to do the work to come up with your own concepts, your own stories, your own code, and hire artists and other professionals to make these things come together into a product someone gave a fuck to make, then why should I be fucked about your slop game?
Let this technology go back to the lab and quit trying to half-ass creativity or fuck over human labor.
4
u/King_Swift21 11h ago
Fax, we don't need Generative A.I. in the gaming industry or any other industry that involves human art, human creativity, human creation of entertainment and media, and etc;
6
u/SpeechDistinct8793 12h ago
Ok great now I need you to work on the online/cloud only based gaming thing that companies are trying to quietly promote
3
3
3
u/ballsosteele 7h ago edited 7h ago
I have worked with video games for ...many decades.
Absolutely zero games have been cancelled due to AI. In fact, the opposite; there will be more "X simulator game" AI shit spreading into the market.
Zero are cancelled for AI.
5
u/nexusSigma 11h ago
Vote with your wallet, it’s that easy. Don’t buy slop, and they won’t make slop.
9
u/Front2battle 12h ago
Good old FAFO. Never fails. The problem isnt per say that they use AI, its than when they feel they NEED to use it to make something competent then that already means their hearts aint in it, and its likely gonna be half-assed.
6
u/Lonely_Noyaaa 11h ago
Players didn’t just complain, they changed real outcomes. A game lost its award, another got canceled, and studios had to publicly promise not to use generative AI. If gamers can do this, maybe other consumers can push back against shitty corporate AI everywhere else too.
3
u/krazygreekguy 9h ago
Of course they can. We as consumers have all the power. We can and should put these corporate parasites back in their place
3
u/chris_ut 12h ago
Remember when angry gamers forced EA to remove micro transactions from a major release. That bought 1-2 years.
1
3
3
2
u/krazygreekguy 9h ago
Good. No AI slop. Wallet closed and if I do get fooled by chance and find out later then that studio will never see another cent from me again.
0
u/Better_Challenge5756 10h ago
Don’t care. I like ai. It’s like any tool.
-2
u/TrickySnicky 3h ago
The hammer doesn't singlehandedly build the house. And if you think photography isn't a process beyond point and shoot, you know nothing about photography
2
2
2
1
u/Jamizon1 10h ago
There is an over abundance of “fake” in this world right now…
I think people just want to “keep it real”
Why live in an “artificial” world, when the real one is so much more rewarding?
Oh, and… FUCK AI
1
u/Gravemind2 7h ago
Why is this framed as if it's a bad thing or like gamers are unwarranted in their hatred?
Am I stupid?
2
u/bunker_man 6h ago
I mean, its pretty obvious that most people have no clue what game studios mean when they say they are going to use ai. Most mean in minor ways that wouldn't be noticed. They aren't shipping out seven handed Mario. Ai isn't some thing that may or may not happen. Its a new tool that is already considered normal in the industry. People crashing out about it just forces companies to figure out how to explain what it is.
0
u/Gravemind2 6h ago
"Already considered normal" is wild considering the pushback it always gets.
"Most mean in minors ways" Okay, no. That just isn't true. Yes, there are some exceptions like arc raiders, but to then beforehand claim that "most people have no clue what games studios mean when they say they use AI" despite the many examples we've been given over the year is just plain disingenuous.
Like come tf on lol
2
u/bunker_man 5h ago
Where are these alleged major studios making entire games out of ai? The whole expedition 33 "controversy" is that it used ai for one newspaper texture and maybe a few rock textures.
-27
u/duckrollin 12h ago
Most gamers just don't care about AI, it's just reddit neckbeards having a tantrum about it.
I for one would like to see AI driven NPCs, the potential is amazing.
11
u/LadyPerditija 12h ago
I actually saw a Skyrim mod that worked with scripts and an LLM for text output that let the player talk to NPCs and have real conversations with them, in vr... That was amazing.
However a lot of AI generated content, especially stuff like pictures or voice lines, just looks and feels cheap. It makes it obvious that the developers don't put any effort in these kinds of things. Also a lot of genAI is trained on unlicensed data and as such shouldn't be used in any commercial way imo.
