AI content for games, Opinions,

[SK]

What do you guys think about this,

Someone used AI to generate a song, then paid a real artist to re-create it cleaner and or better

do you guys think this would still need an AI disclosure?

In my opinion i don't think so because anyone can look at ai art references and draw art based on that,

edit: apparently some people don't understand what a DISCUSSION is while on Steam DISCUSSIONS...

A discussion is talking about something in order to reach a decision or to exchange ideas.

With this post i am mainly looking to exchange ideas,

Posting the rules on ai content is not an opinion nor idea, it is the topic of discussion,

[SK]

引用自 Crazy Tiger：

引用自 Soldat John：

but its not a discussion, its not exchanging ideas or adding anything to this,

again, we are discussing the rules and opinions based on logic,

Yes, like I said: "A discussion isn't "we talk the way I want to"."

It's perfectly fine if someone has the opinion that things don't need to change. That's one stance to take in the discussion.

I think that most people will take the stance "don't care one bit". There won't be much "discussion" coming from there as well.

Then again, if I look at the responses you've given, I do question whether you really want a "discussion" and not just an echo chamber where you'll simply dismiss everything that doesn't jump your angle.

we aren't ''talking the way i want to'' i am stating facts here,

he basically said ''my opinions on donuts is that theyre donuts, and because i said so''

there was absolutely no argument or discussion anywhere, just posting the rules, which isnt a discussion as thats what the post is about,

tldr:
his '''''discussion''''' is = why? because.

[SK]

there are a few here disagreeing where i replied with a counter argument, this is a discussion,

whatever he said is just circular reasoning

nobody here has agreed on anything yet, i am waiting for their response, there is no echo chamber,

think my arguments on ai against those who made an actual argument are wrong?

then tell me about it!

This is called a discussion!

[Crystal Sharrd]

AI shouldn't be used at all until they stop infringing copyright with it.

[SK]

引用自 Crystal Sharrd：

AI shouldn't be used at all until they stop infringing copyright with it.

Not all ai infringes on copyright, but most do,

Human artist use references to create original art,

if ai generates an image, and a human artist uses it as reference,

would you still consider it ai?

[Zarineth]

引用自 Soldat John：

引用自 Zarineth：

To be honest, I think it still should have the disclosure. It is still created by AI. Adding some author later on, seems to me like an attempt to sell game with AI generated assets to people, who wouldn't buy it otherwise (for whatever reason).
At the end, what stops you from finding someone, who will just make minor changes and call it "non-AI generated"?

I think if you want to involve an artist in your project, you should just do that and skip the whole AI part.

But skipping the ai is more expensive,

giving ai sample to artist = maybe less than 1 revision for final product
simply asking for an idea = 10 to 50 revisions at worst

while with ai you can get a preview of what exactly you might want

I know, that AI is cheaper. And artists would probably want more money the longer they work. But as I said making AI music and then sending it to someone with "make it not sound like/be AI" looks like an attempt to game a system (in my opinion).

Some people might not want to buy games with AI generated content. I imagine they might be annoyed when they learn artist listed as creator didn't actually created that music, instead making a remix of AI generated one.

I am mostly alright with AI content. But if I am gonna praise the music and author, I would like to know they made it themselves, and not just remixed something they got for cheap.

[Tolkien Book Fan]

Everyone talks about 'stealing art'. Here in Australia Google got into trouble when they were found to be scraping Facebook pages and similar sources for images of parents and children, without the knowledge or consent of the photo owners or the people in them. So, when you look at an 'AI generated child', you might be looking at a barely changed picture of an actual Australian kid. That's a very dark grey area that I don't think people have even begun to try and deal with.

[Crystal Sharrd]

引用自 Tolkien Book Fan：

Everyone talks about 'stealing art'. Here in Australia Google got into trouble when they were found to be scraping Facebook pages and similar sources for images of parents and children, without the knowledge or consent of the photo owners or the people in them. So, when you look at an 'AI generated child', you might be looking at a barely changed picture of an actual Australian kid. That's a very dark grey area that I don't think people have even begun to try and deal with.

Well, that also would fall under copyright too (in addition to being creepy and invasive), since a photo's copyright belongs to the photographer.

