@steamdb.info "Players have been asking for the ability to filter out games made with Gen AI. We've added an automatic tag on SteamDB based on the AI gen content disclosures on the store pages."
@steamdb.info "Players have been asking for the ability to filter out games made with Gen AI. We've added an automatic tag on SteamDB based on the AI gen content disclosures on the store pages."
Players have been asking for the ability to filter out games made with Gen AI. We've added an automatic tag on SteamDB based on the AI gen content disclosures on the store pages.
You're viewing a single thread.
What's the value here? This is based on the developer saying so and there's no obligation to do so. Black Ops 6 is loaded with Gen AI, the loading screens are obviously Mid Journey like and some of the actors have been replaced by digital performances which was in the news. They won't get tagged here for AI because it's not in the description.
So basically this is going to just have people filtering out devs who are honest and realistically that'll just be a few indie devs who had to use these tools because they're a one man team that can't afford artists.
I think we have to face the facts. Every game is going to be using these tools going forward. If you run a large studio and say no one use AI I bet you your artists are still speeding up making base textures. Your music guy is generating some starter melodies. Your writers are drafting up some filler to pad out the supplementary text.
These tools are as ubiquitous as photoshop (which has had content aware fill all the way back to CS-fucking-5) and unreal engine now (which has added it's own AI features). The idea that's there's only a handful of shady individuals and mega-corps using these tools is naive.
Iirc there was an obligation on steam to disclose AI use as well as the extent. Might be wrong though.
Can a game be flagged as 'contains AI generated elements ' by the community?
This could be useful, but could also be abused by chuds that want to brigade a game they don't like.
Once again, what's the value here. We only see AI when it's someone who's not very good with Mid Journey prompts. We're getting to the point where people are using these tools in ways that no one will know the difference.
Content aware fill in photoshop has been around forever. AI.
If ask chat gpt what this unreal engine error message means. Al.
if get a quick llm made script to tune up Some physics, Al.
If the guy making the music generates some starter melodies. AI
If l generate a rock texture and clean it up myself to the point where no one knows. Al.
All of this is AI and all of this will go unseen to the end user, so once again we'll be expecting developers to self report and only the honest ones will.
Here's a test give yourself 1 or 2 seconds to make up your mind. https://www.sporcle.com/games/Raydon/image-real-or-ai-generated
It's tough isn't it and this is you analyzing the pixels, something we don't do passively.
A lot of (if not all) of those "real" images have postprocessing that makes them look fake. AI uses fake postprocessing to make things look real. Its like taking a real thing and a fake thing and applying a filter to both so that they meet in the middle.
I get the point, but also, if they want a better comparison they should exclude "real" images with filters, faked depth of field, bloom, etc. applied.
Edit: all right, so it's not as exaggerated as I thought. On the ones that look really conniving I wonder how much was "generated." Was it just a face swap or eyes or whatnot?
73%. Glad I'm still able to do a decent job at it.
Use of AI will become mainstream. These filters need to ultimately sort how much of the game visuals/code are generated using gen AI
Sorry you're getting down voted but it's fact. I work in the tech industry and I've got some friends in the games industry. Everyone uses AI in some way. People want to fool themselves into thinking it's just a handful of mega corps but it's being used in everything we consume in small ways we can't see in the end result. The genie is out of the bottle and the line between what is AI and what isn't AI is going to vary wildly from person to person.
I agree, it's unfortunately impossible to boycott AI outright. The game you love that didn't use it for the writing, art or code probably still had plenty of planning meetings where copilot PowerPoint tools were used. A programmer who doesn't use AI may use something from someone who did. An artist may get a job over another because they used AI for their job application.
And that's ignoring everyone that uses it intentionally for projects. I genuinely loathe AI content but it's not worth boycotting like many other causes.
In the 19th century, the Jacquard loom became widespread, using punchcards to automate weaving. Belgian workers who lost their jobs from this would protest by throwing their wooden shoes, their sabots into the machines. This act is the origin of the word saboteur. This era of industrialisation was shared by the movement of the romantics. Romanticism existed to contrast industrialisation and enlightenment, to celebrate nature and imagination and individuality. Poets like Lord Byron led wonderfully flawed but human lives, while capturing this feeling in their art, poetry and philosophy.
But humans although wonderfully flawed, seek convenience. Evolution loves convenience, dopamine loves convenience, capitalism loves convenience. When it's allure comes from all directions, we cnt fault ourselves for succumbing to it.
Although their name lives on, the saboteurs couldn't stop the world seeking convenience. Although Romanticism always existed before it's heyday, it eventually diminished. From the punchcards of the Jacquard looms, Charles Babbage and Ada Lovelace (the estranged and father-loathing daughter of Lord Byron) developed the general purpose computer. Technological convenience survived.
There is a growing opinion that we are living through a new romantic era, this time opposing the digital world, the algorithm and artificial intelligence. I agree with this sentiment. Although I consider myself a socialist, pro workers rights and supporter of radical ideals, I don't see the new saboteurs winning; I don't see boycotting AI, or poisoning our art and media with AI confusing language and imagery as a path to victory. Eventually convince always wins. Instead I want to be a romantic, who can celebrate everything human that AI cannot be, without believing that I can exist outside of it's influence. I can both love human made art, media and content, and consume that which has been touched by AI.
God knows why I wrote this all I guess it's just not a conversation I'd ever get to have in real life. There are probably typos in here, I hate to proof-read.
Traditional art and comics aren't dead because of mainstream digital, AI will just be extra on the pile for games in the same way.
Unless people vote with their wallets against AI slop, then it would be always a controversial choice whether to even employ AI.
Probably too utopian
AI content already appears to be at the point where it's absence is considered positive.
AI slop
That's not what this does though.
To me, AI slop is people generating entire fake websites full of SEO terms but no information. Or people using AI tools to repost popular YouTube content. Completely worthless content that only exists to fool people.
Steam's filter removed any game that reports using generative models at all.
That's simply not useful unless your idea of AI slop is "someone used AI".
Exactly what I wanted to say, not sure why I got upvoted there lol