discussion Why do you dislike AI art in games?

[Antoni103]

It's more the fact that people don't know how to use them and end up doing the same thing over and over again.

 

[tritus]

AI in games is done poorly and the game usually looks terrible and the dialogue is unnatural. Maybe in a few years we'll see decent games made with AI but as of today human-made games are still winning

 

[abarosant]

Consistency, mainly

 

[ツSisterSexualシ]

AI is week and extremely restricted nowadays, I hope they will be more tolerant toward it, for now it's a piece of crap ngl
p.s. i haven't seen a single game with good AI images

 

[jennos]

I think it is fine to use AI for some background images to save time for developers. But all the AI characters I see in games all look the same. Its always a porcelain looking anime girl with a weird baby-doll face.
But I do believe that we will see better art in the future.

 

[ICEMAN]

I don’t dislike AI art itself, but it can feel soulless if it replaces creativity instead of enhancing it. It works best as a tool, not a shortcut.

 

[kemad]

1. inconsistent character designs. details are often lost to ai-gen images or change between scenes
2. the physical resources required to produce so much ai-gen are environmentally catastrophic and the guilt gets to me
3. it usually just feels utterly soulless. even the worst drawings by real people at least carry an "oh, someone took the time to draw this and i respect that and what they were going for" whereas ai is just "gimme this thing, now!" while hoping to get something that kinda maybe sorta suits what the prompt writer had intended

 

[AbbaDoo]

Most AI art is still in the uncanny valley. It is getting better every year, though, and eventually I think most games will start utilizing AI for image generation.

 

[JakeTapper]

As someone who has spent a considerable amount of time generating AI art locally with an RTX4090 and some of the newest models I can say for sure that it's definitely able to get past the uncanny valley if you know what you're doing. The problem is, most people using AI art for games really don't know what they're doing with AI or game dev in general and it ends up being an image gallery of sub-par AI renders.

If used correctly, a developer will produce high quality outputs and then chop up the characters to create proper live2d animations etc. At that point I really see no difference and the only people complaining are artists being bypassed and a handful of whiteknights who don't even understand how AI works and end up on ridiculous uninformed moralfag rants.

 

[anixx]

IDK, AI art look quote weird to me. They try to make the image very realistic and that become unrealistic.

 

[Suntec]

As someone who has spent a considerable amount of time generating AI art locally with an RTX4090 and some of the newest models I can say for sure that it's definitely able to get past the uncanny valley if you know what you're doing. The problem is, most people using AI art for games really don't know what they're doing with AI or game dev in general and it ends up being an image gallery of sub-par AI renders.

If used correctly, a developer will produce high quality outputs and then chop up the characters to create proper live2d animations etc. At that point I really see no difference and the only people complaining are artists being bypassed and a handful of whiteknights who don't even understand how AI works and end up on ridiculous uninformed moralfag rants.

That pretty much sums it up. Most AI games are just slop slide shows.
"Developers" that know nothing about game development nor storytelling nor AI just churn out souless crap in hopes of getting a bit of that sweet sweet subscribestar allowence.

 

[Arqoi]

It takes real effort to have both consistency and diversity (you don't want everyone looking the same but with different colors) with AI art. At that point you can probably just hire an artist?

It will probably change in the future.

 

[User_111574]

My answer to your questions is that I don't care.

Sometimes there's terrible hand-drawn artwork and ugly DAZ models. I don't care about the lack or presence of animations, because for me the plot of the game or VN comes first.

AI is a normal working tool, it's better than using “real porn” anyway. Yeah, with AI I haven't met any successful projects yet (at least those that were completed). We'll see what happens next, in the next couple or three years.

 

[forgetmaster]

Well cause it's new, so most devs dont really know how to perfect it, and people find it inconsistent and lazy, and people appreciate the efforts devs put in their games

 

[Chrissy]

If the AI art is well done I have no problem with it. If the art is bad, I don't care if an AI or a human artist messed it up.
All I want is good art, I don't really care how it's created.

 

[katmoxxi]

I appreciate the hard work that goes into making games. Ai art is still fairly a new tool but overtime hopefully it can be used properly.

 

[Deleted member 123057]

AI is one of those issues that one way or another i doubt will ever be truly solved. the ethical issues alone are debated heavily never mind anything else

 

[SecretSauce]

"Ai art is trained on other art so it's essentially stealing it."

This is really no different than when people create art. Nothing comes out of a vacuum. You either copy directly or you draw inspiration from other peoples work and make it your own. make it something new or better.

When your view of how a human makes art is so watered down, I can see how you'd think that, but as an artist, I can tell you that's an incredible oversimplification.

