- Thread starter FallenPie
- Start date
- Mar 3, 2019
- 223
- 725
Your point is entirely made moot by what seems to be a clear ignorance of how image generation works. Try to get any AI image generation tool and make three images showing two different characters having a conversation in the same place, wearing the same clothes, and with both being more than "Mr. and Mrs. Generic", and then tell me again how AI tools "remove humans from the equation". You wildly underestimate the very human effort required to make anything more than "generic pretty images" with AI.
As you said it yourself: AI is a tool, and that's all it is, just like any tool it doesn't do anything without a person handling it, and the quality of the work created is directly proportional to the skill of its user.
I assume, some just like to make the demos and sell the story, plot character models, whatever. This might be the case. The art is insane. Her ass is to wide for my taste. I always say, girls ass or hips can't be wider then the mans. It ruins it for me as he is more ripped but looks like a child beside her.
I was very slim and no muscled and I always felt to me like being a little spoon in a relationship. Takes away all the ability to feel masculine and be able to protect your precious flower. It was cause of this I started to focus on gaining mass.
Shame, such a lovely girl. Am sure there will be lot of guys who will love it like that though.
- Jun 29, 2019
- 134
- 216
I hop on the debate train 
ClockworkGnome : You made some points sure but as all in life, there is always a darker side of things. And i do believe in the toolusing parabola of JackOh I don't trust human with some tools. When we will be paragon of virtue i'm pretty sure anything will be sure and ok in human evolution but when i was young i didn't know the human nature and believed in scientific evolution and "progress" with the age i fear it.
About AI art i despise the gallery type but i could appreciate something with a soul behind like a game, gonna try when i have the time.
ClockworkGnome : You made some points sure but as all in life, there is always a darker side of things. And i do believe in the toolusing parabola of JackOh I don't trust human with some tools. When we will be paragon of virtue i'm pretty sure anything will be sure and ok in human evolution but when i was young i didn't know the human nature and believed in scientific evolution and "progress" with the age i fear it.
About AI art i despise the gallery type but i could appreciate something with a soul behind like a game, gonna try when i have the time.
AI art - is the issue. Coz he's too lazy to make an effort to create Picture by your own, if even u use props already made. U put some time and effort, and u trying to finish. But if u can make with no effort. Why try hurd to finish? U can make again and again, new 1episod game.
You probably should have read the post in its entirety, instead of using that time to think up what you were going to say next, bruv. In your defense, perhaps my 'clear ignorance' made it harder to explain my position clearer. For that, I failed you, and I am sorry. Next time, I will use a hot dog, a donut and a tour guide from Malta to help you out.
One of my main points was that while generative AI makes art, it is drawing from copywritten or other, problematic sources. While an argument could be made that all art is derivative, it requires a human to recognize that, and consider the consequences for that. AI has no such compunction.
Some folk will want to see generative AI prohibited - especially Creatives of all kinds - because it encroaches on their patch, and that is a consideration. Others will want to see it allowed, as it 'removes' the barrier between the skilled and the dilettante.
The true issue is that generative AI should be seen as a way to ''augment human capabilities and empower communities, not replace or displace them''. Your argument seems to hinge upon folk learning how to use the tool that will replace them as artists. I wonder how that sentiment would play out if your employer asked you to 'train your replacement'.
- Mar 3, 2019
- 223
- 725
I'm sorry, I didn't want to mischaracterize your point, so just we're 100% clear then...You probably should have read the post in its entirety, instead of using that time to think up what you were going to say next, bruv. In your defense, perhaps my 'clear ignorance' made it harder to explain my position clearer. For that, I failed you, and I am sorry. Next time, I will use a hot dog, a donut and a tour guide from Malta to help you out.
One of my main points was that while generative AI makes art, it is drawing from copywritten or other, problematic sources. While an argument could be made that all art is derivative, it requires a human to recognize that, and consider the consequences for that. AI has no such compunction.
Some folk will want to see generative AI prohibited - especially Creatives of all kinds - because it encroaches on their patch, and that is a consideration. Others will want to see it allowed, as it 'removes' the barrier between the skilled and the dilettante.
