>>108591545
No. AI still cant be used to generate quality and consistent 2d sprites or good isometric games assets.

>>108591558
It also still loses the companies running the models billions

>>108591545
No, but it can imitate styles, generate pretty good turnarounds for refs, it simulate 3d rendering pretty good, it can fill missing parts pretty good, it can spit 100 variations of a images for idea generation. For something with a lot of references (2d illustration of a woman in dress) it pretty much does 95% of the work). That's for still images but it can also do some decent 2d animations. Super useful, I use it daily.

>>108591545
People have be been generating AI art assets, AI 3D models, AI sprites, AI portraits, AI voice, AI music, AI sfx, AT coding, for the last few years.

You're late to the party

>>108591545
yes and yes

File: ai-spotted-v0-v7v4dd3f8dye1.jpg (2.5 MB)

2.5 MB JPG

i'd love to see a game like silent hill except all of the flyers are done in ai, some of the E33 stuff looked pretty trippy

>>108592137
Show us something commercially successful made by AI - game, movie, video anything

>>108592158
the biggest video gamea of the past few years? ones that disclosed it are arc raiders, cod bo 6, stellaris, crimson desert, dozens of others. the biggest and smartest don't bother disclosing it because it's indistinguishable and luddites suffering from mass hysteria get really outraged at it when they find out.

>>108592119
>it can spit 100 variations of a images for idea generation
lmao at how AI shills call themselves "ideas people".
you're not making art, you're making jackson pollock-tier slop, because art requires conscious human decisions.

>>108592207
AI ART HAS NO SOUL LOL BTFO'D THE AI BROS1!!1!

>>108591545
no need, DLSS makes all textures slop

>>108592238
you idiots have been looking at ai upscaled and ai enhanced images for a decade without complaining but now that it has the ai label suddenly you're sperging out. here's a hint, any picture taken on a smartphone in the past 10 years has not been a raw unprocessed by ai image, they're all "slop".

>>108592219
Wrong. It's not about "soul" but about the philosophical definition of art. It's simply not possible to create any artistic expression through an LLM. And no, prompting doesn't count.

>>108592246
okay

>>108592269
k
>>108592264
by trying to define what is and isn't art you're actually being a fucking dick and not an artist at all, you're acting antithetical to how artists should and it's frankly disgusting, check yourself. who the fuck are you to define what I see as art?

>>108592207
I make the final decision and the ideas are mine too. AI do the mundane tasks(eg show me this character with 100 different hats)

>>108592193
Come on buddy. Do you really think these games are made without human artists?

>>108592330
see: >>108591545
>Can I get AI to generate high quality game assets now?

>>108591545
It can take 2d drawings, convert them to 3d and do all the rigging and run cycles and all that tedious shit, something like this might mean that I end up doing something more than writing engines without any content for it.

>>108592347
All high quality assets that you see in any successful game are made by humans.
You can prove me wrong by showing me an example, I'll wait.

>>108592374
>It can take 2d drawings, convert them to 3d and do all the rigging and run cycles
No it cant

>>108592380
>are made by humans
Yes, they are made by humans that use AI to a degree in their workflow. Let's face it you Ludds got left behind while the entire industry made use of GenAI for the better.

>>108592458
>to a degree
Exactly. That degree is doing some mundane shit while the humans are doing the important stuff
>Ludds
Not me. I like AI

>>108592473
There is no human vs. AI dichotomy. Humans operate AI in every single case. What do you think happens with an AI editor/generator when its operator walks away for a coffee break?

>>108592330
>without
AI is a tool, so no you will always need skilled individuals

>>108592285
(1/3)
>who the fuck are you to define what I see as my gender identity?
I'm assuming you are also an artist. You must realise that we are facing an unprecedented disaster - and the damage is likely irreversible. Never before has it been so easy to imitate human consciousness, and by extension imitate art. Our old philosophical ideas have not adapted to this new reality.
It's going to take some time for people to catch up. I was very much in favour of AI art during 2023-24 - but the more I thought about it, the more I've turned against the concept. I'm convinced you'll come to agree with me eventually.

Now to turn to the topic of discussion, let's ask a simple question:
>Who counts as the artist when a prompter is using AI?
The possibilities:
1. The prompter.
Insofar as this entity consciously comes up with ideas to enter into the prompt, the prompt itself is his/her artpiece. This authorship cannot be extended to the final output, as there are an infinite number of ways the prompt can be interpreted, and the AI falls upon one of these interpretations.
As an example, let's consider a modern pianist is recording a piece composed by Beethoven. Who is the author of the final audio - Beethoven or the pianist? It is widely recognised that Beethoven is the composer and the audio is the pianist's unique interpretation. Let's apply that to a prompter using Suno (an AI audio generator). The output of a Suno track is the AI's interpretation of the composition written by the prompter - and said composition is the prompt itself. Therefore, a Suno user cannot take credit for the final song - only the prompt.
(cont.)

