Let's talk about AI(-Generated Pictures/Portraits)

[SideZeo]

I'm not about to start a Witch Hunt or anything but... why is nobody talking about this? Ever since I noticed it first, it's been cropping up more and more for me just how many of the photos and portraits in this game are AI Generated. Now, of course, I do understand that it's probably a pain in the ass to craft all of these portraits and other decorations by hand but... on the other hand, part of me also finds it a bit questionable on VOIDs end.

Not necessarily a hill I'd die on, but the morality of it is a bit iffy

[Kleo]

People have spoken about it, you're not the first for sure but people have definitely noticed it.

I'm a lil impartial honestly. It stood out to me like a sore thumb, likely because I've had about a year of experience with image generation now since it became open so for me personally it was extremely easy to notice.

That said, it didn't really bother me at all. The rest of the world is oozing with atmosphere so you end up lost in that more so than some silly anime pictures and what have you. Now, if it were to become pervasive to the point I experience that same "Huh? Is that AI Generated?" moment and pause to take a look every single mission then yeah I'd say it's getting a bit stupid.

Might just be me but yeah, really doesn't bother me in its current iteration, plenty of other eye candy to go around.

[Southpaw]

Let's also talk about the surnames. I have a family-team, named Kimura times 4.

[SideZeo]

Originally posted by Q:

Originally posted by SideZeo:

I'm not about to start a Witch Hunt or anything but... why is nobody talking about this? Ever since I noticed it first, it's been cropping up more and more for me just how many of the photos and portraits in this game are AI Generated. Now, of course, I do understand that it's probably a pain in the ass to craft all of these portraits and other decorations by hand but... on the other hand, part of me also finds it a bit questionable on VOIDs end.

Not necessarily a hill I'd die on, but the morality of it is a bit iffy

So what exactly is morally wrong with AI generated pictures ?

Non of these humans actually exist. What is the problem here? What am I missing ?

The problem is that a lot of AI Models get trained on pictures and artworks by people that didn't consent. Now, I don't know which Model VOID has specifically used, but there's a good chance that if its one of the more common ones, that it was probably trained on what is basically stolen work from others.

There's also the problem that AI doesn't really "make" new pictures and moreso "collages" them together from pre-existing pictures. Hence, the need to train them.
The moral problem then is, is that VOID is potentially using the work of others without their consent. Now, they're far from the only ones doing it and there are plenty of other problems in the world, but it is something to consider

There is also the issue that Valve made a statement that they do not publish games with AI Generated Content (now how seriously they take this and how much they enforce it, is another matter)

[Kleo]

Originally posted by Lefty:

Let's also talk about the surnames. I have a family-team, named Kimura times 4.

Not run across something like that yet. I'd believe it though, very silly stuff and if that's the case then maybe a wider range is required. Personally this isn't something that'd drive me up the wall though either ^^

[Brodi]

Originally posted by Q:

Originally posted by SideZeo:

So, Art theft and putting a game with AI-Generated content on Steam when Valve explicitly banned it is not a problem?
What is your point exactly, besides being a bit of a smoothbrain?

No, I don't see it as a problem.

People like you go around and are begging for rules and bans and then are the first ones ot moan about everything being too strict and modern games being too arcade.

Insulting someone as a smoothbrain does not increase your credibility either.

It's lazy to use AI-gen images. When it is obvious, the consumer might suggest a lack of effort and therefore might question the quality of the product that is provided.

[Reapercussion]

I mean, is there an artist out there that wants their artwork in the pedo child porn streamer guys bedroom? I don't think that'd be looked upon positively

[𝒞𝒶𝓈𝓊𝒶𝓁 Sinner]

I don't really care on this topic, from my understanding new AI doesn't do the whole "let's go online and basically trace art" thing anymore. I am also not entirely sure what art people mean in-game, I'm aware of the stuff on Streamer, but I think they probably did that for the irony of what Milky Toes character is.

[[BLK] Telu]

Why not crying about the texture also ?

