• Hey everyone, staff have documented a list of banned content and subject matter that we feel are not consistent with site values, and don't make sense to host discussion of on Famiboards. This list (and the relevant reasoning per item) is viewable here.

Discussion Developer Rayark (Deemo, Cytus, Voez fame) lays off all of it's game artists and replaces'em with AI art

I can only hope this completely blows up in their faces. Rayark games will be an easy skip in the future.
 
Yaeh this is only the beginning. And it really really sucks


Deemo was really nice and well supported, hate to see them do this.
 
Dcubed said:
If there’s no human artistry involved then you haven’t made a game, you’ve just made a piece of software.
Click to expand...
Furthermore, since AI Art can't be copyright protected you can use their assets without attribution. Unless they hire artists that build on top of the generated pieces... But since they fired every artist...
 
here's the gist of what the TECHNICAL LEAD at rayark said about using A/I:
[...] better games
Click to expand...
....what.

AI art just makes games feel cheap to me. Like the developer doesn't care. Real talk I would take "bad" art made with love and care over the sleekest AI art any day. Not hating on AI as a concept or being reactionary, that is just how I really feel.
 
Jesus... All of them? Was the company going bankrupt?
 
0
First thing it says in big letters at the top of their list of games on their website: "Games are Works of Art"

🤮

(Link)
 
Very fucked up situation.

Wasn't it ruled AI art can't be copyrighted, quite recently? Do these people know once they release any game using AI art, people can appropiate that art freely and legally? Because they sort of deserve that to happen, tbh.
 
Now I do like what generative AI is bringing in some respects - I use it in Notion to help tidy up my writing, maybe suggest ways of re-writing something that I've written, or sometimes to give me a bit of a brainstorm to build my own piece on. Key point there: me, the human and expert in the particular field, is the centre of everything and AI is the assistant.

What I've seen in increasing amounts are tech people, tech influencers making hyperbolic posts about how LOOK AT HOW AI HAS ENDED LOGO CREATION, posting something that they - someone who is not an expert or knowledgeable - thinks is incredible. Usually, an actual designer comes in and points out precisely where putting AI in sole control has pretty much left something sloppy as an end result.

Looks like this lot have bought into the hype. Non-experts not seeing the value that a human brings. It is always the people who actually know the field that can see the errors that AI in charge brings. Hell, I even asked GPT to give a breakdown on how to defeat Ruby Weapon in FF7 and it got a bunch of mixed up nonsense in there. Someone who doesn't know the game will read it as true, I immediately saw it as nonsense.
 
fourfourfun said:
Now I do like what generative AI is bringing in some respects - I use it in Notion to help tidy up my writing, maybe suggest ways of re-writing something that I've written, or sometimes to give me a bit of a brainstorm to build my own piece on. Key point there: me, the human and expert in the particular field, is the centre of everything and AI is the assistant.

What I've seen in increasing amounts are tech people, tech influencers making hyperbolic posts about how LOOK AT HOW AI HAS ENDED LOGO CREATION, posting something that they - someone who is not an expert or knowledgeable - thinks is incredible. Usually, an actual designer comes in and points out precisely where putting AI in sole control has pretty much left something sloppy as an end result.

Looks like this lot have bought into the hype. Non-experts not seeing the value that a human brings. It is always the people who actually know the field that can see the errors that AI in charge brings. Hell, I even asked GPT to give a breakdown on how to defeat Ruby Weapon in FF7 and it got a bunch of mixed up nonsense in there. Someone who doesn't know the game will read it as true, I immediately saw it as nonsense.
Click to expand...

I actually really like generative AI used for fun, and have been enjoying all the developments in open source LLMs and image generators. It's still useful tech for a bunch of things, or just for entertainment.

Key word "open source" there. Most data sets used to train generative AI come from publically available information people have contributed to the internet, be it images of text. Morally and practically, this should mean the software, models, and produced results should by definition be public domain in nature.

And keyword "for entertainment". I have used generative AI to quickly spin off characters for roleplays, for example, generating both images and short lore bits, and that's more than fine. It's also something I've done running the software on my own computer, for free.

My main concern with the tech as it is now is basically stuff like this, where businesses that should know better and have the resources to hire humans, decide that actually no, this is fine for a commercial product, when not only the actual quality of the result isn't at a professional level, but also is morally wrong at several levels.
 
Tangerine_Cookie said:
I actually really like generative AI used for fun, and have been enjoying all the developments in open source LLMs and image generators. It's still useful tech for a bunch of things, or just for entertainment.

Key word "open source" there. Most data sets used to train generative AI come from publically available information people have contributed to the internet, be it images of text. Morally and practically, this should mean the software, models, and produced results should by definition be public domain in nature.

And keyword "for entertainment". I have used generative AI to quickly spin off characters for roleplays, for example, generating both images and short lore bits, and that's more than fine. It's also something I've done running the software on my own computer, for free.

My main concern with the tech as it is now is basically stuff like this, where businesses that should know better and have the resources to hire humans, decide that actually no, this is fine for a commercial product, when not only the actual quality of the result isn't at a professional level, but also is morally wrong at several levels.
Click to expand...

This, so much. Its astounding models build with data weve all provided are going to be used to kick people to the curb. Its high time there was some legislation on this.
 
Tangerine_Cookie said:
Very fucked up situation.

Wasn't it ruled AI art can't be copyrighted, quite recently? Do these people know once they release any game using AI art, people can appropiate that art freely and legally? Because they sort of deserve that to happen, tbh.
Click to expand...

I mean, I don't know why you'd think they'd have a problem with this, they think art is worthless. Why would they care that someone else can use it again for something else, it took them a couple of work hours at maximum making prompts to generate

They'd still have the copyright over their games at large because there's a lot that goes in to a game Dev beyond the images that is still copyrightable.
 
0
Rayark has responded saying that it hasn't fired its artists or started using AI yet, although it is hiring AI experts.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.


Back
Top Bottom