this post was submitted on 07 Dec 2025
128 points (99.2% liked)

PC Gaming

12883 readers
377 users here now

For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki

Rules:

  1. Be Respectful.
  2. No Spam or Porn.
  3. No Advertising.
  4. No Memes.
  5. No Tech Support.
  6. No questions about buying/building computers.
  7. No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
  8. No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
  9. No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
  10. Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Ganbat@lemmy.dbzer0.com 82 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (4 children)

I read through the article. Apparently the studio shared work-in-progress content to prove it wasn't made using AI.

I don't know if they used AI or not, but this type of thing has been happening since the inception of gen AI. Shortly after the release of Stable Diffusion 1.5, moderators of r/Art were banning people who had been around for years because their art suddenly "looked like A.I." and told they should "Get a better art style."

In the intervening time, this type of thinking has spread. Just yesterday, I was watching a YouTube video, and they used a certain background in it which they had used before to no note. This time, however, one user claimed that background was A.I. That was all it took to send the comments into a deluge of hatred and accusations.

Here, though... I ask, if work-in-progress PSDs showing the in-progress art don't meet the burden of proof to sate these accusations, what does? How long will it be until the only safe form of art to avoid these accusations is a photo of a pencil sketch with a hand-written date nearby?

[–] paraphrand@lemmy.world 50 points 2 days ago (2 children)

I hate how I personally have gotten suspicious of certain aesthetics after the flood of AI tools.

[–] Agent_Karyo@piefed.world 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Agreed, this is pretty annoying for me personally.

I don't even mind ML generated art in certain contexts if there is disclosure.

I honestly couldn't tell that from the video that the art is ML gen based and I feel like I have a relatively well developed sense for both LLM output and ML gen'd images.

[–] noobdoomguy8658@feddit.org 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The "work-in-progress" video proof in question basically showed some interface similar to a video editing program with assets popping in like layers, i.e. no actual drawing or concepts or anything.

Your point is very valid, but it also reads like you haven't seen the proof -- which, if anything, was even more of a nail to the coffin.

[–] Ganbat@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 day ago

I haven't seen the proof myself. I searched and couldn't find it. The article above mentioned that they shared PSDs, so I assumed that was confirmation enough that they actually released PSD files of the work in progress.

[–] ozymandias@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

clearly you just wrote this comment with ai… only ai would hyphenate “work-in-progress”.
disgusting….
~/s~

[–] Ganbat@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 5 hours ago

Ever seen that horror movie where the hand gets possessed? It's like that but my hand is AI.

[–] Auli@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

We don't have General AI yet and the current course doesn't seem to be the right one to get it. So unless there is a time machine.

[–] Ganbat@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 1 day ago

Generative A.I.