cross-posted from: https://hexbear.net/post/8882542
It’s a different story for the more established studios with an existing following and previous titles. Game Oracle found that the use of AI by these studios resulted in a significant 40% to 60% drop in sales.
That’s a huge difference. AI stigma seems to hit competent developers with a lot to lose the hardest, and I’m not sure that game studios are ready to accept it.
if you need steam to tell you a game has AI in it then that means you couldn’t have any way of figuring it out without the disclaimer. If you can’t determine, without the disclaimer, whether a game contains AI then there’s nothing to complain about and you fall back to the age old “do I enjoy this game? yes/no” metric. Backwards policy by Steam to cover their ass.
I feel that disclaimers like “this game contains gambling mechanics. It is a casino.” would be way more important and actually helpful. But no, better to admonish a game priced $2.99 that only sold 10 copies for using AI to generate concepts in the early stages of the game.
Or if you don’t want to take the risk of playing “AI slop” just pirate your games like a grownup.
I don’t really agree with that.
You also wouldn’t really know that a coat was made of ethically sourced pelts or if it was made from animals in abhorrent and cruel conditions. But knowing that could shift your opinion of buying that coat, simply because you wouldn’t want to support the practice of abusing and the cruel treatment of Animals.
“AI” is something that a lot of people are not OK with. Disclosing that something contains AI is a good thing because it increases transparency, and a person could determine that they don’t want to support its usage.
I also think that, no, “AI” isn’t as easily distinguishable anymore as you might think, at least not generally. Heck, I am still sometimes getting the “ignore all previous instructions” comments because I like to explain things in more detail, which ends up in walls of text (because regurgitating solutions doesn’t really help). What you clearly be able to distinguish as “made by AI” are the poor examples, the “slop”.
I don’t think any coat is made ethically under capitalism, no matter what material it is made of.
In truth labels such as Fairtrade, FSC, and others like that are just a band-aid to make people feel good about their purchase decisions. Fairtrade is not any fairer; farmers in Africa who grow cocoa beans don’t even know what the beans are used for. They have never tasted chocolate made with their beans.
Same thing with AI. If declaring usage of it hurts sales… then maybe it’s better to not declare it. Is there a disclaimer that a game uses Unreal Engine or Unity? No, because we don’t care care what tools people use, we just care about the result of it. The disclaimer doesn’t change the material conditions of why people might use AI for their app, it just makes it so that they have an incentive to hide it. So it’s not a solution. The fact that Steam doesn’t require a disclaimer for code generated by AI, which is what 80% of AI is probably used for, is an indication that this policy is really just trying to soothe over customers. Players can’t see the code so it doesn’t count as AI to them though.
Exactly, people are going after anyone for the cardinal sin of using AI. Meanwhile BP commits another oil spill and openAI buys another 40% of the world wafer supply. It’s misguided, they just want to yell at someone. But I’m not a priest, and I don’t operate a confession booth. Neither are you! If they want to expiate their anxieties against AI they should formulate an actual actionable platform.
You make compelling points. Ignore the kneejerk down votes from morons blinded by hatred. You contribute significantly to the conversation, they just hate that you do.