The debate over generative AI in games continues.

Clair Obscur won multiple awards but used generative AI art as placeholders during production.

The Indie Game Awards revoked Clair Obscur’s Debut and Game of the Year after the AI disclosure.

IGAs reassigned the awards (Blue Prince, Sorry We’re Closed) and reignited debate on gen-AI use.

    • zbyte64@awful.systemsEnglish
      11·
      17 days ago

      Like I said, when talking about morality you’re talking about a subjective perception of value. All the other issues I mentioned, like them not following the rules, have objective criteria to say “yes they broke the rules”. If your perception of authenticity includes gathering inspiration not from the originator but from a tool that samples art for you, then you would obviously conclude the end result is authentic. If however you define authenticity as something uniquely in the domain of the living, then they would not agree with you.

        • zbyte64@awful.systemsEnglish
          1·
          17 days ago

          The rules being “idiotic” is a different issue from whether using pre-existing assets as placeholders is okay. For instance, one could argue that genAI, even during the concept phase, is an unfair advantage like taking steroids for a sports competition. For the purpose of fairness they have a blanket ban on genAI, not simply because “AI bad”.

            • zbyte64@awful.systemsEnglish
              1·
              16 days ago

              So you would say a godot competition is silly because it restricts developers from using other game engines? Now you’re just being silly.

                • zbyte64@awful.systemsEnglish
                  11·
                  16 days ago

                  If you don’t like the competition then don’t participate in said competition. Other people don’t agree with you that it is an arbitrary rule and that’s okay.