I Don't Want AI NPCs In My Games, Thanks

[@ArloStuff]

I WANT THIS COMMENT PINNED, THANKS Head to www.squarespace.com/arlo to save 10% off your first purchase of a website or domain using code "arlo"

[@JoshTheWoz]

1:01 we got arlo saying steamed hams, let's go

[@mekman4]

Speciesism!

[@jarrellfamily1422]

When I heard about this it sounded like project milo but real

[@No-jh1xr]

ARLOS IS A SOAD LOVER CONFIRMED??????

[@xxsb101xx]

Horse blinder vision. AI isn't just going to replace artists. The vast majority of office jobs will be automated in 10 to 15 years. Trying to argue to save jobs is a fools errand due to no way to realistically prevent AI usage worldwide, and is wasting time on what the actual discussion should be about, which is how we should adapt/prepare to feed people when the majority of people don't have jobs. Furthermore, the topic of "I want art vision inherently in my games" is a niche position that only art brains really care about. The average person just consumes content because they enjoy it. They don't care about who or what makes it. I could also point out that you feel like AI "regurgitates", while also deliberately mentioning that AI is trained off the majority of human expression, expressions that you admit in this video you could take numerous lifetimes to consume. In other words, you admit that AI is trained off a large amount of art that you almost definitely haven't consumed, thus making your point about not consuming AI due to it not original meaningless, as the content made by the AI is almost guarenteed to be new to you regardless. If you want to just consume stuff made exclusively by humans, just say that, and don't waste time trying to logically justify a position that's irrationally based to begin with.

[@salmence100]

As an anecdotal experience, having to find legitimate sources to cite for my college papers is awful, especially since I'm in Computer Science, so I use a lot of tech journals. They're not shy about using AI to write their articles, and it almost always leads to tons of misleading and outright wrong information. AI corruption is going even beyond art, and affecting other professional fields as well.

[@mogalixir]

This is also a problem for 99% of papers out of China.

[@oh_wall]

As someone who works in the field, that's incredibly good to know.

[@dragon1130]

AI is very good at doing math, computational, statistic's or other such tasks that would suck for any human to do, even if they love counting and math. But man o man, does it suck at literally anything that requires creative, critical, or on the go thinking. AI can make already good looking games look greater by upscaling the resolution so it looks better on bigger screens. However, ask it to make an image, or game, and it will looks like... well, like a computer made it, boring, bland, and completly mechanical.

[@DeadBaron]

Google has been messing with their algorithms for years and is definitely trying to hide using AI to influence searches. It's scary how unreliable Google and other search engines have become.

[@dragon1130]

@@toumabyakuya technically, it is corruption because AI is publishing false information in the form of faulty poorly researched/vetted articles. It's corrupting the space by introducing false information and making it more difficult to find legitimate information. Is there a better word than corruption to call this deed by, sure of course there is, but corruption also does fit here even if it is just a technicality.

[@Lionfrog13]

I don’t know any artists that would rather type in a prompt than create something themselves. I know a lot of executives who would.

[@luisoncpp]

Generative AI is much more than converting text prompts into assets. THis is a misconception that has grown quite a bit thanks to tools like midjourney or dall-e, but that's just an application of AI, AI as a whole is much bigger and can help artists to create things by themselves.

[@Lionfrog13]

@@luisoncpp you’re not understanding my point. I don’t doubt that to get good results out of modern generative models it takes skill, but the goal from an economic perspective is to be able to produce art like any other product and that means that the artist will become unimportant. As an artist I don’t believe that movement away from artistry is a good trend.

[@Noordledoordle]

@@luisoncpp I don't want the help, thanks

[@gameguy1337]

@@luisoncpp Sounds like a hassle compared to putting a pen to paper though.

[@fattestallenalive7148]

"AI is a scary doppleganger claiming to be you" is a such a good way to put it and I don't think from anywhere else. It's so simple yet hit on the point so strongly

[@toekneemart5597]

And the funny thing is I think I'd be even more openly embracing of that doppleganger than I am AI

[@youtubeuniversity3638]

Miss when "A. I." meant "The path finding algorythm that keeps the lizalfos from mindlessly ramming into the level geometry."

[@secureb00t39]

This is a mindset that baffles me. Why do so many people want technological innovation to stagnate? This is a genuine question.

[@youtubeuniversity3638]

@@secureb00t39 ...the heck did you read my comment as exactly? What part of what I said communicates ANY MINDSET AT ALL?

[@jakeodile]

@@secureb00t39 shut up bro. actually

[@legendaccount3247]

@@secureb00t39 This isn't technological innovation. It's a destruction of the entire purpose of art.

[@Seoul_Soldier]

@@secureb00t39 People don't want technological advancement to stagnate. They want technological advancements to be used to improve our lives, and make things better for the average person. Not be used to sell them more soulless bullshit and rot their fucking brains. AI art, and pretty much AI everything, will be the death of human creativity. The fact that most image search results are inundated with AI vomit should show you that, and this is only the beginning. The only mindset that is baffling is yours.

[@holdenontomydignity]

Oh shoot. This is on the main channel, not topicarlo. This is SERIOUS business folks

[@agreedboarart3188]

I had the same thought loll

[@w1ndw4ker95]

Cerealsly

[@jameslawrenson1208]

This is on the level of Elmo getting attacked. That's how serious this is.

[@mogalixir]

@@istealpopularnamesforlikes3340 No matter when you introduce this technology, there will be children throwing the 'baby pictures' of it around acting like AI will never be better than it is now. And you are correct, any tool used incorrectly will produce bad output - if used correctly it can enable a singular artist with just their vision to produce what they imagine without having to be a multi-modal art/music/programming genius. And none of these artists cry about programmers when someone makes a tool that allows them to easily apply their art ability to games. If it's a solodev programmer curating and carefully selecting AI output to replace the artists all of a sudden it's a disaster.

[@GCX050]

@@mogalixir why are you trying so hard to sell this AI stuff? Sounds like you just want to benefit financially from people buying into it tbh

[@undercoverduck]

The best argument against AI art I've read was something along the lines of "Why should I bother consuming a piece of art that someone else didn't even bother to create"

[@xXDexter3000Xx]

this is not a good argument at all bc ai prompts are generated by people

[@undercoverduck]

@@xXDexter3000Xx Yeah that's not creating anything. Thats providing a description of what you want. If I order a meal at a restaurant I'm not gonna claim that I created that meal. That would be silly.

[@xXDexter3000Xx]

@@undercoverduck right but not every usecase for ai is just generating a prompt and then leaving it at that, even in this video the example provided literally only has one ai element and the rest is hand-crafted like any other video game. there are tons of arenas where ai can reduce pointless and tedious work for artists to make them realize their creations faster and u are essentially saying its inherently worthless unless they struggled pointlessly to make the same thing. its like saying ull only eat food if it was cooked over a wood-burning fire even if there are easier and faster methods to do it and it comes out tasting the same. but i was merely pointing out the flaw in the logic of saying nobody bothered to create it when in fact people did, they just used a tool u think is unacceptable arbitrarily.

[@undercoverduck]

@@xXDexter3000Xx It's not arbitrary lol. You chose a nice hill though.

[@xXDexter3000Xx]

@@undercoverduck it is absolutely arbitrary bc the entire history of art has been taking processes that require endless labor and training and streamlining them to be infinitely easier. this is just an organic extension of that but u think its unacceptable bc ur only concept of art is worshipping the artist.

