Midjourney AI create art for events

[StupidDupes]

Just wondering if this can be integrated into the game. Create art from event descriptions.

[whatamidoing]

Integrated? Fat chance. Just run anything you want yourself if you want.

[VoiD]

I have no doubt AI will be integrated in future games, and proceduaral generation will be completely different from what we understand nowadays, but I don't think it's quite there yet, AI can create beautiful, new images, new stories, new situations, but it's often wonky and flawed and it requires human input to fix several details.

It also creates some abominations quite often, along with unintended NSFW content, SD2.0 tried to censor itself and the only thing they have acchieved was a very bad model incapable of producing art of any quality.

[whatamidoing]

Even ignoring the slight jank, it's the "integrate" part that's the real problem. Pay for generation that you can only use while online, or massively raise the hardware requirements for the game by using an algorithm that runs off your own GPU?

[Security Cam #7]

Originally posted by whatamidoing:

Even ignoring the slight jank, it's the "integrate" part that's the real problem. Pay for generation that you can only use while online, or massively raise the hardware requirements for the game by using an algorithm that runs off your own GPU?

This right here. This would be an issue.

This game for example has everything randomly generated by AI as you play:
https://store.steampowered.com/app/1889620/AI_Roguelite/

And has huge requirements despite looking pretty basic, that's because it generates all this stuff on your own PC.

Now, I can see something like this becoming a *MOD* for RimWorld, either as a proof of concept or something to mess around with, but I do not see it becoming an official feature anytime soon. Lots of players would be cut off from rimworld when they would see the requirements.

An online service wouldn't work for a task like this. It has to run a local model. Midjourney is subscription based and needs to be paid for too. Local models don't need to.

[corisai]

Originally posted by VoiD:

AI can create beautiful, new images, new stories, new situations

Except it doesn't actually creating anything new. They're reproducing examples from learning + some pure random. Calling that "AI" is a pure marketing and nothing more.

[Steelfleece]

Originally posted by corisai:

Originally posted by VoiD:

AI can create beautiful, new images, new stories, new situations

Except it doesn't actually creating anything new. They're reproducing examples from learning + some pure random. Calling that "AI" is a pure marketing and nothing more.

A number of art sites are very much against AI art posting because said AI art is usually a composite of existing art the program has pulled from the 'net and whose original creators go uncredited.

[VoiD]

Originally posted by corisai:

Originally posted by VoiD:

AI can create beautiful, new images, new stories, new situations

Except it doesn't actually creating anything new. They're reproducing examples from learning + some pure random. Calling that "AI" is a pure marketing and nothing more.

Yeah, no, that's false, mess around with it for a little bit and you'll realize, it does create art, you can take the exact same generated image and change absolutely anything you want about it, from posture, direction, composition, backgrounds, the actions being taken within the context of the picture, and if you do it right it all ends up perfectly coherently, that's just nonsense being spread by people who don't really know what's going on.

This is especially true when you decide to form one image with a certain checkpoing, then switch to another completely different trained with completely different patters to adjust and change it.

Ai generation is just a tool for artists, and it enables people without physical skills to create something nice, something new, something unlike anything ever done before. AI generation is no more of a copy than human generation, but you can prove me wrong, draw a new color that doesn't exist right now. Or even picture it in your mind, you can't do it, and the AI can't do it either.

Then again, 3D modeling didn't require those skills either, photoshop drawing and/or adjusting didn't require them either, artists without actual pencil skills have existed for a long time now.

[Nyx (She/Her)]

Originally posted by VoiD:

Originally posted by corisai:

Except it doesn't actually creating anything new. They're reproducing examples from learning + some pure random. Calling that "AI" is a pure marketing and nothing more.

Yeah, no, that's false, mess around with it for a little bit and you'll realize, it does create art, you can take the exact same generated image and change absolutely anything you want about it, from posture, direction, composition, backgrounds, the actions being taken within the context of the picture, and if you do it right it all ends up perfectly coherently, that's just nonsense being spread by people who don't really know what's going on.

This is especially true when you decide to form one image with a certain checkpoing, then switch to another completely different trained with completely different patters to adjust and change it.

Ai generation is just a tool for artists, and it enables people without physical skills to create something nice, something new, something unlike anything ever done before. AI generation is no more of a copy than human generation, but you can prove me wrong, draw a new color that doesn't exist right now. Or even picture it in your mind, you can't do it, and the AI can't do it either.

Then again, 3D modeling didn't require those skills either, photoshop drawing and/or adjusting didn't require them either, artists without actual pencil skills have existed for a long time now.

you're very clearly poisoned already
AI "art" is a tool of art theft and cannot generate anything New

[VoiD]

Originally posted by Nyx (She/Her):

Originally posted by VoiD:

Yeah, no, that's false, mess around with it for a little bit and you'll realize, it does create art, you can take the exact same generated image and change absolutely anything you want about it, from posture, direction, composition, backgrounds, the actions being taken within the context of the picture, and if you do it right it all ends up perfectly coherently, that's just nonsense being spread by people who don't really know what's going on.