The true issue is that generative AI should be seen as a way to ''augment human capabilities and empower communities, not replace or displace them''. Your argument seems to hinge upon folk learning how to use the tool that will replace them as artists. I wonder how that sentiment would play out if your employer asked you to 'train your replacement'.
Your argument then is that you don't like when people use things from legally or morally problematic sources... to create the games you download from this game piracy website? Games that are, even without considering AI art at all, almost universally created from illegally downloaded assets?
THAT... is your argument? Is THAT why you don't like AI art?
I would try to find a picture to help illustrate your argument, but I worry it would trigger people with trypophobia. You, as well as every single person here are swimming in copyright infringement up to your neck, but somehow training a machine to learn art without asking for permission is where you draw this very, very fuzzy and dirty line? If you want to have some moral high ground to complain about art being used without permission of artists, you might want to quit F95 first: that is THE WHOLE POINT of this place.
Yeah, like I said on my first comment on this thread: you guys have such arbitrary gripes, it's just ridiculous. Talk about pot calling the kettle black.
- Apr 11, 2018
- 57
- 89
It's already mostly solved, but not for lazy porn game devs who don't even try.
so clearly this "FallenPie" dude is going for quantity over quality. about a dozen games all released in the last month or so, all using AI CG art style, all titled "Dirty Fantasy: [insert title here]", and all stuck on "v0.1 Demo"
Well, far be it for me to confuse you with the truth, Kenneth. I mean, why would I argue your belief that my mere presence means I am an eye-patch-sporting pirate, here to steal the riches of hard-working Joes [and Janes] by downloading their games super-duper-illegally. Or that the people using these assets to make games are doing so illicitly. You question my very presence here to be a rebuttal of my post [which again, you seemed to fall asleep or something while trying - really trying] to read what it said. Er, does it take being slapped with a trout for you to realize that you're here too? Does that make you a pirate as well? Do you have a parrot on your shoulder? Is its name 'Polly'? Does Polly wanna cracker?
In your worldview, a shoplifter isn't allowed to express opinions on any morality subject [because, you know, shoplifter]. You might be surprised to know that a lot of devs voluntarily release their games, presumably to increase interest and subsciptions. I wish someone would put together a study to see if offering a free version after a time does increase subscriptions...hmm.
So, while I appreciate your opinion, you might want to ''come down off the cross and then use the wood to build a bridge to get over yourself''. [and yeah, that is a paraphrasing of someone else's comment from elsewhere]. Just because we are here in a pirate site doesn't diminish our right to express an opinion on the subject, or the opinion itself.
- Aug 11, 2018
- 128
- 281
It's a short text based demo with AI images, but it seems to have struck a nerve with the F95 commentariat. It reminds me very much of the angst over the replacement of hand drawn cell animation by CGI (and we all know how that turned out). We're only at the beginning of the AI revolution folks: in ten years I would happily bet that the vast majority of games will be based on AI generated images and animations. If you doubt this, just look at what proportion of this board is currently composed of Koikatsu image based games--not because of the image quality or realism, but because it allows less-skilled graphic artists to enter the field. We may have seven-fingered models now, but given the rapid evolution of the technology don't be surprised when we start to see AI animation and graphics that are of higher quality than the DAZ, HS, or Koikatsu products of today.
Would you be willing to play a game where you interact with models who deep fake Carrie Fisher's Princess Leia, Marilyn Monroe, and Jodie Foster including visual and voice assets? How about if the interaction was with actual different AI personalities rather than making choices off a menu? Just sign me up for $100 a month on Subscribe Star and give me my full haptic body suit and I'll be a happy camper. We're not there yet, but we will be soon and based on what happened with the internet, we can expect that porn will be on the cutting edge.
Would you be willing to play a game where you interact with models who deep fake Carrie Fisher's Princess Leia, Marilyn Monroe, and Jodie Foster including visual and voice assets? How about if the interaction was with actual different AI personalities rather than making choices off a menu? Just sign me up for $100 a month on Subscribe Star and give me my full haptic body suit and I'll be a happy camper. We're not there yet, but we will be soon and based on what happened with the internet, we can expect that porn will be on the cutting edge.