[@epicgamner1139]

the way i see it, ai definentely has the POTENTIAL to be a genuine tool for devs. But given that profit-oriented corporations are behind the operations, it will definentely not be used in a responsible way

[@IsaacSperrow]

Yeah we need actual proper input by artists, musicians, developers etc etc about what the proper use case of AI, not by shareholders and these big wigs.

[@bluetoadettethegoddess6104]

I completely agree. There is some really cool stuff that ai can do that humans cannot, but that should be the main use case of it. I love ai, but it should not be REPLACING anyone, rather ASSISTING. Like one example I have is using ai to say a player's inputted name for example, of course only with the VA's consent. That is something that isn't really possible using the English language, or it would take way too long and even if you did it with like, sentence mixing, it would sound super out of place. (This idea mostly comes from Tetra's Trackers in 4 swords I think, where it's only Japanese and with how the language works, with only Japanese characters, different names can be pronounced.) However this definitely comes with the idea of like "oh if we're using ai for this one part we should use it for every part" which is not true. Even with ai, it's probably going to sound kinda funky, but it could create a somewhat more immersive experience where characters are calling the player out by their chosen name rather than just a placeholder that everyone uses. It's not a perfect solution, but I think that's a legitimately cool thing that realistically only ai can do, and it's a way for it to assist, and not replace.

[@Mikedot]

In the words of Scott the Woz: "I'm not apposed to the future. I'm just scared sh*tless of it." (Cloud Gaming Episode)

[@extremepayne]

we *gotta* get some unions in the industry

[@Mikedot]

@@extremepayne Unions won't solve anything though. All it will do is cause companies to ship jobs to overseas or embrace AI even faster.

[@Mattriix]

Expectation: "Wow AAA masterpieces but faster?" Reality: those bottom of the barrel games in the online store that nobody buys but like 100× more of em, all with microtransactions

[@HappySuperFace]

If AAA games die as a result of AI then I say we should go full steam with AI. AAA games are nothing but garbage nowadays. The day God of War crybaby edition stops getting made will be a happy day.

[@Mattriix]

​@@HappySuperFace if anything Al isn't gonna kill off AAA as competition, it's gonna kill it from being used by the AAA studios themselves

[@not_ever]

It's Ubisoft so it's an AAAA masterpiece

[@gradientcube]

​​@@HappySuperFace what?.. you reactionaries are always the same social outcasts that never leave their houses...

[@ПётрПавловский-щ1х]

@@HappySuperFace what's wrong with triple a games

[@meisteryogurt1460]

These guys are like the tobacco industry. They are fully aware that their products are going to harm millions of people and only take away from the overall experience, and yet they keep pushing through.

[@lalehiandeity1649]

Capitalism.

[@jasper_i_guess]

7:41 The idea of a soulless corporate entity creating a scenario about a resistance against a soulless corporate entity USING a technique that would make people want to form a resistance against a soulless corporate entity is a perfect example of the quiet dystopia we live in.

[@Brucci_]

Lmaoo literally! The irony is insane

[@Bassynater2500]

Some of the most evil things are literally right on the nose x(

[@cevatkokbudak6414]

mouthful

[@noa670]

A boring and evil modern dystopia

[@trapez77]

It’s not that deep

[@ChozoFS]

Speaking as a game designer myself, I hate the idea of AI NPCs because it offers me little to no creative control over what NPCs in my games say. NPC dialogue isn't meaningless fluff, it's important and what's spoken has weight for the story at hand, even if it's just random guy #5 with one line reacting to in-world events. And also AI voice cloning for these NPCs is another can of worms I can very rarely get behind due to ethical issues and the painfully flat, lifeless delivery they often have.

[@deedoubs]

>Speaking as a game designer myself, I hate the idea of AI NPCs because it offers me little to no creative control over what NPCs in my games say. Depends on what you are using the AI for. If it's to provide dialog trees you maintain full control, you just have to curate them. If it's to create real-time responses, that's a lot trickier, but depending on how well developed the technology is you should be able to provide a lot of constraints. Of course the more you can do with something the more ways people can work around whatever constraints you can think of. It's a lot more work to make something with infinite variability act the way you want than it is to make a doll speak a pre-recorded line and wave its hand when you pull a string.

[@ccl1195]

Here's another game designer with you who Still Keeps the Old Ways. Well said.

[@jaredf6205]

What makes you think using AI NPCs means you have no creative control over them? You don't think they're just going to attach gpt4 to the npcs and leave it at that, do you?

[@richardmurray9026]

​@jaredf6205 not only that, but it's incredibly short sighted to think that ai won't develop to a point where it's able to recognize thematic elements of a story and respond with intention. Everyone always seems to react to the ai of today and not the ai of tomorrow.

[@fnatilover2003]

they aren't forcing you to use it if you want to do it your way then do it

[@lilamasand5425]

I like that you acknowledged how different this is from other technological advancements. I'm sick of hearing "This is just like the invention of the camera!! You guys are just scared of progress!!" overall it makes a big difference to have people with platforms state their positions on AI so clearly and openly, so thank you for this video

[@psychokinrazalon]

The difference between this and the Industrial Revolution is that the IR didn’t take away jobs, rather it evolved them, requiring workers to learn a new set of skills. AI will actually take jobs away.

[@KaizokuShojo]

Main thing to me is that we are looking at a HUGE number of jobs (artists, writers, truck drivers, etc.) being lost to AI, and not looking at enough new jobs, and still requiring an enormous amount of money not to be homeless. (And this in a time when housing prices and grocery prices are jacked way up.) Star Trek federation worlds (generally) and ships are post scarcity. (That's why replicators are a thing!) Everyone has the ability to have a home, clothes, & food. A Holodeck and the like isn't going to rob someone of their ability to keep a roof over their head, and you still get people specifically writing holodeck programs (for fun!) as well as the use of generative programs. But nobody is losing their income over it. And even Trek prioritizes creatures that are shown to have sapience (except Moriarty, lol). But in our world, a dev gets fired? Can't find a new job? Spent THOUSANDS to go to school for a job that becomes "obsolete"? Good luck getting something that pays. :/ We personally rely on truck driving money and are staring down a future where we are completely fucked. I'm pretty unlucky so I've got a zillion bad circumstances on me where I can't make a lot of money. The truck driving industry, game dev industry, writers, all these are just a fraction of people who could easily become straight up homeless! Not to mention the dumbassery powder keg of any politics in the US or globally, where most people aren't able to distinguish fact from fiction anyway, and ai vids are going to make that so much worse. If we were a post-scarcity, peaceful society, this would be a relative non issue. But since the powers that be are greedy bastards and just being alive is expensive, it's not good. "Is it art" can be argued in philosophy classes. "Is it a huge problem in our current global societal atmosphere" is more like it. (And I'm not downplaying how damaging it is for artists, and how unfair-Im an artist. Or how inconvenient-just try to look up references now! But boy howdy. It's rough.)

[@shcdemolisher]

Yeah... honestly its gonna lead to new depressions and economic collapses, maybe even wars as humanity tears itself apart from the ensuing identity crisis. Considering that Star trek went through two big conflicts, the eugenics war and 3rd world war, and came so close to where everyone realized that they HAD no other choice but up! We have yet to reach that point, and I fear that most of us won't live to see that light at the end of this hellhole of a dark tunnel. Whatever the events that will happen in the future. Though I pray that Ai does eventually fail, like all the other attempts by the rich to get richer, like Crypto and NFT's.