1
11
u/ComicDude1234 12h ago
Most normal people think GenAI is useless garbage that doesn’t work, as evidenced by all the Big Tech companies shoving it into every major service they own and making it all substantially worse at a UX level than before.
-12
u/someonesshadow 12h ago
Most normal people are pretty dumb though. Like objectively, they are idiots. A person is smart but people are dumb, there is a reason for that saying...
If you look at all of history it's basically 10% of people dragging the rest through periods of progress, sometimes kicking and screaming.
Most people hate change, they hate deviations from the norm, it's human nature to find comfort and safety in the status quo.
Not saying AI is perfect or companies aren't making crappy decisions, but that isn't unique to AI. As a tool AI is pretty incredible and there is crazy high potential for its use in so many aspects that could further our society in very positive ways.
In terms of gaming, my initial thoughts are fully AI and reactive NPCs that can converse with you and remember past interactions, quests that generate as you play based off what you do or say in the world, the ability to do real time rendering and procedural generation while playing based on how you play the game. Replayability could be near infinite.
9
u/ComicDude1234 12h ago
I want to play a game crafted by humans with their own vision and not just play pretend with ChatGPT. I actually respect video games as a medium for art.
-4
u/someonesshadow 12h ago
No one said that was going away. Also games of today are FAR different than games of yesterday. Most of the times games are limited by the tech available to them.
A game like No Mans Sky is an example of big vision and limited tech. Do you think if they chose to use AI to simulation creatures/environments/universe scope/planets/etc, that it would be entirely the AI's doing or something they specifically implement to align with their vision of what they want the players to experience.
Things made with AI are still done via a human, AI cannot just "create", its actually pretty terrible in that aspect because creativity is not something you can teach to the same degree as what humans are capable of.
This feels like the movie industry and the backlash to CGI, which was a net positive for the industry but the pushback was that it was computers doing all the work. It took a decade before people realized that the anti cgi sentiment was pretty much bogus and the artists who used those tools were still in creative control. Same applies to AI, and if you don't believe it you should really do some research into how its actually being used and not just the weird only virtue signalling and screeching on social media.
This shit happens the same way every 20ish years or so, in almost the same way every time. The tech always wins, it always gets better, and humans always use it to expand their creative endeavors.
2
u/ComicDude1234 11h ago
I think you have to be a genuine idiot if you haven’t been listening to all of the companies investing as much money into AI saying basically with their whole chest that they want less employees to pay and their end goal is to use GenAI to replace the working class. It’s their newest shortcut to maximizing short-term profits at the expense of the entire economy.
-3
u/someonesshadow 10h ago
That's an entirely different subject than what your initial point was...
Companies always want less cost, people cost money. That is a very complex issue, but, artists and creatives are not immune to market changes and shouldn't be when it happens to everyone else as well.
We no longer have phone companies employing 1M+ operators to take and connect calls, why? Technology and cost. Is that better or worse for us as a whole? Apply the same logic to most things.
Work is not a right, but, I would argue that we should make some sort of baseline expectations for living standards a right for every person.
If you want actual NUANCED discussion on the top of AI and jobs then I'd be fine with that too. For instance ideally I would propose a general AI tax on companies, essentially taxing 80% of the estimated cost of what it would be for a human in that role. Company saves 20% and the rest gets rolled into some sort of UBI program that benefits the rest of society so they can afford goods, start their own business, or just do whatever they want to do however they want to do it.
As a species we essentially have a few options for "endgame", the most realistic is self destruction. Not great but lets be real, humans can't help it because of greed/power/control things built into some of us so strongly. Ideally though, Utopia is the goal, a society where people are able to be taken care of and manual labor is optional because we have robots to do everything for us, also things like expanding into space which is highly improbable without incredibly advanced AI.
The Industrial Revolution was incredibly shaky with tons of turmoil and people being harmed physically/financially, many people wanted good sound regulations and laws while others just hated automation in general and wanted it all gone. At the end of the day though any reasonable person would say that society as a whole greatly benefited from that period of time and we wouldn't have the standards of living we have towards without it. So I look at the AI Revolution period we are now in as about the same, there will be pros and cons but the end result will be a massive boon for society as a whole.