[BJWyler]

引用自 Soldat John：

引用自 BJWyler：

Yes, it would need AI disclosure because the AI is the originator of the song, not the artist that tweeks and sings it. The song is still not am original human composition.

So if you took inspiration from someone elses song, does that mean you need to credit the inspiration source? i don't think so...

Actually you do depending on the situation.

[Doctor Zalgo]

引用自 Tolkien Book Fan：

. So, when you look at an 'AI generated child', you might be looking at a barely changed picture of an actual Australian kid.

That's not how the technology actually works. The ABC has a lot to answer for, with respect to spreading misinformation about AI.

[SK]

引用自 BJWyler：

引用自 Soldat John：

So if you took inspiration from someone elses song, does that mean you need to credit the inspiration source? i don't think so...

Actually you do depending on the situation.

Like with art, you mostly don't, you take inspiration from multiple pictures and make something,

[SK]

引用自 Zarineth：

引用自 Soldat John：

But skipping the ai is more expensive,

giving ai sample to artist = maybe less than 1 revision for final product
simply asking for an idea = 10 to 50 revisions at worst

while with ai you can get a preview of what exactly you might want

I know, that AI is cheaper. And artists would probably want more money the longer they work. But as I said making AI music and then sending it to someone with "make it not sound like/be AI" looks like an attempt to game a system (in my opinion).

Some people might not want to buy games with AI generated content. I imagine they might be annoyed when they learn artist listed as creator didn't actually created that music, instead making a remix of AI generated one.

I am mostly alright with AI content. But if I am gonna praise the music and author, I would like to know they made it themselves, and not just remixed something they got for cheap.

it wouldnt even have to be remixed, finding the right music type is hard, you could generate multiple pieces and take inspiration of that,

Its like finding multiple songs for inspiration, except its way easier, and doesnt waste your time with ''top songs this week'' even if youre specifically trying to ignore them

while messing around ive used ai art before to help me with my art, i didnt at all trace, i just draw what i saw, with my own spin to it, which i think is no different from getting inspiration from real art... because you never personally interact with the inspiration,

If i draw a building outside or an ai generated one,
if i am inspired by music or ai generated music,
There is no personal interaction there, there almost never is, human or ai

[SK]

The musician ''C418'' took inspiration from the spore sound track, you can hear one of the minecraft ambient soundtrack has almost the exact same notes as a spore sound track for a few seconds, just a fun fact that like nobody knows

[cSg|mc-Hotsauce]

引用自 Soldat John：

The musician ''C418'' took inspiration from the spore sound track, you can hear one of the minecraft ambient soundtrack has almost the exact same notes as a spore sound track for a few seconds, just a fun fact that like nobody knows

Someone's never heard of the 4 chords of music.

[BJWyler]

引用自 Soldat John：

引用自 BJWyler：

Actually you do depending on the situation.

Like with art, you mostly don't, you take inspiration from multiple pictures and make something,

AI cannot be inspired, it can only copy.

引用自 Soldat John：

If i draw a building outside or an ai generated one,
if i am inspired by music or ai generated music,
There is no personal interaction there, there almost never is, human or ai

And that's where the problem lies. Actual, true creative inspiration is nothing but a pure personal experience.

[Dura_Ace]

引用自 Soldat John：

What do you guys think about this,

Someone used AI to generate a song, then paid a real artist to re-create it cleaner and or better

do you guys think this would still need an AI disclosure?

In my opinion i don't think so because anyone can look at ai art references and draw art based on that,

edit: apparently some people don't understand what a DISCUSSION is while on Steam DISCUSSIONS...

A discussion is talking about something in order to reach a decision or to exchange ideas.

With this post i am mainly looking to exchange ideas,

Posting the rules on ai content is not an opinion nor idea, it is the topic of discussion,

I am a musician. I support full disclosure. If the song is good, it is not an issue to me if i like it. But there needs to be an honest disclosure.

Music is music, to me. Even if a machine did it. As a drummer i am used to being replaced by a machine and for the longest time we were not even in demand. The 80's was bad. New wave and the end of punk put and end to us.

Even some of the most iconic sounds of the 80's were altered and gated. In the Air Tonight by Phil Collins was his drums but gated and that is what made that sound.

I am not afraid of AI as long as it is disclosed. But i also know that some will not disclose this and claim the work as their own. Scummy.