Humans aren't just looking at a bunch of art and then suddenly able to make similar art. We learn how to use actual drawing utensils, we learn to understand the world at a conceptual level, and through this understanding are able to come up with entirely new ideas from concept evolution alone, not from derivation of existing work. A human can continue to get better at art simply by practicing, without having to keep looking at other people's art. It doesn't matter how much art you look at, you won't become better at it, unlike with AI where that's all it does since it's just learning general patterns about how existing images are constructed visually so it can blend pattern info, it's not learning the processes involved in actually creating those works in the first place.

Humans live lives, our journey through life, our experiences and the path we take to refine our artistic skill results in works ultimately unique to each person, unlike with AI which is purely an amalgamation of all those artist's unique outputs.

An "artist" straight copying other artists is also looked down on the same as AI is. So that point is moot.

"why should I be bothered to read something you couldn't be bothered to write?"

Not everyone can do everything. I might have a great idea for a game and i used hundreds of hours learning coding in my spare time so i could finally create my dream game - i learned to use renpy myself - but i dont have the money to hire an artist to create thousands of drawings - but here is a AI tool that can help me with that - is it really as simple to say that im just lazy? i dont know.

Part of the reason we ever appreciated content in the first place is our recognition of that skill and time it took to make it. If everyone can just type a prompt and have an AI do most of the work, what value is there in that content anymore? Why would I care about it? Why would I bother with yours when I could just type up a prompt for whatever I want too? We end up with an increasing flood of "content" at a much greater pace than population increase, cheapening the perception of the medium as a whole, like an AD you see play over and over.

I don't have the money for a Lamborghini, does that mean I deserve to have it for free? You're basically saying, well sorry artists of the world, I want unlimited artwork and not to pay you, so I'm going to feed all your existing works into an AI to create derivatives of, thanks!!!
You're supporting a tool that takes from artists around the world to then compete with them on a scale that's impossible for a human to compete with, it's frankly disgusting when you truly, empathetically think about it outside of the selfish "I want this" box.

How about instead of using AI for art, you find someone to collaborate with? There's plenty of artists developing their skills, looking to collaborate on things. Do you not think that's ultimately better for society for us to be connecting and working on things together, instead of supporting software with which its increased reliance on pushes us towards isolation and simply existing to be fed dopamine hits from an AI?

When you don't have the resources to make something yet, your response should be "okay, I need to reduce the scope here and make something within my budget/time, earn some funds from that and make something bigger the next time.", not "well then I'll just take what I want instead".
Stop with the obsession of reaching the end result of things instantly, as seems to be a major component of people wanting to use AI instead of learning to draw, putting so much importance on the end result instead of the journey.

Also where do we draw the line? We gotten so used to using tools that cuts out a huge portion of the work prior generations had to do, that we dont even think about it. At some point AI art and text is gonna be miles ahead of humans and no one is gonna care as long as the product is great. Just like u dont care if i got help coding my game by using software or i used photoshop instead of drawing by hand.

This is not a proper comparison at all. The line is pretty crystal clear if you take the time to actually think about it. Existing tools simply worked to streamline the act of drawing, reducing the pain-points that don't add anything, like being able to undo, or to erase without leaving smudges or destroying the surface, it allowed the artist to fully focus on the act of painting/drawing and fleshing their idea out and into detailing it. AI does something completely different, it replaces the actual act of drawing and truly producing something by your own hands from your own lived experiences, you're not the one creating anymore, you're asking a tool to do it for you like you'd ask an artist to make some idea for you, relying on the works of artists around the world to even function, unlike typical art tools.

"no one is gonna care as long as the product is great"
Saying that shows your lack of connection to artistic expression. You're so focused on end-results. It's not about the works being good enough or not, it's about the use of it at a fundamental level, the ethics and the societal impacts it has.

We value art and content not just by the end result, but by the fact there's a human connection there since we could know it comes from the lived experiences of the people who made it; we understand that time, effort and passion they put into each aspect, crafting the details to make an experience unique to them as people, which these AI will never have unless we're getting into a discussion about actual autonomous AI systems that go about growing and living lives of their own, which is a whole other discussion with many more issues to cover outside of just art.


Art is such an important part of the human experience and self expression, and supporting the use of these tools instead of stigmatizing it contributes to a degradation of that relationship and how we people are able to connect with and appreciate it.

 

[Seo In-guk]

Nah AI
I don't find meaning and realism in it. It's just a generated image: v

 

[entry1]

AI art kinda all look the same and has an uncanny feeling