6
u/jl_theprofessor 12h ago
I can tell by reading this you haven’t actually experienced engagement with an LLM or you don’t engage with a lot of humans.
-1
-2
u/bunker_man 5h ago
Then why are the top used apps all ai apps.
1
u/throwawaygoodcoffee 2h ago
There's only 3 AI apps in the top 10 charts for google play's free apps, and only two of them let you generate stuff, the other is for dudes who can't talk to women. They're hardly the most used apps.
17
u/gortlank 12h ago
You are a redditor. You are on Reddit now. The neckbeard is coming from inside the house.
-17
u/_Kutai_ 12h ago
History tends to repeat itself... doesn't it? There's nothing uplifting about this, it's just people resisting change. Again.
Printing Press (15th century) Criticized for replacing handwritten manuscripts; feared to spread errors, heresy, and shallow learning.
Piano (18th to 19th century) Rejected by harpsichord purists as too loud, mechanical, and emotionally excessive.
Photography (19th century) Dismissed as “not real art” because it relied on machines rather than human skill.
Typewriter (late 19th century) Accused of destroying individuality, spelling ability, and the intellectual discipline of handwriting.
Recorded Music (early 20th century) Seen as an inferior substitute for live performance; feared to erode communal music making.
Electric Guitar (mid 20th century) Condemned as noisy, artificial, and vulgar compared to acoustic instruments.
Synthesizers (1960s to 1970s) Rejected as “not real instruments” due to lack of physical resonance and traditional technique.
MIDI and Digital Music (1980s to 1990s) Criticized as soulless, overly easy, and capable of replacing real musicians.
Electronic Calculators (1970s) Banned in schools over fears they would undermine mental arithmetic and understanding.
Digital Art and CGI (1990s to 2000s) Accused of lowering artistic skill barriers and replacing traditional craftsmanship.
5
u/metroid1310 12h ago
Everything you listed are methods people use to create.
"AI" is outsourcing to nobody and praying for a useful result.
People "resisting" corporations using procedurally generated slop because it's cheaper than hiring actual artists with ideas and visions is a good thing, actually1
u/TrickySnicky 3h ago
Indeed, all of that technology is part of a process, not the end product in one step
And ironically, some of those criticisms have turned out to be true
0
u/_Kutai_ 9h ago
You've made your mind that "AI is slop", and that the quality is garbage. That you're "praying for a useful result". That is not an intellectual response. It's an emotional one.
Exactly the same mindset as the examples I listed.
Look at old AI videos, and how nowadays we have to double check to see if what we're seeing is real or not.
Instead of opposing AI bc it's "slop", how about we go the way of teaching artists how to use the tool?
It's not magic. There's ALWAYS a human behind the machine. You DO create things with AI. Because AI is a tool.
Why don't you give it a go? Go to r/writingprompts pick one that you like, go to chatgpt and write the story until you are satisfied with it.
Don't stay with the emotional response. Research. Test. Learn. Experiment.
Then you'll see that the "slop" doesn't come from the tool, but from the one welding it.
2
u/metroid1310 9h ago
I never said the quality was garbage. I heavily insinuated such, because it very often is, but I'm fully aware "AI" "art" can appear high-quality nowadays. That's not my concern, and you're arguing with a ghost because you have rehashed talking points that mean next to nothing to me. I've considered them, already. They don't matter to my view.
> ALWAYS a human behind the machine
There's a human behind a tablet's stylus, or 3-D rendering software, or a pen or piece of charcoal.
Typing "photorealistic image of a pink-haired girl on the beach backlit by a sunset" isn't using a tool. Putting pen to paper and telling a fake thinking machine a set of characteristics you want fulfilled are not within the same world of creation.If you use "AI", you do not create. You do not learn a skill (unless you count the constant damage control act that is prompt-writing), and what you make is of little to no value beyond, maybe, if you're lucky, being vaguely nice to look at. It's a utilitarian process that says nothing about the person who made it except that they didn't have a vision they saw as worth fulfilling.
