Art is the medium through which we process and communicate our most complicated emotions.
Listen, I’m not saying we don’t need the odd new DeltaRune or Blue Prince. But the sheer volume of new mass market games seems to have eclipsed the real overall demand some time ago.
If you’re constantly obsessed with the New Title, you lose sight of the vintage classics. You never have a chance to pick up an old Atari game from the 70s or try some SNES banger from the 90s or even a PS3 classic from the 10s if you’ve glued yourself to the New Releases queue.
Maybe people have emotions worth communing with that are more than a year old.
I mean, it’s another FtP PvP base defense shooter. Like we were running short of Team Fortress clones any time in the last ten years.
I do sometimes get the sense that when a marketing team can’t gin up artificial enthusiasm, they settle on “controversy” as an attention grabbing strategy. Getting legions of digital skanks to declare a mid-game The Worst Thing Ever at least keeps the title on the radar, rather than falling into obscurity.
Honestly, I’m not even clear how you can spend nine figures on a game when its a copy of a copy of a copy. “We reskinned Tribes again, then dropped a full scale motion picture’s budget on the fucking trailer” seems to be how AAA titles get sold these days. No wonder everyone in the industry is so excited about AI.
It’s a very mixed bag. You can (technically) do a Pacifist Run in BG3 that leans on conversation to keep earning XP in a game that heavily favors combat rewards.
But without prior experience in the story paths, it can be hard to know who can actually be cajoled and who is innately unreconcileable. Lots of NPCs lie or bluff or just bait you into giving up initiative.
You do get more story in dialogue. So if you don’t mind the odd ambush or icy rebuff, I’d say there’s more to diplomacy than just pain.
I’m hard pressed to name a nominee that wasn’t made with love. And it seems weird to insist a game as lauded as E33 needs another awards show genuflection to reaffirm it’s status.
It’s stupid because the game has already received a stack of awards a mile high. Nobody seriously cares about this. Nobody’s sales will be hurt in any meaningful capacity. It’s a dumb awards show, not the FCC.
People are going to use the tools available if it leads to quicker development cycles to get a product out.
I think this “placeholder art” is a silly line to draw. But the high profile of the game makes it a ripe target to make a statement.
If you really don’t want to reward people for “quicker development” over the human touch, might as well pick a game everyone already bought and highlight folks who did their dev work organically
This is just the whole robot sandwich thing to me.
If home kitchens were being replaced by pre-filled Automats, I’d be equally repulsed.
A tool is a tool. Fools may not use them well, but someone who understands how to properly use a tool can get great things out of it.
The most expert craftsman won’t get a round peg to fit into a square hole without doing some damage. At some point, you need to understand what the tool is useful for. And the danger of LLMs boils down to the seeming industrial scale willingness to sacrifice quality for expediency and defend the choice in the name of business profit.
Doesn’t anybody remember how internet search was in the early days? How you had to craft very specific searches to get something you actually wanted?
Internet search was as much constrained by what was online as what you entered in the prompt. You might ask for a horse and get a hundred different Palominos when you wanted a Clydesdale, not realizing the need to be specific. But you’re never going to find a picture of a Vermont Morgan horse if nobody bothered to snap a photo and host it where a crawler could find it.
Taken to the next level with LLMs, you’re never going to infer a Vermont Morgan if it isn’t in the training data. You’re never going to even think to look for one, if the LLM hasn’t bothered to index it properly. And because these AI engines are constantly eating their own tails, what you get is a basket of horses that are inferred between a Palomino and a Clydesdale, sucked back into training data, and inferred in between a Palomino and a Palomino-Clydesdale, and sucked back into the training data, and, and, and…
I think artists could use gen AI to make more good art than ever
I don’t think using an increasingly elaborate and sophisticated crutch will teach you to sprint faster than Hussein Bolt. Removing steps in the artistic process and relying on glorified Clipart Catalogs will not improve your output. It will speed up your output and meet some minimum viable standard for release. But the goal of that process is to remove human involvement, not improve human involvement.
I will say, gen AI seems to be the only way to combat the insane BEC attacks we have today.
Which is great. Love to use algorithmic defenses to combat algorithmic attacks.
But that’s a completely different problem than using inference to generate art assets.
You know it doesn’t have to be all or nothing, right?
Part of the “magic” of AI is how much of the design process gets hijacked by inference. At some scale you simply don’t have control of your own product anymore. What is normally a process of building up an asset by layers becomes flattened blobs you need to meticulously deconstruct and reconstruct if you want them to not look like total shit.
That’s a big part of the reason why “AI slop” looks so bad. Inference is fundamentally not how people create complex and delicate art pieces. It’s like constructing a house by starting with the paint job and ending with the framing lumber, then asking an architect to fix where you fucked up.
If you don’t like them, you can just chuck them in the trash and you won’t have wasted the work of an artist
If you engineer your art department to start with verbal prompts rather than sketches and rough drawings, you’re handcuffing yourself to the heuristics of your AI dataset. It doesn’t matter that you can throw away what you don’t like. It matters that you’re preemptively limiting yourself to what you’ll eventually approve.