I hope more games start to use AI genned content

[Parun]

Not that I think it's higher quality or anything, I just don't think it's an issue. Tbh in 20 years it will be more like "This game features NO AI generated content" as a badge of honor, since everyone will just do it. Go for it. The buyers don't care, there is a very tiny minority of crybabies who are very loud about it, shouldn't even be a percentage of your sales.

[cmeier]

People are fine with Unreal Engine 5 which uses ai to create forest's, lighting, etc. Lets not forget DLSS which you could argue makes devs lazy in optimizing their games. Some reason art is a no no, to me it depends on the game, and scale. Thanks to the devs using ai they were able to make the game in a reasonable time frame and focus on making the game fun.

[Garble]

It entirely depends on how it was used.
The argument against AI art most of the time boils down to the fact that it was trained on other artist's art, often times without their knowledge/permission.
Remember though, everybody thought that the creative fields would be safe from AI, as AI could never replicate human art or music.
The reality however has turned out to be the opposite, the creative fields are falling to AI first as there is an abundance of training material.

[RGM Sobstar GG]

Originally posted by Garble:

It entirely depends on how it was used.
The argument against AI art most of the time boils down to the fact that it was trained on other artist's art, often times without their knowledge/permission.
Remember though, everybody thought that the creative fields would be safe from AI, as AI could never replicate human art or music.
The reality however has turned out to be the opposite, the creative fields are falling to AI first as there is an abundance of training material.

-Well thats a dumb argument since they trained on someone elses art without them knowing let's be real

[The Former]

I agree, AI has the potential to be a gamechanger for studios on a budget.

Originally posted by RGM Sobstar GG:

Originally posted by Garble:

It entirely depends on how it was used.
The argument against AI art most of the time boils down to the fact that it was trained on other artist's art, often times without their knowledge/permission.
Remember though, everybody thought that the creative fields would be safe from AI, as AI could never replicate human art or music.
The reality however has turned out to be the opposite, the creative fields are falling to AI first as there is an abundance of training material.

-Well thats a dumb argument since they trained on someone elses art without them knowing let's be real

Is it unethical for an artist to, without permission, like another artist's style and then proceed to practice until they can draw in a near-similar style? Say Toriyama Akira, of Dragon Ball and Dragon Quest fame. If a young artist learns to more or less recreate that style and goes pro, is that unethical?

I hope not, because artists do it all the time. It's why western comics all have a very similar style, and why there are certain tropes you see in the vast majority of manga art. It's also why every digital artist seems to what to use the warm, subsurface-y painting style you see in League of Legends and similar games.

This being the case, why would it be unethical for a computer to do it at the command of a human who likes a given style? This sets aside, of course, the other multitude of uses for AI, like - as this studio asserts they did - training it internally and using it only to greatly improve productivity, or using it to scratch up concepts that are refined and hand-drawn later.