[@His_Princess619]

I believe corporations at some point will realize that the economy cannot function without people who exist in the middle/lower class And thank goodness, now through the usage of internet we can have a bigger impact on companies by boycotting them So if consumers, which is what we are to them at the end of the day, stop actively supporting them and giving them profit, they will be forced into changing their ways We have seen that happen before and trust me, most people don't wish to support businesses that use AI instead of people

[@shcdemolisher]

@@His_Princess619 Agreed! They will realize that NOTHING can replace true human ingenuity!

[@handsomeboi3767]

@@His_Princess619 the fact is that consumers will prefer ai art over artists. people really do not care enough to boycott these companies for using ai. people consume and if that company uses ai correctly and its executed well then people will be happy with it and not care. artists and voice actors are the first to be replaced like how weavers were replaced with machinery, this is the march of technological advancement and consumers mostly can not care unless the product their receiving is of poor quality. most people just do not care I would prefer that companies and individuals will use ai as a tool so at least these people will at least have a job instead of being replaced but it will this replacement will eventually happen and people can not care any less.

[@Vanished584]

@@handsomeboi3767 The technology we're creating is making humanity less important overall.

[@agreedboarart3188]

The Arlo vs Ubisoft side-story is such a thrilling development.

[@siraaron4462]

I'm here for the Raycon subplot personally

[@EmyN]

There’s a game called “Suck Up: AI Vampire Game” where you are a vampire and you have to convince the denizens of a neighborhood to let you in their houses in order to suck their blood while the police is on patrol, you have disguises and some powers but mostly you have to invent stories and excuses through voice chat to convince the AI controlled people, I thought it was a nice use of AI, but I get what you are saying

[@madnessarcade7447]

Agreed

[@evanchilson9829]

I thought AI NPCs was a fun gimmick for that one vampire game, because it's so absurd and stupid. You sign up for it KNOWING you're trying to convince dumb ai to let you into their house. In literally any other context, its disappointing that it's being used -- both for workers and player.

[@neo-didact9285]

How is technological advancement a "gimmick"? Conversations can now feel much more realistic. Luddittes may complain but technology marches on.

[@datnastysalad5616]

​@@neo-didact9285a gimmick is when one element of a work (in this case video games) is it's main focus and used to an extreme extent. It's a feature to grab attention. Just because ai as a whole is a technological advancement doesn't mean it wasn't a gimmick for this game, I don't know why you're acting as if they are polar opposite ideas.

[@lukebytes5366]

​@@neo-didact9285it's realistic to hear actual dialogue written by actual people, not amalgamations of phrases that are prompted by certain words.

[@Shadow650Nintendero]

​@@lukebytes5366Yeah, because you surely remember half of NPC dialogues in videogames. Besides, the Matrix demo already shown how positive AI can be if we'll implemented, giving you the possibility to literally have an actual conversation with any NPC.

[@vanyadolly]

Exactly. I don't get why anyone would want to interact with AI generated characters. It's meaningless by definition. AI generated art has nothing to say, nothing to convey

[@ArtDadDraws]

The thing that grinds my gears about AI in games is that these companies will absolutely demand that games are connected to *their* services. It's another point of failure for games that don't need to be connected to servers but are.

[@KiboSuperStar]

They just want the money you could spend on x thing.

[@VixYW]

That is not necessarily the case. With hardware advancements, it can be possible to have the whole AI system run on the local machine without needing to connect to anything. Now, if the big corporations will do that over having another tool to hold games hostage is a whole different story. Indies, on the other hand, may be able to use the tech that way once it becomes more easily available.

[@ArtDadDraws]

@@VixYW this would probably require dedicated AI cores more than likely, yeah?

[@MindinViolet]

It is indeed an obnoxious trend. It comes down to control and keeping you in a position where they can sell you microtransactions, season passes, etc.

[@rockoman100]

That's why central servers that host AI tools need to be socialized and made public

[@exotic-gem]

AI is the real life version of : “Players will optimize the fun out of any game, if given the opportunity”

[@gguy3600]

That's actually a really good way of putting it.

[@Bmanritchie]

If anything, AI should replace CEO’s. I guarantee they’d be more efficient since they don’t require a x400 pay to their lowest employee to function at optimum efficiency.

[@weeklystruggle4205]

Ceos are probably just scared themselves. who needs industries if everyone could just type in some prompts, and get a movie/video game out if it?

[@philltheotherguy1868]

It’s called a dao, I think

[@rustyshackleford234]

“New AI CEO fires all workers and replaces them with more AI to save cost”

[@lvbboi9]

I thought putting AI in positions of power was the ONE thing we didn't want to do.

[@messofstuff1116]

In my project management course, I learned that there's a fund set aside for emergencies or if the project doesn't go so well. Turns out, if the project is successful, many in upper management just pocket that money rather than reinvesting it in the company or the staff. This goes completely against my ethics course I took earlier and my business sense. Imagine if employees were being paid 2 or three times market price. They would be so happy and their company loyalty and productivity would be sky high. Or, you can higher excess staff with that money and train them for emergency cases. You can invest more into employ training. You can retain expert talent longer! You can reinvest in your community doing societal marketing in the process. You can build a stronger and better company. The goal of a business shouldn't be "maximum money for owners". It should be "more net income than expenses." And net income doesn't have to be more than middle class or upper middle class by Western living standards. Anything beyond that is greed. For people who are all about investments and returns, they seem to invest remarkably little in the places where it matters the most.

[@Jacks_game_room]

Remember when the Mario 64 iceberg came out like, what? 4 years ago? And the idea of a game using AI was the meant to be the scariest thing a game could possibly do. It was deemed so unbelievable that it was an often a joke entry on other icebergs. Look where we are 4 years later.

[@the_most_ever_company]

really looking forward to infinite (actually) AI-gen'd B3313 sequel in a few years personally

[@jabber8227]

10:31 I know this is a serious topic, but those ten seconds of Arlo going BLECH BLEHH NUHUH while AI generated grandmas wrestle and eat massive sausages behind him was absolutely the funniest thing I've seen this week.

[@SuperUberDae]

Agreed. Replayed that section multiple times for others to enjoy the *disgruntled Arlo noises* along with me, lol.

[@generically.watched]

right? even at 9:54 i've just been distracted watching all the AI eldritch horrors cumulate in the background while Arlo speaks

[@Furluge]

Oof, yeah, considering Photoshop is including AI, we're pretty much gonna need to go back to physical media to avoid AI. It's gonna get added to everything digital in some way shape or form I imagine.

[@MrMoon-hy6pn]

Ai fill in photoshop is an actual legitimate and interesting use for the technology. It’s pretty much the only decent use I can recall so far (as of wiriting). I still hate how the underlying tool is trained though, being based on adobes entire stock photo library against stock photographers wills.

[@Furluge]

Back in the 90s it was a very big deal when Disney began using cg to reduce the labor of making background characters. 3D animation cuts down on the labor of animation significantly. AI like it or not is probably going to be used in a similar manner, and in 20 or 30 years it will likely be thought of as completely normal for someone to supplement their work with AI tools. That is why I say, you are going to have to go back to physical media to avoid AI. As of now it looks like it will be incorporated into a lot of tool suites. Hopefully the "bad ai" phase is shorter than the bad cg phase.

