"Hopefully a meteor will strike the earth soon": Game devs talk genAI witchhunts and the importance of honing your visual literacy
The era of generative AI has kindled an era of generative AI witchhunts. It's routine right now for videogame developers to fend off accusations of using the technology, even when they are full-throated in their disapproval of ChatGPT, Claude and their ilk. Recent examples include Sandustry, the 2D factory builder from...
The era of generative AI has kindled an era of generative AI witchhunts. It's routine right now for videogame developers to fend off accusations of using the technology, even when they are full-throated in their disapproval of ChatGPT, Claude and their ilk. Recent examples include Sandustry, the 2D factory builder from Hooded Horse with strangely haunting physics, and the just-announced Humankind 2, whose creators Amplitude have rushed to assure players that their announcement trailer is genuine live action film.
The conversation reflects a shifting idea of what AI-generated imagery 'looks like' - shifting because, strictly speaking, AI-generated imagery has no fixed style or quality. It's derived from whatever data the model is 'fed'. The confusion is exacerbated by the fact that the technology is changing, with new or updated buzzwordy tools being added to the pile. Established hallmarks of generated imagery go out of date fast. Meanwhile, generative AI's advocates muddy the waters, conflating tools and framing their capabilities in ludicrously open-ended, investor-baiting terms. Still, some responsibility falls on regular users who've become accustomed to chucking around claims of "AI slop".
Original reporting appears on the publisher’s site.
Open original article →