>>108592814
>>108592285
(2/3)

2. The AI
Let's take Ayn Rand's definition of art:
"selective re-creation of reality according to an artist's metaphysical value-judgments"
As we all know (and hopefully you're in no illusion about this), today's AI has no capacity to think and make independent decisions. It cannot make value-judgements, and therefore it is not making art. There won't be AGI for at least another decade.
You can reject my interpretation of objectivism, but I'll offer another example here. Let's say there is a random string generator, and one man who clicks a button to run the generator. After a very high number of iterations, a complete fairy tale is generated. The man did not write the fairy tale, but liked what he saw, and decided to save it. Who is the author of this story? Nobody.
Now, let's say this same man goes to Egypt and uncovers an ancient scroll containing the same exact story. It must have been written by someone - unless the earth eroded in just the right way to arrange those black marks into letters on a sheet of papyrus. Assuming the scroll does have an author, said author would be long gone, but we don't attribute authorship of the story to the man who dug it up.
(cont.)

>>108592820
>>108592285
(3/3)

3. Everyone
The AI output doesn't come from nowhere. It depends on the massive amount of training data given. To oversimply things, the generative AI takes this huge corpus and funnels it through a filter defined by the prompt (you prompt "ragtime" to suno, you get some ragtime back). If our corpus was different, so too would be the AI output.
However, we don't count the composers Beethoven learned from to be authors of his compositions; if it was so, the credits list for The Beatles - Come Together would be billions of lines long. Beethoven selectively re-created music according to his own metaphysical value-judgements.
So - if the prompter isn't the artist of "AI art", and neither is the AI, and neither is there collective authorship - who does that leave?

4. Nobody!
And if a supposed work of art does not have an artist - dead or alive - it cannot be art!

>>108592820
Prompting AI to draw/write/compose something is not the same as a random generation. You give it specific instruction of the thing in your had that you want to create

>>108592814
>>108592820
>>108592826
not reading any of that lmao

>>108592984
Your part of the authorship is your prompt, and the final result isn't art as I explained. Today's AI does not have the capacity to reason - that's what separates AGI from the token predictors we have today.

File: 78A7BF30-FCB7-446B-8840-5E5539C7B1ED.jpg (1.3 MB)

1.3 MB JPG

>>108591545
Yes. Artists are deprecated and transgender.
AIGODS keep winning

>>108592387
Yes it can
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M1dWBasJqqY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tgJQHy-xMnk

>>108593105
I'd argue that your average human doesn't have the capacity to reason either. Yet we don't throw out what they create.

if anything, ai has made traditional art skyrocket in value. smart people know how to capitalize on both sides

>>108591545
I still don't get the replacement meme. It's just another tool, at best fewer people will be needed. And the artists too stupid to adjust might survive by pushing some corny organic labels for people who have a hate boner against AI.

>>108593105
Why would it need to? The obsession about philosophical definitions seems misplaced, a much more practical approach seems to focus on the reaction of the people towards the "art" and here how and by who it was created only matters for jews who want to milk it with some fancy narrative about the creator to inflate the value.

>>108594112
>if anything, ai has made traditional art skyrocket in value
In the same way candles are more "valuable" (in terms of price) today than they were 200 years ago, yet nobody uses them for actual lighting. They're a novelty, which is where human art will mostly be in a few years/a number of years, but I see your point

>>108593912
It’s all fun and games until you actually try to edit or optimize these assets. Mixamo rigs are basically dead ends—they only work with their pre-made animations, and even those behave correctly maybe 10% of the time. You can’t hand them to an animator to work with. There are no controls, no rig logic, no set-driven keys - nothing you’d expect in a production setup.
And that’s before you even get into textures and topology, which are a whole separate mess.
Fill your game with assets like this and it quickly turns into a steaming pile of shit—hard to maintain, impossible to polish, and fundamentally limited by tools that were never meant for real production.
This is the 3D equivalent of free online logo generators-fine for quick demos, but not something anyone uses in professional work.

>>108591545
yeah

>>108592119

Ahhaaha imagine bein this much of skillet slut

>>108591569
they are retarded if they are losing money, generating an image costs cents of gpu power at most, they just need to charge enough to make a profit.

>>108593111
honest question, why do you spam all threads with this, don't you have anything better to do with your time?

>>108595526
>why does a troll keep shitposting
You underestimate the level of mental illness people in this site acquire for the sake of free (You)s.

>>108594223
Everything has a definition. If your definition of art is "something that makes people emotionally react", then crack cocaine would be art.

>>108595793
Coke is a fully biological/chemical trigger while art requires a conscious mind to consume due the communicative aspect. Though I suppose this means that AI art only becomes art because the output was initially instigated by a human and the output itself is based on stuff previously made by humans.

>>108592151
this looks way better than when people intentionally try to make trippy shit with AI, e.g. anything they're showing at the sphere in vegas

File: Crab-Nebula-exposures-image-astronomers-explosion-NASA.jpg (476.4 KB)

476.4 KB JPG

>>108595927
This photo of a nebula requires a conscious mind to consume, but it is not art.
>communicative aspect
You're getting there. Just consider than in a communication there must be a recipient and a sender. I identify who the sender is in >>108592814
If there was no sender, there was no communication in the first place.