- Mar 3, 2019
- 223
- 725
Not at all, I'm fine with shoplifter expressing their opinions on morality subjects. Freedom of expression is paramount, after all. Just as I am free to express my opinion that a shoplifter accusing other shoplifters of shoplifting is... you know... slightly hypocritical.
I also point out that I didn't accuse YOU of piracy of any particular games, I accused you of being a member of a website dedicated to piracy, and on that point, a website that encourages piracy by being dedicated to a majority of games developed with piracy of their assets, a fact you seem to be perfectly fine with... unless such piracy is done in the process of training one tool used for it development. So direct piracy is fine for you, but second-hand piracy... oh, no that's completely immoral and bad, bad, bad, and anyone using that should be shamed, right? But wait, if you play a game that was made with piracy of 3D assets, doesn't that make you the second-hand pirate here?
Finally, I don't know why you keep saying I'm not reading your posts. I don't need to spend hours writing a point-by-point rebuttal of every single nonsense you wrote, when every single part revolves around the hypocrisy at its very core.
Sounds like you have a religious or pseudo-religious belief in the human soul or human exceptionalism. A lot of people nowadays are materialist/atheists and don't have that view.
Look, I'm not sure where your passive-aggressive tone is coming from, but I don't think it's having the effect you may had hoped. You aren't coming across as morally or intellectually superior (if indeed that was your aim). I've tried to give you some leeway here, but it's just growing tiresome.
I don't know where you get off accusing all of the devs here of stealing their models and game assets to make their games. Maybe it does happen with a fee of them, but when they start charging subscriptions, the clock begins ticking on when they're going to inevitably be discovered and financially beaten with a cricket bat. Most have skin in the game, and are terribly honest about it. Insult me all you want - though you've been doing a pretty lame job of it thus far. But insulting those devs who almost never break even because they pour moat of their profits back into paying for better assets, etc. It is a slap in the face to everyone who tries to make an honest buck (or whatever) by making a game. That shite is just uncool.
This conversation has gone beyond the discussion of AI as an ethical tool into some bs basket of insulting insinuations.
Go peddle that nonsense elsewhere.
I think we're done here.
- Mar 3, 2019
- 223
- 725
I haven't insulted you at all. I called you no bad names and said nothing about you that isn't directly from your own words. Pointing out facts and showing the hypocrisy in your arguments isn't an insult, it's just reality. But you are right, this has gone long enough. See ya.
If I do, I never saw it as such. I see humans as a species somewhat arrested in evolution because it makes tools that would otherwise require evolutionary adaptation [and adaptation can be fast or slow] of the wetware. A number of people in our grouping are materialists and/or atheists. I might be a Doubting Thomas [and yeah, the metaphoric contradiction isn't lost on me], but I think that expressing the view that people have the possibility to evolve and be better than their circumstances. All too philosophical, I know.
The meat and potatoes of my idea was that Generative AI robs all of us of the creative process. I can tell you that the first time I saw Vermeer's Girl with the Pearl Earring, or Renoir's
You must be registered to see the links
, I was pretty much transfixed by the beauty of the effort that clearly went into making them. I would argue that it was that effort that made them masterpieces - even more than each image itself.I am not against AI. If predictive AI can map out potential flooding, traffic and infrastructure usage patterns, I'm all for it. Because its not replacing people; its just assembling the efforts of people to predict where further human effort has to come into play.
Generative AI can be problematic. I am not talking about
You must be registered to see the links
here. And while its true that the science of AI is still in the crib, its evolving by leaps and bounds. At its current state, almost all the effort goes into just making the damn picture not look like
You must be registered to see the links
. I am talking about replacing the effort of actually making Art with a capital 'a'. By taking away the need to make any effort, you end with the chubby folk from Wall-E. And the flab is not just of the body.Creativity is hard. And it should be hard. This is not an elitist point of view, but rather a celebration of struggle to make something out of virtually nothing through a sheer effort of will. That is to be applauded, not turned into an evolutionary stub out of convenience.
Rant off.