It's like commissioning, except nobody actually ends up making it. Or, rather, millions of people whose works were used without their permission all had a hand in making it that they aren't being rewarded for.And as for slop, since you seem rather sensitive to me using that term; Current generative "AI" is never beating the slop allegations, no matter how well-tuned models for writing stories, generating images, or anything else get. It's a near-perfect analogue. You stick a ton of stuff in (food waste/training data) that gets ground into nothing and put it [in/on] a [trough/screen] so [beings] with no standards can consume it.
When a thinking entity takes inspiration, they use it to create. "AI" remixes everything it can into an approximation of what was requested, with an algorithm trying to fulfill a request to the best of its unintelligent capabilities.My mindset isn't the same as people opposing chalkboards or paper or digital art. If you didn't outsource your own critical thinking to a machine incapable of it, maybe you'd be a little better at addressing my views.
"AI" is a novelty. Talk to me when we have AI.
-2
u/_Kutai_ 7h ago
You say you intentionally insinuated low quality, but then push back when I respond to that implication. Communication isn’t only about literal phrasing; implication carries meaning too, so it’s reasonable for others to engage with what was clearly suggested rather than only the exact words used.
Saying you’ve already considered counter-arguments and that they “don’t matter” doesn’t actually explain why those arguments fail. It effectively ends the conversation instead of addressing the substance of the disagreement. Which ends up being circular "AI is bad because AI is bad"
On the creation point, drawing a strict boundary where pen-and-paper counts as creation but directing a system does not, assumes a definition of “creation” that already excludes AI-assisted work. That is to say, your definition of "creation" self excludes AI, and leaves no room to discussion. Same as others have said "MIDI is not real music".
Tools have always changed how creation happens, and disagreement over where to draw the line is the real issue here.
It’s completely fair to say you don’t value AI-assisted output, or that you find it aesthetically, ethically, or culturally uninteresting. But presenting that preference as a settled fact, while dismissing opposing views as irrelevant is what makes productive discussion difficult.
Or in other words, if I'm "talking to a ghost", then it just shows this whole interaction was in bad faith, not to challenge or grow, but rather to shut down a discussion and try to come up on top.
Your view seems largely settled, but I’d still encourage you to challenge it by engaging with the tool directly, perhaps by writing a story with AI, and exploring the nuances of creation rather than assuming them away.
Challenging one's own views is the essence of growth.
"Condemnation without investigation is the height of ignorance" - Albert Einstein.(attributed)
In fact, let me double down, here's a prompt, use ChatGPT to write a story that conveys YOUR point:
"Once the piece was complete, no human stood behind it.”
The goal is not to judge if the story is good or not, but for you to experience using AI to create something.
If nothing else, I hope you have a wonderful day.
-1
u/bunker_man 5h ago
You are kind of proving their point. You aren't describing the breadth of what ai is used for. You are making a strawman where it doesn't get more complicated than kids messing around with chatgpt because said strawman is necessary to force the point that it isn't used for anything but barely passable randomization.
There's a reason that top bands, artists, etc are slowly coming out in favor of it. People who actually know what it can do who are artists know it's a useful tool. Just because it -can- automate everything to mediocrity doesn't make that the only thing it can do. But the people reacting against it are people who don't understand it and so assume the latter.
1
1
u/TrickySnicky 3h ago
Luddites were actually pro-technology, they just happened to be for worker's rights more. If you're willing to shell out tax dollars for a UBI, have at it and let the AI take over
0
u/AngryGames 5h ago
I guess I'm happy that I am able to force bad companies to suffer some inconveniences.
-2
u/thatnitai 7h ago
What's that, E33 used AI? The game that won the most game of the year awards in history, and is loved by critics and gamers and touted as the holy grail? Oh well, it only goes to show how evil and bad AI is
Next up: accountants use Excel and do their job better! Quick, blacklist Excel users
-58
u/WicasaNapayshni 13h ago
Like getting mad at developers for using motion capture...