[@jasminecole8596]

@@Furluge If you say so; I'll leave this comment here and see. (Warning: Opinions and bias) I hope not, because ai art really just...no matter it's qualities, typing in prompts and poof an image- eats away at my ability to enjoy it because there's nothing there. I really tried enjoying this; I stayed primarily middle, and browsed pro-ai stuff. I've generated Ai art to entertain myself. Almost all generative AI is currently in a 'for profit' mindset, and I've actively learned better prompting and delving deeper into it. But. Effectively...there's nothing there to save and like/favorite/subscribe to; there's nothing that really...ah. >-< Nothing which really makes me look for more then a few seconds. Even the super amazing ai's (Which I'll credit) with edits for fixes are incredibly lifeless. There really isn't anything new being created, but if an AI could live a human life, I think it could make human art.

[@joelrobinson5457]

Wait for it

[@lukerabon7925]

Heres what i think the difference is: most of the people excited for AI art are excited to never pay artists again. Doesn't matter if AI art itself is ethical or "real art", the corpos want free labor

[@jaredf6205]

It's not about art at all. It's about entertainment.

[@SystemBD]

Not "free labor", just (nearly) free results. Artists will not receive the commissions in the first place.

[@richardmurray9026]

The people excited for TV are just excited to never pay radio hosts again. The people excited for cars are just excited to never pay carriage drivers again. Etc etc

[@BurgerSoup]

​@@richardmurray9026 The exemole you list are all basically "new human work replaces human work" but with AI it's just AI replacing human work, soulless art imitating real art and put countless people out of work.

[@kadabraguy9846]

​@@jaredf6205entertainment is art. You cannot separate them

[@natogaia3502]

The AI reels playing in the background are the stuff of nightmares

[@Sylvia_Corvidev]

I think when a game is built around it, E.G., "Suck Up", it's fine, but otherwise it's a huge letdown. "We COULD write an NPC with personality and actual characterization... OR... we could use a soulless machine that doesn't know what "personality" even is... hmmm..."

[@ShyBug42]

Is it though? It’s only really good if you can provoke something funny out of it; as the technology improves you won’t be able to do that so it’ll just be talking to variations of chat gpt instead of realized characters

[@Sylvia_Corvidev]

@@ShyBug42 That's what Suck Up is. It's just a goofy game where you play as a vampire and try to get allowed into ChatGPT's home. It isn't anything serious, it's just a goofy 1-2 hour romp. And if you're worried about the AI getting too advanced, you can do what Cibles did when she made the Undertale and Deltarune AI mods and use a really outdated stupid AI

[@Oliver300Dude]

Agreed. People viewing AI as a replacement for things is the problem, it’s a new developing tool not an all-in-one new reality

[@veggiet2009]

But here's the thing, anything you do with ai you need to put as much or more effort into it as you would without the AI ... you write that fleshed out personality, you put as much effort into the backstory as you would a normal game, and you do more, you have to think about topics any player might think of to flesh out that backstory. Also consider how the NPC should address anachronisms, like how a beggar in a medieval town would respond to a question about smart phones, feed all of that into the AI, then test,test test test ...

[@Sylvia_Corvidev]

@@veggiet2009 Effort doesn't equate to creativity.

[@The_Moss-Man]

I swear we're going to have to start reading the ingredients on the back of our products now to find "DOES NOT CONTAIN A.I."

[@weeklystruggle4205]

I would like a label like this so I can avoid AI.

[@sony_mdr7506]

i hate that this shit is called AI when theres nothing intelligent about it. Its just generative algorithms no? Algorithms! Algorithms! Algorithms!

[@flyingstonemon3564]

"No beefed up algorithm was used to replace jobs to make this!"

[@kymo6343]

"Truck Driver Cruelty Free" XD;;;

[@weeklystruggle4205]

@@sony_mdr7506 yeah you’re completely right. it shouldn’t be called like this. there is really nothing inteligent about it. just a huge amount of data.

[@DanGamingFan2406]

Games are an artform, something talented and dedicated people put hardwork into to express their vision. THIS, while impressive, is just a shallow novelty and corporate greed, the the idea of it becoming the norm is not only scummy, but straight up terrifying.

[@watershipup7101]

Exactly.

[@genjis5155]

Preach my brother, preach!

[@garnetbird7557]

Couldn't agree more.

[@xoxo.pochacco]

🙌

[@fnatilover2003]

games are an art form but people should be allowed to use ai if they want to imagine Minecraft but with ai elements it would but the mystery back in the game not knowing what comes out at night

[@QuiGonJohn1999]

I’m at 6:25 And I moment I got here I said out loud “Why am I not surprised it’s Ubisoft, not even a little bit…”

[@VixYW]

Hopefully they won't kill the whole idea with their bad practices before someone uses it the right way to make something actually good...

[@kdoesthings12D3]

I find it horrifically Ironic that they're becoming the watchdogs enemys

[@SubjectiveObserver]

@@kdoesthings12D3 If you look around, you'll find that irony in most companies that create art and entertainment. The writers are telling stories for common workers, and the company doesn't care, as long as they still profit.

[@gobbagoo]

Wow i love corporations trying to save money by cutting hard workers out and making a lesser quality product in the process!

[@Dharengo]

Workers are owed compensation for their work. They are not owed work.

[@AnotherCraig]

How do they not see how much they'd save by replacing the CEO with AI instead??

[@Dharengo]

@@AnotherCraig Because you wouldn't actually be replacing the CEO. Someone would have to operate that AI, which would then by default be the actual CEO.

[@sillyali]

​@@AnotherCraigFunny you say that, a Chinese gaming company did exactly that and reported record profits. No one really is safe

[@Oliver-ef2vf]

@@Dharengo Humans need work, even if we could sit around and do nothing all day, most people wouldn’t be happy with that. The fact that so many people are willing to put their passion and art into projects but it’s being replaced by a computer who will do a more soulless job is the problem. In fact really people are owed work. Society should accommodate people’s skills instead of ignoring them and getting richer quicker

[@pingpong5877]

Expect to be replaced in a field where nobody respects you but expects highly of you.

[@ZackFireX]

I like my art with *PURPOSE* and *INTENT* thank you. Human-made art commonly has deeper meanings and life lessons baked into it, and I love speculating / theory-crafting those meanings and seeing how they relate to the artist who made it. My empathy towards other humans and their struggles keeps me emotionally invested in human-art at a meta level, because I ALWAYS get to ask myself “MAN, I wonder how they thought of that.” AI art completely eliminates any purpose or intent out of that picture. The purpose of AI art is to execute a prompt, not tell a message or spread awareness. The intention of AI art is random and succeeds by happenstance, which isn’t fun to speculate at all. Don’t get me wrong, AI art is COOL… but that’s all. I will never be able to relate to AI’s creative processes, life struggles, or hopes and dreams because AI doesn’t have any of those things. The result may look pretty, but the execution is soulless, bland, and uninteresting. Art itself is only half of this industry, the other half is the artists, and I don’t want to lose them. They’re what makes art FUN. I dearly hope both Human and AI art will be able to co-exist, peacefully or otherwise, because the creativity we have on the internet right now is beautiful… and I would rather die before it becomes lost media.