This is especially true when you decide to form one image with a certain checkpoing, then switch to another completely different trained with completely different patters to adjust and change it.

Ai generation is just a tool for artists, and it enables people without physical skills to create something nice, something new, something unlike anything ever done before. AI generation is no more of a copy than human generation, but you can prove me wrong, draw a new color that doesn't exist right now. Or even picture it in your mind, you can't do it, and the AI can't do it either.

Then again, 3D modeling didn't require those skills either, photoshop drawing and/or adjusting didn't require them either, artists without actual pencil skills have existed for a long time now.

you're very clearly poisoned already
AI "art" is a tool of art theft and cannot generate anything New

False

[Morkonan]

Originally posted by ᲼⁧⁧Smelly Fish:

...
This game for example has everything randomly generated by AI as you play:..

Not "everything." It is not writing game code and new mechanics determined by an AI. It has to operate from within a set of rules. Sure, a lot of the content may be generated by an AI as well as some of the variables that are already coded into the back-end mechanics, and basic operators for combat and the like, but read the description... It's a "text-based game."

Introducing AI Roguelite, the world's first text-based RPG where every location, NPC, enemy, item, crafting recipe, and game mechanic is 100% determined by artificial intelligence.

Some "AI Everything Game" writing its own executable code by itself on my computer is going to cause fire and brimstone to fall upon it from on high...

Hey, it's an interesting premise and a nice achievement, no doubt. But, it's not "everything."

ChatGPT could be incorporated into Rimworld right now as long as Micro$oft allows its free and open use... Some modder out there may have already done it. (So many reports of modders doing that in games now that I've forgotten who's done what.)

[Morkonan]

Originally posted by VoiD:

False

/agree

[VoiD]

This comment is awaiting analysis by our automated content check system. It will be temporarily hidden until we verify that it does not contain harmful content (e.g. links to websites that attempt to steal information).

[Morkonan]

Originally posted by VoiD:

... AI art ..

My opinion, which is factually true, indisputable, and accepted as currency in some galaxies, is... :)

A.I. Generated "art" is not "Art."

Art is an expressive work intentionally and purposefully created by a human to communicate something to other human beings that is greater than the sum of its components. (brief definition...)

What counts as "art" in the case of A.I. Generated art is possibly the prompt, itself, combined with the output the artist has accepted best expresses an intended message... (Some leeway may be possible for "intent" here. The combination itself could yield a new expression that was originally unintended.)

So, a prompt of "Dali's Ronald McDonald" that yields a variety of outputs and one of those is chosen by the human creator to be presented in concert with their work in the prompt... would be "art." They would, at that point, be "playing the A.I. like an instrument."

A.I. "art" on its own, with no evidence of human input, is not "Art" in the truly valuable sense. It may exhibit certain forms of artistry, but there is no clear "intent" present and that is, for me, what is critical in defining what "Art" is, with a capital "A." :)

download IvokeAI or Automatic1111

Cool. Got any recommends for offline tools? My gaming/PC is still from the Stone Age and air-gapped atm, on purpose. (Old OS and It's got melted bits..., so I Frankenstein it just to get game patch updates. :) I've looked into a couple to play with, but haven't tested any yet. Will check your recommends after this post.)

Edit: Check them both, looks like at least Automatc, maybe even Invoke, can bot be run offline. (I want something for decently weird/new'ish styles of concept art for 3D stuffs and that's not easy to find without it being either immediately recognizable or... crap. Not for naughty stuff, just fyi. :))

[VoiD]

Originally posted by Morkonan:

Originally posted by VoiD:

... AI art ..

My opinion, which is factually true, indisputable, and accepted as currency in some galaxies, is... :)

A.I. Generated "art" is not "Art."

Art is an expressive work intentionally and purposefully created by a human to communicate something to other human beings that is greater than the sum of its components. (brief definition...)

What counts as "art" in the case of A.I. Generated art is possibly the prompt, itself, combined with the output the artist has accepted best expresses an intended message... (Some leeway may be possible for "intent" here. The combination itself could yield a new expression that was originally unintended.)

So, a prompt of "Dali's Ronald McDonald" that yields a variety of outputs and one of those is chosen by the human creator to be presented in concert with their work in the prompt... would be "art." They would, at that point, be "playing the A.I. like an instrument."

A.I. "art" on its own, with no evidence of human input, is not "Art" in the truly valuable sense. It may exhibit certain forms of artistry, but there is no clear "intent" present and that is, for me, what is critical in defining what "Art" is, with a capital "A." :)

I'd agree if you couldn't create, exactly, what you wanted through AI art just as well, I see it as a tool just like photoshop, it's just better, if AI art isn't art, photoshop isn't either, and neither is 3D modelling, or anything else.