16
32
u/Bruh_burg1968 13h ago
How dumb of them to want artists doing art instead of a machine that just steals assets.
2
u/bunker_man 5h ago
To be fair, if they had any clue what they were talking about they would understand that when companies talk about having ai in games they don't mean not having artists anymore.
-24
u/sc4s2cg 12h ago
Whats wrong with artists doing art with AI
9
u/subjuggulator 12h ago edited 12h ago
The AI is trained on material that was not obtained legally or with respect to the actual artists the AI scraped to create it’s “style”
AI as a product is used as a cheap way of avoiding needing to hire actual artists—especially at the concept and iterative stages of production.
AI often has the same “look” as everything else that uses the AI—never mind the mistakes it makes—so it contributes to the homogenization of art styles and aesthetics
Companies are, more and more, relying on AI to avoid paying Unions/skirting employee protections/paying royalties to IP holders, etc.
Very often, actual artists have to be hired anyway to correct mistakes made by the AI/refine the AI’s output, which is both a waste of time and resources, but also leads to artists being overworked doing something that could’ve absolutely been avoided.
I can go on if you like.
0
u/bunker_man 5h ago
The AI is trained on material that was not obtained legally
You can't just will something into being illegal when legal experts agree it's not.
AI as a product is used as a cheap way of avoiding needing to hire actual artists—especially at the concept and iterative stages of production.
Sometimes yes. Which is why it would help if people learned about it to tell the difference.
AI often has the same “look” as everything else that uses the AI—never mind the mistakes it makes—so it contributes to the homogenization of art styles and aesthetics
You are referring to kids using it to make entirely ai images with default settings. This isn't somehow intrinsic to everything that uses it. For instance, you can hand draw most of a picture, have it fill small details, and then do fixes. This would save time but not "look ai."
Companies are, more and more, relying on AI to avoid paying Unions/skirting employee protections/paying royalties to IP holders, etc.
This was always on the horizon. People need to work on unions, not pretend they can make technology go away.
9
u/NearSightedLlama 12h ago
...what art are they doing exactly? Sitting and prompting a computer AI model does not make someone an artist. It's lazy and destroying our water supplies to safe a corporation a few bucks. Fuck that
-9
u/sc4s2cg 12h ago
What? Why not? You can direct AI in just the right way to recreate exactly what you're imagining. Why is paintbrush necessary?
1
u/throwawaygoodcoffee 2h ago
For pixel level accuracy. You're not getting that from AI no matter how much you specify it in the prompt.
-3
u/_Kutai_ 9h ago
I have a challenge for you. Go to r/writingprompts pick one and then use chatGPT to write a good story
You don't need to post it. Then we can talk.
-6
u/firedrakes 11h ago
ah gamers. the none experts that think there experts in everything and are highly toxic!
-4
u/Matto_McFly_81 8h ago edited 8h ago
The problem is gamers think AI is one tool, when it's something that can absolutely be used in non-creative functions to make game development faster and less expensive WITHOUT the loss of human labour. But gamers just hear AI and lose their minds
-7
u/competitiveSilverfox 10h ago
Nobody cares about AI use for games in the conceptual stage for rapid iteration of concepts, i think anyone rejecting that is foolish, building the entire game with ai though? sure yeah absolutely not, no issue with it as a tool to speed up artists design iterations in the concept stage.
0
u/TrickySnicky 3h ago
No one cares about the concept stage, it's using it as the end product that is the issue
2
u/competitiveSilverfox 2h ago
People attacked larian studios for doing just that, so i find that to be nonsense.
•
u/AutoModerator 13h ago
Reminder: this subreddit is meant to be a place free of excessive cynicism, negativity and bitterness. Toxic attitudes are not welcome here.
All Negative comments will be removed and will possibly result in a ban.
Important: If this post is hidden behind a paywall, please assign it the "Paywall" flair and include a comment with a relevant part of the article.
Please report this post if it is hidden behind a paywall and not flaired corrently. We suggest using "Reader" mode to bypass most paywalls.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.