[@SirBanana1992]

My favorite game seriess biggest strength is the world building, Legend of Heroes. And a large portion of why it works is specifically because they write massive amounts of NPC dialogues themselves, give them stories they follow that evolve as events occur in the games and whose lives move without the player pushing them along. We the players can just go and talk to them and find out about who these NPCs are and what their life is like of our own accord and keep checking on them to see how they're doing. Sometimes you're intrinsically rewarded for just recognizing an NPC you met somewhere else in a previous game. It's also why these games take forever to translate to english. AI would probably save them a massive amount of time but it would also take away the soul of what makes the series so amazing, becoming invested in the most lived-in and breathing world I have ever witnessed in gaming.

[@knuckleheadwestwind3585]

I might be opening a can of worms, but I think there is an even bigger problem with AI NPC’s, namely what it might do to end users. The ability to form relationships with fake people is the worst thing I can imagine happening to anyone, and there is precedent to believe it will happen. I looked at a case study in college about a man who “married” a cartoon character, and how shockingly common it is to do so. People lacking relationships can form them with an analogue, something that’s close even if not actually the thing in question. If too many people, especially too young, form their relationships with NPC’s, what is stopping them from never talking with real people? That’s what worries me the most.

[@hadtomakeachannel]

real people better up their game then.

[@SubjectiveObserver]

you're still missing the worst part. even the best ai will have stilted inhuman behavior, it inherently lacks real understanding and empathy. growing up with ai relationships will severely stunt their mental and social development. like being raised by dogs. even if they do talk to real people, they'll struggle with social cues and expressing emotions. Which can create a feedback loop that pushes them back to the ai.

[@Subject_Keter]

Tell the people to stop being worst then a malfunctioning roomba, half the people you meet arent worth the time or cant give you a moment.

[@jaycobobob]

A single chat GPT query uses 10x the energy of a google search. Unless we want to light the earth on fire even faster than we already are, we need to reconsider how much we want to integrate AI into our lives

[@RaiRai214]

A Google search only pulls already existing websites that match the search query while chat gpt has to generate its output almost from scratch . One does more work than the other so of course it's gonna require more energy. What's the point here?

[@GCX050]

​@@RaiRai214the point here is that the use of AI shouldn't be normalized like Google searches are nowadays

[@yeahboiii6351]

​@@GCX050 I'd use Chat GPT less if Google was more reliable. Depending on the topic, sometimes its much easier to get a streamlined answer from GPT than it is to dig through Google's SEO slop.

[@shcdemolisher]

Agreed! The energy costs ALONE need to be addressed. Like shutting down AI since our current energy grids can't function with them pulling that much power! Seriously it's a case of one little thing by some idiot being dragged out by the mobs of people who now are in a powerless city. That's gonna be scary, though I do hope that the companies behind power see that they should cut the lines to these ai users as the needs of the many outweigh the few. Might not be appropriate to use, but remember we have over 8 billion people on this planet, we can't afford to lose vast numbers of that by overtaxing our power!

[@RaiRai214]

@@shcdemolisher or just adopt more efficient, clean power generating methods like nuclear

[@AshnSilvercorp]

"AI" in the title these days of a service is a "we want investor money" call. It's never about you the customer. It is just forced on you...

[@deedoubs]

Right, which begs the question of why people are so upset about the prospect of not being able to work for these specific companies in the first place. Who really wants to work on the assembly line for Ubischlock or EA anyway?

[@Bubble-Foam]

@@deedoubs People gotta pay their bills. The current job market is decent in terms of unemployment, I think it was just under 3% last i checked, however it is taking about twice as long for unemployed people to get hired. When you combine that with increased cost of housing and food, that becomes pretty stressful. Especially in america where you also dont have insurance without fulltime employment. I know you were probably just goofing, but just in case

[@ramon_rcg]

“Art is a human expression and I don't want to consume art that was not made by humans. All art, at least to some degree, says something, communicates something about humanity. Art without humanity isn't just ‘not art’, it's a scary facsimile of art. It threatens art.”

[@Quinhala11]

But ai and ai art don't come from or exist in a vacuum, ai is made by humans, by definition it is human expression.

[@ramon_rcg]

@@Quinhala11 Did you even think about that for a second? Art is made by an artist. Would you call someone that made “art” using AI an artist just because they were the ones that “told” the machine what to do? That would be the same as paying an actual artist to do a commission for you and then calling yourself an artist just because you were the one that told the actual artist what to do. In other words, calling yourself an artist just because you “guided” the process doesn't make any logical sense and isn't even reasonable. And if you're not an artist, what you “made” isn't art either. It's just as stupid as using a roomba and then saying that you were the one that cleaned the floor because you were the one that turned the machine on.

[@Quinhala11]

@@ramon_rcg I think you're the one who didn't think for a second actually. Yes, if you comissioned an artist to draw something for you you're an artist. You literally described art as human expression and, sure, you might have not actually grabbed a pen and drawn it but that art would literally have not existed if it weren't for you and your want to express your ideas. You do have a part in the artistry of the comission your order. That's like saying a blind writer isn't a writer because he asked someone else to type a script for him, they are sharing the artistry with someone else but they still have part in it. If you used a roomba to clean the floor then you used the roomba to clean the floor, you're acting like using stuff outside of your own bodily functions to do things takes all the validity from doing those things. Do you think people can't say they cleaned the floor unless they use their own tongue and spit? Do you think digital art is lesser than traditional art?

[@ramon_rcg]

@@Quinhala11 What you're doing is called a premise error. I never said one can't use external tools to create art. I myself create both traditional and digital art, using both pencil and a drawing tablet. My point was: there's a huge difference between using an external tool and delegating the job to someone else. One thing is me using a drawing tablet to create art. Another thing very different is me paying someone else to make art for me and then saying I'm the one that made that art. One thing is me holding a vacuum cleaner with my own hands and cleaning my room with it. Another thing very different is me setting up an automated robot to do it all for me and then saying I'm the one who cleaned the room. It's the same as if I payed someone else to clean my house for me and then saying I'm the one that cleaned it just because I told the person to do it and payed for it. It's just as stupid as a boss taking credit for an employee work, as if they had done it themselves, just because they were the ones who asked their employee to do it. When you delegate a job to someone else, be it a chore, an art or whatever else, you might have contractual rights to it and be its "owner" (like you have the rights to use a comissioned artwork or an employee work), but that doesn't change the fact you're not the one actually making it. When you delegate the making of an art to an AI, you're not the one creating it. You're not an artist. You're just an "employer". If you are not creating art, you are not an artist. If the product is made by a soulless machine, it isn't art either. As Arlo put it, it's a "facsimile of art". PS: The fact you maliciously tried to completely change what I said makes it clear you're not interested in having this discussion in good faith. That being said, I'm not going to reply to you anymore. Cheers.

[@Quinhala11]

@@ramon_rcg The first thing you said in your first reply to me was "Did you even think about that for a second?", yet i'm the one "clearly not interested in having this discussion in good faith"? If you want to be a coward and flee from this discussion do that, don't put words in my mouth. "You maliciously tried to completely change what I said" I genuinely have no idea where that came from. I think i made myself pretty clear in my first comment but i'll repeat my point. You literally described art as human expression, and if I paid someone on twitter to draw an original design i imagined who's expressing themselves? The actual execution is part of the art, yes, but so is the conception, without anyone to conceive it it literally wouldn't exist. If you paid someone to clean your house then you paid someone to clean your house. The person who cleaned your house didn't volunteer themselves to do it, they weren't obligated to do it by law, you paid them to do it. The house would not be cleaned if you didn't pay them do clean it. Yes, there's an obvious difference of direct involvement, and you' are allowed to think AI art is lazy and superficial just like how many traditional artists think digital art is lazy and superficial, but don't act like the God of what objectively should and should not be considered art. AI art isn't made by a soulless machine, it's made by an artist using a "soulless machine". AI is a tool just like any other.