That being said, I'm not saying you should never consume AI generated content. Just don't call it art.

>>108591545
Gay asses? Sure!

>>108595967
>but it is not art
Isn't it though? The nebula obviously isn't art but the photo is no less art than any other photography.

As for your argument, it seems a bit short-sighted, a prompter isn't that different from a director of a movie. Your Suno example skips the step of the prompter making sure the output of the AI is actually following their vision, and the AI can't take over the role of a pianist, since it doesn't do shit by itself. It's closer to the piano in the example.

Now granted, I probably wouldn't value an AI dependent artist the same as someone actually doing most of the work (and it doesn't help that most of the stuff I saw so far appears like soulless slop) and I find it pretty hard to even call them artist out of my autism for the process but since we still consider writers and directors who produce formulaic by the numbers work "artists", I don't see why AI ones shouldn't qualify.

And generally, it just seems like a pointless direction. If someone's work touched people, it doesn't matter how they arrived at the result.

Also think you're worrying about the wrong thing, the biggest danger for artists I see from AI meme is just the flood of content – humans already created oceans of slop as it got easier and easier and AI opens up the floodgates for everyone with a phone to generate ungodly amounts of shit in no time, making it nearly impossible to find the non-slop. The slop curators are going to eat good.

Famous twitch streamer quin69 attempted to make a survivors game with full blown AI. Vibe-coded and AI generated media (images, models, textures, music, etc). The music was fire but everything else was absolute dogshit. He spent a good amount of thousands of dollars on tokens too

>>108595524
>Just charge people more!
Holy fuck you're a genius, Jesus titty fucking Christ someone get this guy a company to run, oh my God it's so simple why didn't I think of it myself?!

>>108592158
E33
Crimson Desert

>>108596580
Crimson Desert was not made by AI. Some of the assets are made by AI, and some AI was used in the process of creating others. All the cool stuff and the things you see up close are made by humans.

>>108591545
Yes but AI product is not copyrightable. AI output is superior to anything a human can produce in any field but the courts are afraid of the massive revolutionary power AI presents so they have done everything they can to prevent the masses from using AI to build their own wealth.

>>108597758
You dont know what the fuck you're talking about. AI isn't just a retarded step child, AI can do the entire workflow if needed. And if you want the illusion, you can even insert in human touch to the final process so that you can claim its human made.

>>108597758
n-n-no achstualoly what i meant was games made 100% by ai unprompted no human input or assets even though i didnt specify it! therefor your examples which fit the previous question are not actually valid!

>>108595526
I hate your people

>>108597870
Why are you angry? Why do you wish to destroy rather than to create?

>>108597790
I know what I’m talking about - I’m an artist working in game dev, and one of our CEOs was obsessed with AI and kept trying to shove it into everything. It fails miserably 95% of the time.

>>108597888
You deserve that, you will die

>>108597897
My sister's boyfriend's wife works at Nintendo and he told me you're full of shit

>>108591569
It's almost a certainty that paid inference is profitable or at least break even. They're losing money on free users and active capex and R&D. Given, those are associated in some way with serving customers. It's pretty likely that something like ChatGPT 5.4 costs maybe 2x-3x as much as leading chinese models, which is appropriate relative to their parameter sizes. ~800B-1T for top chinese models vs. ~2-3T estimated for GPT 5.4.

>>108597897
yeah no, you're afraid of losing your livelihood so you're trying your best to fight against being replaced at every avenue not knowing your resistance is futile

>>108597930
I’m not worried. I’m well off, and my livelihood doesn’t hinge on this. I’d be more than happy to prompt some llm to do my job but that’s not the realty. Even its “good” output still needs a lot of human work to make it usable.

>>108597920
Do you have any personal experience with game dev/art? Share your success story!

>>108598026
>artist
>well off
yeah now we all know you're larping, get out of here.

>>108598045
You are clueless

>>108597857
>art directors, game artists, concept artists and illustrators worked for years to make this game happens
>but that bush and the rock way back in the background was AI generated so AI GODS WON. LUDDITES ON SUICIDE WATCH

>>108598101
>thinking that something capable of making good bushes and rocks is incapable of doing anything more complicated
you lost before you even began sweetie

File: 00002-3318679956.jpg (736 KB)

736 KB JPG

>>108591545
>Has AI replaced artists yet?
I generate gay furry porn to masturbate to, but I still masturbate to handmade gay furry porn too.

>>108595526
nta but I enjoy the suffering
csfags had it too good until now, a month of learning and 300k salary is guaranteed, whereas regulat stemfags needed a decade of schooling and a decade of career to not be poor, not to mention tradies and others
the payback is here

>>108600081
not really, to think that one can be replaced but not the rest is silly. even physical jobs aren't safe at the rate robots are progressing and being integrated with multimodal systems.