To everyone supporting AI images.

[PlanktonHatesTheWorld]

Listen, we get it. There's definitely people out there who don't care about AI images and you're one of them. Maybe you even think your prompts are some Van Gogh level wonder. Remember though, without Van Gogh's talent you could never ask for an image in his style.

Overall, I do believe AI image supporters are in the minority as far as whether or not the general populous cares about AI image creation. Once people have suspicion, they obviously care, enough to throw a stink and try to remove it. I'm speculating based on vibes because I'm human, but that's where my mind is at on it.

I suspect people who don't care about AI images also don't consider video games art either and just think a game is a game. Games are art, as much as movies and actual paintings and anything else that requires genuine creativity.

The thing is, if the Devs had not removed the AI images, there's a good chance that myself and everyone else who does care would have review bombed the game despite the fact that we like the game. AI images cheapen all actual art, including game development. There's a reason people get upset.

I imagine that in the future when the AI's have gotten to the point where they can simulate games, the developers here will be rather unhappy if someone just went online and said "Make me a game that's Project Zomboid but..." and then just used that as their "own creation" for monetary gains, when obviously, it wouldn't be their "genuine creation" it'd be a prompt made by a system that scanned and copied PZ to spit out an uninspired facsimile.

AI as a tool, is fine. AI as a "creative" force is not.

[funni_noises]

Originally posted by PlanktonHatesTheWorld:

Listen, we get it. There's definitely people out there who don't care about AI images and you're one of them. Maybe you even think your prompts are some Van Gogh level wonder. Remember though, without Van Gogh's talent you could never ask for an image in his style.

Overall, I do believe AI image supporters are in the minority as far as whether or not the general populous cares about AI image creation. Once people have suspicion, they obviously care, enough to throw a stink and try to remove it. I'm speculating based on vibes because I'm human, but that's where my mind is at on it.

I suspect people who don't care about AI images also don't consider video games art either and just think a game is a game. Games are art, as much as movies and actual paintings and anything else that requires genuine creativity.

The thing is, if the Devs had not removed the AI images, there's a good chance that myself and everyone else who does care would have review bombed the game despite the fact that we like the game. AI images cheapen all actual art, including game development. There's a reason people get upset.

I imagine that in the future when the AI's have gotten to the point where they can simulate games, the developers here will be rather unhappy if someone just went online and said "Make me a game that's Project Zomboid but..." and then just used that as their "own creation" for monetary gains, when obviously, it wouldn't be their "genuine creation" it'd be a prompt made by a system that scanned and copied PZ to spit out an uninspired facsimile.

AI as a tool, is fine. AI as a "creative" force is not.

AI prompting still takes practice as you can spend a few hundred hours finding the right combination of tags to get a image you like then try that prompt a few more hundred times to get a good image and then edit that image in photoshop or other image editing programs. some people do not care about the quality and give a few tries and post the raw image while others spend weeks perfecting it cause they have a idea that they want the ai to perfect. ai is a tool while the finished image is the product of said tool.

[funni_noises]

Originally posted by funni_noises:

Originally posted by PlanktonHatesTheWorld:

Listen, we get it. There's definitely people out there who don't care about AI images and you're one of them. Maybe you even think your prompts are some Van Gogh level wonder. Remember though, without Van Gogh's talent you could never ask for an image in his style.

Overall, I do believe AI image supporters are in the minority as far as whether or not the general populous cares about AI image creation. Once people have suspicion, they obviously care, enough to throw a stink and try to remove it. I'm speculating based on vibes because I'm human, but that's where my mind is at on it.

I suspect people who don't care about AI images also don't consider video games art either and just think a game is a game. Games are art, as much as movies and actual paintings and anything else that requires genuine creativity.

The thing is, if the Devs had not removed the AI images, there's a good chance that myself and everyone else who does care would have review bombed the game despite the fact that we like the game. AI images cheapen all actual art, including game development. There's a reason people get upset.

I imagine that in the future when the AI's have gotten to the point where they can simulate games, the developers here will be rather unhappy if someone just went online and said "Make me a game that's Project Zomboid but..." and then just used that as their "own creation" for monetary gains, when obviously, it wouldn't be their "genuine creation" it'd be a prompt made by a system that scanned and copied PZ to spit out an uninspired facsimile.

AI as a tool, is fine. AI as a "creative" force is not.

AI prompting still takes practice as you can spend a few hundred hours finding the right combination of tags to get a image you like then try that prompt a few more hundred times to get a good image and then edit that image in photoshop or other image editing programs. some people do not care about the quality and give a few tries and post the raw image while others spend weeks perfecting it cause they have a idea that they want the ai to perfect. ai is a tool while the finished image is the product of said tool.

as long as it takes time and effort to produce the finished product. the product is art. even if said effort and time was learning what tags (words) gets the ai to understand what kind of image you truly want.

[Zabu]

Art is a fleeting privilege its not a right. You dont have the right to make money your entire life by painting pictures - same way i dont have a right to make money playing football. I know this sucks to be told - but its the reality. You need to work for to make money and then you can do your hobbies in your free time like the rest of us.

[Frogging101]

Is this really the place to have this debate which has been bludgeoned to death all over the Internet again and again for the past 2 years?

[Lexyvil]

I'm one of those people that actually loves seeing how good AI art can be, but really dislike seeing it used for movies, games, or any project unrelated to testing the capabilities of AI art.

If anything, I'm glad that they removed the new art to looking into whether they ended up being created even partly by AI.