[@SleepySeal121]

As a writer, AI terrifies me. I studied for six long years to get a masters in creative nonfiction, and now companies are salivating at the thought of replacing us.

[@HappySuperFace]

what value do you offer? I don't see the issue with purging your kind. Writing is not some special skill. Anyone can do it.

[@paulustrucenus]

​@@HappySuperFace Then write a book.

[@ianhubble9973]

@@HappySuperFace You can't just say "writing is not a special skill" and not explain yourself in fewer than 3 paragraphs.

[@SleepySeal121]

@@HappySuperFace I’m going to assume that you’re trolling. I refuse to believe you’re so dense that you can’t see the inherent value in writing.

[@HappySuperFace]

@@paulustrucenus sure lol I'll prompt an AI to do just that.

[@TheLastBrandon]

It’s so weird how everyone seems to want video games to feel closer and closer to real life, but you know, real life is out there right now. You don’t have to wait for it. It’s already here, everyday. And if you don’t like the reality of actual real life, then I say yeah, exactly! So don’t put your real life in my video games! Games were much better when they felt like games instead of attempting to be like real life.

[@dragonmaster1500]

That's why I love JRPGs, because they let me visit fantastical worlds away from the regular world, as opposed to many of the western games.

[@TheSlipperyNUwUdle]

I’ve been saying this for years. I don’t want games that look like real life either. I want games with inventive and artist worlds that rely on the creative vision of a team of artists. I don’t want a game that has graphics that basically just feel like watching a movie. I know it’s not a common opinion, but tbh I already don’t even enjoy a lot of realistic games that are out now and they’re only going to keep looking more and more realistic. I find it uncanny too.

[@Obri55]

weird argument, games are a broad genre and theres different types of games. Some games tend to try emulate real life because thats their goal but others tend to do something else. say that games "were much better when they felt like games instead of attempting to be like real life." is just really ignorant and dumb. also "my video games" you're not the only one who plays video games

[@Xxicewolf97xX]

Gabe Newell made a similar point in the "Half-Life: 25th Anniversary Documentary" video, where he mentioned people in the design room would make a comment about something not being 'realistic', and he would point out why is that interesting though; one wants to play games to have fun, not worry about realism. Getting games to be as realistic as possible thankfully seems to primarily be a thing done by AAA companies, whereas Indie Devs still mostly stick to fantasy & more adventurous concepts, and make games with a creative art direction that allows the game to age well even a decade from release. I love going back to games like BioShock, Hollow Knight & Portal 2 because despite their age they still hold up excellently in big part to their art direction & well-written worlds & characters.

[@goncalocarneiro3043]

Fantasy and realism aren't mutually exclusive, and they overlap. Life and fun aren't mutually exclusive, and they overlap. Is it not reasonable to want to put the fun parts of real life in a videogame within some contexts? I mean, there's a whole genre of videogame called "Simulation". Simulation implies a real life counterpart, some form of realism in it. Plane simulators can be really realistic sometimes but still have wimsy. City builders too... Heck, there are fun videogames about... Working a retail job. They manage to grab what's fun from the realistic and run with it.

[@killergrooves2438]

A.I. is the new desktop computer+productivity software. I’m almost 40, so I can remember a time when having a computer in middle class suburbia was still kind of rare. My family had a computer before any of my friends. I was doing my book reports on the computer before my classmates were. And that was in the early 90s. Desktop computers and Microsoft Works (which later became Microsoft Office) had a massive impact on business in the 80s and early 90s. What used to take an entire department full of people and weeks of work could now be done by a few people in a day. You can see in old black-and-white movies, TV shows, and educational shorts what industries were like in the days of typewriters and pen and ink. Instead of reducing the workweek, businesses reduced the work force and increased productivity. There was a Congressional study in the 60s that said due to computers, by the year 2000, the workweek would be reduced to 15 hours. The opposite happened. Instead of more people doing the same work faster, less people were doing more work faster. And that’s not counting all the blue collar jobs that technology killed off. Those coal jobs didn’t die from reduced coal consumption. They died because a machine can mine coal faster. That’s why no matter what politicians promise coal country, that promised renaissance never happens. And A.I. will do the same thing to white collar jobs. White collar jobs will be eliminated by A.I. just like the internet, productivity software, and desktop computers did before it. And people in trade and skilled labor jobs won’t be safe, either, because they’ll get a glut of competition as white collar workers retrain and younger generations opt for trade school. Not to mention how trade jobs destroy your body over time. A.I. is going to wreak havoc on the job market and in turn the economy and we are not preparing for that transition. What’s going to happen when unemployment skyrockets all over the world? It’s going to be worse than the Great Depression, but it’ll be on a global scale.

[@NickonPlanetRipple]

My problem with AI is.... what are people supposed to do? When 99% of jobs have been eaten by the machine, how are people supposed to EAT? To pay for things, if all the jobs are gone? Without some sort of universal basic income to give people the free time to pursue REAL art without threat of starvation or homelessness, how is anyone even supposed to afford supporting AI-created products anyway? I don't want to consume any "art" created by a society that values artists, humanity, so little. Some people will say "It isn't the industry's job to provide people jobs" but until jobs are no longer necessary to survive, in my view it is their job to provide work.

[@mogalixir]

It's the government's job to care for the people they represent.

[@NickonPlanetRipple]

@@mogalixir Agreed. But assuming we can't expect them to do that quickly enough, how do we cope with AI?

[@His_Princess619]

​@@NickonPlanetRipple hurting their profit and their image is the answer in my opinion When people talk against this and actually start not giving profit and not supporting companies like Ubisoft and business that replaced people with AI, it will start bothering them Most people aren't fond of AI, journalists could interview those who lost their jobs because of AI, they could even create videos about this The goal would be to show the consequences of supporting those who value AI and profit more than people and I think it would have an impact

[@rasuru_dev]

Labor has to end. If it can be automated, we have no reason to do it. That's very liberating. And nothing will stop us from doing art

[@dragonmaster1500]

@@rasuru_dev Except for the fact that we'll be starving because we can't afford to buy food after the AI took our job.

[@rootbourne4454]

Thank you for making this Arlo! We really don’t appreciate the hard working, insanely talented writers that bring video game characters to life. I’d hate to see more slop produced by the gaming industry just because they wanted to cut down on human involvement in the creative process.

[@mogalixir]

The humans are making the slop you complain about now.

[@rockoman100]

We really don't appreciate the hard working, insanely talented scribes that bring print media to life. I'd hate to see more slop produced by the literary publishing industry just because they wanted to cut down on human involvement in the production process.

[@limelad1]

​@rockoman100 This is a faulty comparison, as the major issue with "AI Art" is the creative process. Media isn't just another arbitrary task to automate in the name of progress, it's a form of human expression.

[@pixels_per_minute]

AI isn't about making "better, more dynamic art." It's about profit margins and how snak oil salesmen can make an extra million or two by cutting even more corners. Will they succeed or not? Idk...

[@weeklystruggle4205]

exactly you got it.

[@joelrobinson5457]

No, we can make sure of that

[@mitwhitgaming7722]

The only way I would want to see this used is as a bit of satire. Like when Wheatley saw the first turret you come across in Portal 2, "hello, yeah, thanks, we're good (keep moving, don't make eye contact) yeah see yeah!"

