No artist gets paid to create placeholder art during development. They get paid for the final art pieces that are used in the game itself. No actual AI art was used in the final game except for a few accidentally included bits that were not correctly replaced with the final art and that issue was corrected. No artists were harmed in the making of this game.
Comment on After GOTY pull, Clair Obscur devs draw line in sand: 'Everything will be made by humans by us'
Rekorse@sh.itjust.works 5 days agoThose poor artists, its actually a good thing they have AI now, isn’t it?
PaintedSnail@lemmy.world 4 days ago
Rekorse@sh.itjust.works 4 days ago
I guess I’ll just take your word for it then.
MrFinnbean@lemmy.world 4 days ago
Any projects i have been on, if i need quick placeholder i take it from some existing library that is filled with free to use textures or i create some bullshit texture name temp.png or removethis_brown.jpg and some real artist comes and makes the final one somewhere down the line, 10-1000 hours later.
I have hard time understanding how creating the temporary texture that is never meant to be seen by end user is different when using generative tool versus paint. Especially when no artist looses their pay check or their spot in the credits.
However I do take offence if somebody uses ai to replace writer, designer, voice actor, or artist of any kind in the final product.
Rekorse@sh.itjust.works 4 days ago
If it doesnt matter then dont use AI for placeholders. What’s the argument here for them?
yggstyle@lemmy.world 5 days ago
AI as a monolithic “thing” is bullshit. Fugazi. We relabled a ton of tools like OCR and other pattern recognition engines: “AI” to capitalize on the sheer stupidity of the average investor. Artificial intelligence indeed.
I digress. Tools save time and energy. If a team can prototype a space and become more immersed in their project faster and with less effort - so much the better.
I’m for tools as effort multipliers. My initial statement implied as much. I don’t see us running back to rooms full of women doing math at NASA and discarding the digital equivalent.
Look - everyone is absolutely sick of “AI” being jammed into everything. I get the raw response to it… But the concern isn’t about renamed tools; it’s not about a glorified chatbot being an “ok” facsimile. No company would spend billions on that. No - they are spending billions on a product that they could care less if it could reason. If by some chance they could make an automiton that was good enough… That could work without stopping, with no rights, for free: Its slavery. Literally they are gambling everything on a shot at replacing every single worker they currently employ. That is short sighted, ignorant, bullshit… which deserves all the hate it gets and more. But that - ain’t this.
Rekorse@sh.itjust.works 5 days ago
What does NASA have to do with the creation of art? Art and science are not the same thing. What might be good for progress technologically, like flying to the moon, might not be good for a different field.
Art is all about the time and energy spent. If Clair Obscure came out of an AI machine that took 3 minutes to create it, most people wouldn’t play it and it wouldn’t have won any awards.
Cutting corners or “saving time and energy” is the opposite of exploring creatively, and these tools are not capable of unique thought or inspiration.
yggstyle@lemmy.world 4 days ago
Reread the comment instead of irrationally reacting before you understand the context. Calculators used to be people. Literally. It was a job. I brought up NASA as an example because, very famously, their “calculators” were part of history… So it should have been well known enough for people to see the parallel. But then I guess ever since moving to digital boards for math we can just downplay all subsequent achievments because the scientists didnt work hard enough.
If I’m not mistaken those artists’ art was well recieved. I find it interesting that so many people seem intent on defining a world they aren’t part of. Wacom tablets are tools, are digital artists not real artists because they don’t use paper?
Know any artists? I know quite a few. I wouldn’t dare inject my preconceptions on their process. Who the fuck am I to tell somone what is or isn’t part of their process. Traditional media, music, …even architects use tools to help iterate on their ideas - and their lives are easier for it.
But please, explain to the class why your ideals supercede their own.
Speaking for everyone? That’s bold. Is that your process or are you just a bobblehead parroting what someone else told you to say?
Rekorse@sh.itjust.works 4 days ago
Oh cool, now I’m an irrational person who reacts quickly. Thats a good start.
Do you even know the point you are trying to make? You make a bunch of preconceptions and then claim you won’t do that, so thats fun too.
You can keep writing nonsense arguments all you want, you aren’t an artist and should probably do what you said and shutup instead of making a bunch of assumptions.