[Keldorn]

I don't care whoever or whatever creates the images as long as they are good to look at. I don't care if the games are art or not as long as i enjoy them.

[funni_noises]

Originally posted by Keldorn:

I don't care whoever or whatever creates the images as long as they are good to look at. I don't care if the games are art or not as long as i enjoy them.

this is the correct stance on art.

[???]

how can the people in this comment section support the previous ai art on the loading times is lowkey a surprise to me

[Zushen]

Originally posted by juan:

how can the people in this comment section support the previous ai art on the loading times is lowkey a surprise to me

Few reasons. The new Main Menu actually looked pretty good and it was something different to look at other than the same image over the last decade.

Also you can train your own ai art model using your own art. I didn't know/don't know if the new stuff was even AI, but it was refreshing having some change.

[Fist]

This guy is almost on the same level of "out of touch" with the world as most politicians, pop-stars or social-media a$$-clowns out there. Your average gamer doesn't give a flying frack about who or what created what image, as long as it is pleasant to look at. I've seen people take a sh1t on a ventilator aimed at canvas and sell it for "art" to some wealthy ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ on a yacht.

[Rusty]

It's interesting that the laptop class and their nepobaby children privileged enough to foster their talents in the arts in the first place, who spent the last two decades shouting down the working class as "luddites allergic to progress" when it was service/resource extraction jobs and industries being carved apart by automation. Now there's a risk that their industries* (financially gatekept from the working poor) are endangered by automation, suddenly automation is the biggest threat to the working class ever.

It's just kind of telling is all.

*Disclaimer because intentionally misconstruing an argument instead of addressing it in earnest sincerity is spreading like a disease through society: I'm not just referring to artists. Programmers, financebros, middle managers. They're all working jobs that have post secondary education requirements (with exceptions, which is why they're called exceptions) preventing the "pesky poors" from obtaining them.

[⎛⎝ Kupo ⎠⎞]

Ai when it comes to art is a tool as much as google searching an image and calling it '' my work '' is...
It's NOT a tool, and nothing it generates is yours.
Even if you make a sketch yourself and feed ai your sketch the output isn't yours, the sketch was yours but the output of the ai isn't.
It's the same if you make ai generate a landscape and then manually paint over it, the output of the ai ( which includes the design ) isn't yours either only the edits are.

Everyone understands this when it's someone googling an image and saying '' I made this '' or doing the same when they commission an artist and takes credit for their work.
But for some reason when it comes to ai people pretend like it's different and makes sense to take credit for it when it isn't and doesn't...
If you take credit for ai generated outputs you're a moron, and it's not art that's something humans do and something we attribute to humans.
Even if you generate an image and then copy the design the design isn't yours still you didn't come up with it, ai can't read your mind and translate what's in your mind to paper none of the output is your actual vision or creativity it's again the same as commissioning an artist to create something then taking credit for it it's just stupid.
Or googling an image and saying it's your because it has some extremely vague resemblance of what you thought you had in mind...

These models are fundamentally built on theft and no one who claims to care about creatives or art which includes all of the games, movies, tv shows, comics, manga, anime etc you ever consumed should support this crap.
When you support or make excuses for it you're actively spitting in the face of everyone who created everything you claim to love.

Lastly because some people are extremely bad faith about this, no one is saying that literally all ai is bad.
People are talking about these generative ai models built on theft meant to automate the creative process and replace artists.
People aren't talking about ai in medical research fields or the Spiderverse team creating their own software to make animating lipsyncing easier ( which I think is a stretch to call ai to begin with, and they didn't create it based on stealing other peoples work ).

[stecph]

To all the people supporting AI: enjoy being unemployed sooner or later.
It's all fun and games until something hits YOU,then it's not so fun anymore.
Whenever you will be unemployed,remember what OP posted.

[Frogging101]

Originally posted by Rusty:

It's interesting that the laptop class and their nepobaby children privileged enough to foster their talents in the arts in the first place, who spent the last two decades shouting down the working class as "luddites allergic to progress" when it was service/resource extraction jobs and industries being carved apart by automation. Now there's a risk that their industries (financially gatekept from the working poor) are endangered by automation, suddenly automation is the biggest threat to the working class ever.

It's just kind of telling is all.

Art is financially gatekept? By what? The cost of pencils and graphics tablets (<$150)?

[⎛⎝ Kupo ⎠⎞]

Originally posted by Rusty:

It's interesting that the laptop class and their nepobaby children privileged enough to foster their talents in the arts in the first place, who spent the last two decades shouting down the working class as "luddites allergic to progress" when it was service/resource extraction jobs and industries being carved apart by automation. Now there's a risk that their industries (financially gatekept from the working poor) are endangered by automation, suddenly automation is the biggest threat to the working class ever.

It's just kind of telling is all.

What the actual ♥♥♥♥ are you talking about, most artists in the industry didn't even go to art school if anything art school has a really bad reputation for being ♥♥♥♥♥♥ and not worth the money.
Most artists are also quite poor and work overtime for less pay than usual, if you want to make big money you don't become an artist wtf.
The artist who make a lot of money are a very extreme minority of people who got giga lucky on Patreon or something.

Also artists didn't call other people luddites for worrying about automation in other industries you're making ♥♥♥♥ up.
No one is being gatekept from art either all it takes to learn art and how the overwhelming majority of artists learned to do art is quite literally just to pick up a pen and a piece of paper.
If anything especially running things locally runnings these ai models is by far much much more expensive...