[@harfharfful]

Good luck with game preservation when all these games depend on external LLM systems.

[@RaiRai214]

This is the only good point brought up in this whole conversation. Games as a service is already a massive issue in the industry, we don't need another branch of it breaking our game because it can't communicate with the necessary servers

[@VixYW]

Hardware can go into the direction of the whole system working on a local machine tho. That being said, big companies will probably avoid that so they can keep their games hostage. However, indies are a whole different story.

[@RaiRai214]

@@VixYW considering the energy requirements for the processor to go through constant queries, we'd need a breakthrough in multiple fields just to create the hardware that can handle them well enough to run locally without impacting performance (or causing a fire) while also being commercially viable. That still sounds a few decades away

[@VixYW]

@@RaiRai214 True, but they said something similar about generative AI in general. I'd say they can accomplish it in a single decade or less, unless we run out of materials for chip production, which could very well happen in the near future.

[@tarwod1098]

I can’t imagine AI games being worth preserving. But who knows?

[@artemisia4718]

I LIKE hearing “Let me guess. Someone stole your sweet roll?” over and over again.

[@HawksJHawks]

In a presidential election year in America, AI is particularly scary.

[@spartaninvirginia]

AI is scary, regardless of year.

[@w1ndw4ker95]

The truth becomes increasingly blurred with AI

[@mrrowwmeoww]

not just america. 2024 is a big election year. 64 countries holding elections (plus the european union election). and this is the year ai gets used as a testing ground to spread disinformation.

[@weeklystruggle4205]

youre so right and i hate it.

[@DogratDavis]

No more scary than a world where all the media corporations and celebrities get to influence the unthinking masses into voting for a literal zombie of a president

[@randomyoutubecommenterr]

Generative Ai hype thrives on "Get in now or get left behind!". Meanwhile these companies are hemorrhaging money. This is the internet bubble (can't say the words "dot" and the other word "com" without getting comments erased here) of the 90's all over again. Massive speculation and hype around products that have no actual use case and cost way too much to run. I can only pray regulations and cost sinks most of these ships before they ruin the quality of artistic productions.

[@mogalixir]

The companies are hemorraging money because their writers and directors keep jamming their divisive politics into entertainment products and HR keeps hiring barely competent people to maintain the IP they bought at a high price.

[@randomyoutubecommenterr]

​@@mogalixir Reread what I wrote. Generative Ai companies are hemorrhaging money.

[@apersonwhomayormaynotexist9868]

@@mogalixir ... they're talking about AI companies why are you talking about any of that? They're saying that the companies running giant AI setups are hemorrhaging money because surprise surprise, these things are really hard to run, take a lot of power and computers, and are being thrown into the world to be used by literally anyone and people are just throwing really trivial requests at it. The problem with companies using AI to write movies isn't that the movies are too 'wOkE,' that's just you being an idiot

[@lazyful3961]

@@mogalixir you are talking about an entirely different subject you seem to know nothing about. lets try to stay on topic

[@orions2908]

Regulations would just artificially hold back everyone If the quality of the product does indeed decrease because of ai, and I do think it will, the market will take notice, people will just stop buying these games. And if they don't? Honestly, we have it coming at that point

[@melo-7904]

you have 2 options here A - good hand written dialouge that can express anything B - hey chat grungle pungle tungle! y'know which one im taking, i like to write funny dialouge

[@adora_was_taken]

of course it's ubisoft and square enix jumping on the AI train lmao

[@liammcnicholas918]

Square Enix and Ubisoft love hopping in on the next big technological fad (NFTs)

[@Rubberman202]

Square Enix in particular is unsurprising given how hard they pushed NFTs for a bit.

[@artemisia4718]

The companies that hate the workers, what a surprise.

[@fillerbunnyninjashark271]

Every game uses ai. Sorry to break it to you. So new ai is going to be used in games

[@adora_was_taken]

@@fillerbunnyninjashark271 everyone involved in this conversation is using "AI" as a shorthand for generative AI. we know most games have AI already.

[@linguotgr]

One other thing I would like to throw in here… gaming is a shared experience. I don’t mean couch co-op or multiplayer, i mean that there is a collective experience we are all a part of when we play a game. Take a game like Undertale. Would *anyone* give a damn about that gem of a game if all the dialogue was open ended and AI generated? Or if character motivations could be influenced beyond what Toby Fox intended? Or if the game created enemy types in real time? Sure, it’s infinitely replayable in the most literal definition of the word, but there would be no cohesion, no soul. Every player has a different experience, so there is nothing worth sharing. There is no deeper lore because there is no set canon. I’d also like to throw this out there, the idea that better tech means fewer jobs is a capitalist lie. It means fewer hours are needed. We need to band together and demand that *everyone* works fewer hours with no reduction in pay. Or more accurately we needed to band together like forty years ago. But now is the second best time.

[@rachele183]

Thanks for saying this, I feel the exact same with everyone saying that AI dialogue would make stuff better, to me the infinite possibility of dialogue becomes meaningless as there's quite simply no meaning or reason behind their words, same as why we don't think of Siri as a developed character of our phones And was thinking I was just getting out of touch

[@fnatilover2003]

creating enemy types in real time could be good for an evolving enemy faction though imagine a game with a body horror enemy faction like the flood necromorphs the infested and so on that evolve over time like cdda zombies and there are branching paths of evolution that grow stronger and more bizarre as the game go's on

[@SubjectiveObserver]

It's not really a lie, if they will guarantee it will be true. That makes it a threat.

[@goncalocarneiro3043]

Think of it like original works and fanfictions. Each fanfiction is unique, with some common ground with the original work, if it didn't it'd be an entire original work itself. You can't get a complete collective experience benefit if each member of the audience was given a fanfiction to read each... And some will certainly be better quality than others, by a large margin, even... But something is still there! There's still something to bond over. Baldur's Gate 3 is a monstrously huge game and two players could realistically have experienced swathes of dialogue and dozens of encounters the other has no idea about and they'd not only still have SOME shared experiences, but they'd also APPRECIATE the differences in their experience. It's not a mutually exclusive thing. On your second point I agree completely though. More automation should mean more freedom, not less. Any strive towards less people being needed means everyone should get more reward for doing less. Not just the corporate overlords. Universal Basic Income should become a thing yesterday.

[@itf2212]

There should be no surprise that when the Labor force swells, pay decreases, no AI necessary. Focus on why that is so much bigger than it was in the 60’s to solve the problem.

[@isaac_6530]

really liked the nod to the art of the secret of kells @15:30 , such a great childhood art memory i had totally forgotten about

[@_ThatJaceKid]

I was a graphic designer. I say was cuz I recently lost my job after nearly a decade as the company inches closer and closer to using AI. And they are a smaller company. It really is only a matter of time until artists arent needed across the board because at the end of the day, businesses arent passionate creatives who see the value in art but bigwigs who just want more money in their pocket and are wowed by the hip new thing without giving it a second thought.

[@dragontears]

As a report writer losing their job in another industry... YUP. It is already cutting into writing hard. And not even because it can do our work, but because executives expect that it can, so they're undercutting pay and bids so if we want to keep working we'd have to do it for half or less than what we make currently (which isn't much).

[@weeklystruggle4205]

The problem is that AI is “good enough” for ceos. We need to wait for the consumers to realize and wake up. Nobody wants to pay for something that didnt cost the company anything.