[adaneze]

Originally posted by Q:

Originally posted by SideZeo:

So, Art theft and putting a game with AI-Generated content on Steam when Valve explicitly banned it is not a problem?
What is your point exactly, besides being a bit of a smoothbrain?

No, I don't see it as a problem.

People like you go around and are begging for rules and bans and then are the first ones ot moan about everything being too strict and modern games being too arcade.

Insulting someone as a smoothbrain does not increase your credibility either.

You don't see it as a problem because it doesn't affect you which makes sense. However, this topic has been a pretty big deal and artists started using tools that add a small color perturbation to images (art) that doesn't visually change them much but can "fool" AI. They are doing this to prevent their creative work from being used for training.

So, it really has nothing to do with "People like you go around and are begging for rules and bans and then are the first ones ot moan about everything being too strict and modern games being too arcade". This has been a real concern.

Using AI generated art in this case could also indicate that VOID might be done working on this game and just wanted to release it ASAP. I hope that's not the case, though.

I wanted to buy this game but will wait and see if VOID decide to continue working on it and bring back the cut content.

[Brodi]

Originally posted by Q:

[
Since AI generated faces look like real faces, the consumer doesnt care much.

No, they do not and it is not just me who cares.

[[BLK] Telu]

Originally posted by Brodi:

Originally posted by Q:

[
Since AI generated faces look like real faces, the consumer doesnt care much.

No, they do not and it is not just me who cares.

Nobody force you to buy the product.

[SideZeo]

Originally posted by 𝒞𝒶𝓈𝓊𝒶𝓁 Sinner:

I don't really care on this topic, from my understanding new AI doesn't do the whole "let's go online and basically trace art" thing anymore. I am also not entirely sure what art people mean in-game, I'm aware of the stuff on Streamer, but I think they probably did that for the irony of what Milky Toes character is.

It's literally all over the place. Take "Sins of the Father" for example. Those Portraits around the Hotel are all AI Generated

[[BLK] Telu]

There is also texture "not made by devs" all other the places.

[Shurenai]

Originally posted by SideZeo:

Originally posted by Q:

So what exactly is morally wrong with AI generated pictures ?

Non of these humans actually exist. What is the problem here? What am I missing ?

The problem is that a lot of AI Models get trained on pictures and artworks by people that didn't consent. Now, I don't know which Model VOID has specifically used, but there's a good chance that if its one of the more common ones, that it was probably trained on what is basically stolen work from others.

There's also the problem that AI doesn't really "make" new pictures and moreso "collages" them together from pre-existing pictures. Hence, the need to train them.
The moral problem then is, is that VOID is potentially using the work of others without their consent. Now, they're far from the only ones doing it and there are plenty of other problems in the world, but it is something to consider

There is also the issue that Valve made a statement that they do not publish games with AI Generated Content (now how seriously they take this and how much they enforce it, is another matter)

I always see people citing that "the problem is that AI models get trained on pictures and artworks <made> by people that didn't consent", but like... You do realize that artists themselves are an intelligence model that was trained on pictures and artworks made by people that didn't consent, right?

Like, That's literally how learning to be an artist works. Nothing an artist makes is truly 100% unique- It's all driven by the things they experienced in their lives, the people they met, the things they saw and heard, the pictures they've seen, the ones they've studied.. the artists they aspired to be like (Leonadro Davinci, Vincent van Gogh, etc).... So many people lead into the creation of any given artist, and next to none of those people ever gave consent.

The whole point of most art is to create something 'New' that builds upon the collective pile of knowledge that humanity has made by focusing the past through the lens of your own experiences.

Many artists even specialize in replica work, replicating the work of artists pass- Do you think Leonardo da Vinci ever gave any of those people consent to replicate the Mona Lisa?


I don't think anyone could name a single artist on earth that hasn't been inspired by seeing other art- Many even actively look through giant portfolios and websites full of images made by other people actively seeking that inspiration.

But when an AI generator does the same damn thing, Suddenly it's a consent problem?

[YoungZer0]

I applaud the use of AI. Its saves time and money. It's a fantastic tool for indie devs. Allowing their vision to shine through without much compromise.

From my experience most people who are against it are utterly ignorant on the subject.