Of course this can keep scaling down arbitrarily, where someone may decide that paiting isn't art either if the "artist" didn't create a sketch either, after all, the art itself isn't the object and we can set up arbitrary definitions to excluse what is actual art, which is a rather odd position condering we're at an age where people have forgotten what art truly is, and have literally been accepting anything as art, even though there is nothing artistic about most modern creations, and it doesn't take any skill to glue a banana to the wall either, while using AI generation does take a lot of technical knowledge instead of motor skills, very similar to 3D modeling training.

Originally posted by Morkonan:

download IvokeAI or Automatic1111

Cool. Got any recommends for offline tools? My gaming/PC is still from the Stone Age and air-gapped atm, on purpose. (Old OS and It's got melted bits..., so I Frankenstein it just to get game patch updates. :) I've looked into a couple to play with, but haven't tested any yet. Will check your recommends after this post.)

Those are both offline and local, but yes, they are very heavy programs, and specially require a ton of vRAM to run, smaller pics can be generated but the more modern nvidia cards make the experience much better, and much faster.

Honestly, invokeAI is much easier to use, but it's rather limited, so you'll sort of end up at the mercy of the AI's references, you can use several functions, like drawing a stickman and using it to set up the exact position of your characters, or a rough sketch, and I'm not sure if it can be used to train your own patterns to teach it how to use a face/your face, or your own characters with it, but if you're not willing to be super hardcore it's a great program, once it evolves and can incorporate some of the features from automatic1111 then it will be much better. There are some videos showing how to quickly install and set it up but you can simply download it through the ItchIO platform too.

The other one is... A pain in the ass to install, I don't quite understand every step in the process, so I'll just leave it here and hope it works for you as well: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3cvP7yJotUM

I Think Automatic1111 is also a bit heavier on the requirements, but I'm not sure, in any case look through the Checkpoints in Civitai to select a style you'd want to use, the base SD1.5 seems more focused on photorealistic images, which isn't very helpful if you want to do D&D style aventurers, or 3D fantasy, or anime, etc... Just keep in mind InvokeAI can't use most files you'll find there other than Checkpoints and text inversions, at least, since I last checked.

Edit: Note that, while it is possible to download someone else's checkpoints to create a certain style, it is also possible to generate your own based off your own style if you want to, along with teach it your own characters, so you can design certain characters, enviroments, etc... Let the AI learn how you do things, and then generate a ton of new stuff exactly on your style, without any references from other people, it's quite crazy.

[This user has no known aliases]

Originally posted by Nyx (She/Her):

AI "art" is a tool of art theft and cannot generate anything New

You would be amazed about how art truly is generated by people. There is much more to it than having an idea and being nothing but an imbecile who scratches paint onto a canvas because they deem themselves something special, at all.

There is no originality to begin with if you set such high bars for art to overcome for it to be considered original. If there is any originality, then AI art is original, too. There is a reason why intertextuality and -mediality are respected theories.

Originally posted by Morkonan:

A.I. Generated "art" is not "Art."

Art is an expressive work intentionally and purposefully created by a human to communicate something to other human beings that is greater than the sum of its components. (brief definition...)

This applies to AI art as well. It is expressive, otherwise you would not see the pixels the way they are composed. Every neuron and weight is expressed by something different in the picture or the output in general.

Intentional, because the neurons and weights dictate the manner of composition, prompted and

purposefully, since the purpose is the script that is determined to make a so-called prediction, which is the picture.

It is not by a human, so with regards to the law, they most likely are without any copyright. Now, if you don't care about the law, then in my opinion, I do not care for now if it is made by a human or not. You could say the very same thing about photography.

It is communication (and that is my expertise) by nature.

It is, as far as one could tell, addressed to human beings.

"Greater than the sum of its components" is exactly what you, as a recipient, can do with your interpretation. You have no clue about an artist's intentions, either. They could make stuff up on the spot if you ask them.

We know that the AI does not make stuff up, and we know that there is no greater intentions from the AI's "vita". But AI shows patterns that require deduction, creating subliminal messaging through symbolism. That, by definition, is bigger than the sum of its parts, since this requires an interpreter to interpret.

And even the AI's vita could play a part if you consider training a vita. If you communicate with a language model or (more specific) an instance (/session) of it, you are training it as well and influence its output. There is no difference there, either, aside from time and origin.

If you had a human being to influence, who hangs onto your lips, then it would be quite similar.

Originally posted by Morkonan:

What counts as "art" in the case of A.I. Generated art is possibly the prompt, itself, combined with the output the artist has accepted best expresses an intended message... (Some leeway may be possible for "intent" here. The combination itself could yield a new expression that was originally unintended.)

This only applies if you deem the human element as absolutely necessary. You could do that, but aside from law, that is very subjective. Art is *not* purely subjective. Refer to the previous reply to you above.