[@dragontears]

@@weeklystruggle4205 yuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuup

[@deedoubs]

The reason the executives are looking at AI is because they are having to cut costs anyway. Entertainment in general is in a very rocky spot from a profitability angle. Lots of major game companies have been delivering flop after flop. Same for cinema. Online blogs have lost most of their ad revenue and that has hit KZbin to a large extent as well. Executives turning to AI isn't a get rich quick scheme it's an "Oh God I hope I can keep this thing solvent" scheme.

[@Bubble-Foam]

This is the main argument against AI imo, the fact that it outright strips bargaining power away from workers, who already are mistreated and undervalued to begin with.

[@deedoubs]

@@Bubble-Foam This is why I see very little to worry about. Companies that try to treat AI like a substitute for real writing are going to meet a rude awakening and go under.

[@NinjaKingAce]

The biggest difference to me, is that AI is replacing the fun jobs

[@weeklystruggle4205]

after stealing the work of the artists whos job youre replacing

[@rasuru_dev]

If you familiarize yourself with the research then you will get that it's not on purpose. It's just the natural course of development to train on the data we have. I bet soon enough, all labor can go. And those of us who will keep doing our thing, will do it not because we have to, but because we want to

[@weeklystruggle4205]

@@rasuru_dev lol

[@rasuru_dev]

@@weeklystruggle4205 Why not? All it takes is a single mild increase in reasoning capabilities. I am sure researchers and companies are going to figure it out

[@rasuru_dev]

@@weeklystruggle4205 Like, I would say most people agree that it will happen eventually. Even before ChatGPT, people said it may happen, maybe in centuries. But now people think it will happen earlier, which makes sense. It's only a matter of time

[@Brickwraith]

This topic is so important to me as someone trying to get a job in Visual Effects right now. It’s terrifying having dreamed about a career in art my whole life only to graduate college and find out that AI might entirely replace my industry in the next 5 years.

[@weeklystruggle4205]

please keep making art. dont let this destroy your passion!

[@Fralexion]

Machine-learning algorithms are kind of at a point of diminishing returns. Even with the whole of the internet to train on, they can't advance much further without way more training data, and the more garbage they slop onto the web, the more inbred the algorithms get as they train on their own outputs. It's not sustainable.

[@weeklystruggle4205]

@@Fralexion I honestly cant wait to see AI being trained on itself and totally become inbred!

[@kristalgic1534]

You don't need to ask a goron what rocks taste like, just ask a geologist!

[@liriosogno6762]

😂😂😂😂😂😂

[@smolbrendan5978]

ask Jerma, he could probably tell you how a rock tastes

[@hadtomakeachannel]

or just lick a rock 👀

[@omegahaxors9-11]

But a geologist wouldn't have first hand experience of what it's like. Ask Jerma985, he's eaten a smokey granite.

[@benmcreynolds8581]

What's irritating about all of this. Is our advancements stopped BENEFITING people's Life's. It's pretty much the opposite of what motivated us towards advancing our future. We're already seeing a struggle with gaming in general. Now we are adding a whole new level where we might see tons of people lose their jobs, lose their ability to make art, make projects, earn a living, create things.. We shouldn't create these advancements that will take away people's jobs, especially when they are providing zero options for us to choose from, while continuing to insist we find ways to afford the cost of living. It's the opposite of progress. That's what makes it so Dystopian. It's something corporations will love because they see ways of making money with less employees. Great 👍🏻

[@SubjectiveObserver]

And the fans of AI are conflating "anti-inovation" with "anti-corporate-dystopia." These new technologies are amazing, but they won't benefit normal people as long as they are controlled by a few rich people. It's supposed to be a good thing when robots take our jobs, so we are free to enjoy life and create art for fun. But it doesn't work that way if we are still expected to work to survive. If AI becomes advanced enough to take millions of jobs, our entire economy will need to fundamentally change, whether we want it to or not.

[@EnigmaticGentleman]

I don't like to be derogatory, but the hype for AI NPCs is almost solely perpetuated by idiotic investors and people who REALLY need to touch grass.

[@poenpotzu2865]

No your right, the whole AI craze is more a marketing tactic rather than actual progress in technology and application.

[@MoonlinerPictures]

you're not derogatory, you're just not an idiot

[@666slateran666]

You're nuts. It's neat technology that responds to specific things you do. Way to generalize

[@shinyhero306]

Suddenly, it’s obvious that this shit is perpetuated by investors! WHAT DID WE LEARN FROM NFTS!? WELCOME TO THE AGE OF NOT IDIOTS

[@Oliver-ef2vf]

@@Jeanssj98 I’ll take bad writing from a human over good writing from an AI any day

[@captainjet-pack]

Imagine tricking an AI NPC into saying something way out of character. That for me would be 20x less immersive than the NPC only having 2 dialogue options.

[@nephatrine]

If you're having to "trick" it then aren't you going out of your way to make it unimmersive? Like if you're just asking normal things in-character it's very different then asking random oddball things specifically to break the ai.

[@captainjet-pack]

@@nephatrine I guess that’s fair but I’ve messed around with chatGTP before and it’s not that hard to get it confused. There is the argument that “the technology will get better with time” but I personally don’t think it could ever get better than an actual writer so why even mess with AI.

[@Yamartim]

@@nephatrine the thing is that's completely unpredictable, you could totally say something that makes sense to you but the developers didn't account for when testing the npc and it could break apart instantly

[@BadMelody.]

@@captainjet-pack With near limitless access to stories, themes, human history, scientific discoveries, real world events, media ratings and reviews, and everything else that can be found online, I have a felling that there will be a time where AI has the potential to be better than like 90% of writers.

[@tyldrthepark64]

@@BadMelody.All the ai is doing is taking from competent writers to do so, it’d be the most bland and normal writer on the planet, it wouldn’t be able to innovate or do anything new, just pull from existing content. I personally think that sounds boring as hell and indescribably lame. Ai should be a tool and that’s about all it should be.

[@shinyguru]

Actual artist here for about a decade doing it for a living from home. It's really easy to be excited and pro-Ai when it doesn't effect you. But change that to "Well why would want to watch an arlo video when you can just watch this Ai Arlo instead? You wouldn't even know the difference!" When thinking about Ai do your best to be unbias and think about how you would feel if affected you. It's broadly why issues like starvation and death in far away places, while bad and we wish they'd get better, we are sort of unaffected and don't care too much. But we would care if it was happening on our doorstep. Progress and new tech isn't always = better. Look at plastic as an example. And now we're struggling to reverse its damage. Ai will be just the same and despite all the warnings we gave, pinheads will still spout "How could we have known that flooding our art world with mindless robot goop was bad?" Ridiculous.

[@gingkobud5502]

I think the fact there is currently only one notable example is one game in the comments showcases an inherent limitation. When VR came onto the scene, there were more than a few people already developing for it and seeing the potential. “AI” has that; however, in the creative scene, its potential is currently being sold as a replacement rather than a support/aid (not entirely, but most conversation around it always gets brought back to it). So imagine trying to sell something to a crowd with the tagline “It'll take your job!” doesn't really create hype with the right people. It creates hype with very corporate types who could care less about creativity beyond cash. I think for this to flourish rather than become stale truly, it needs to be (to sound like a communist) controlled less by giant corporations and actually by the people. Truly though I hope the worst doesn't come to pass and all this is just growing pains to something great.

[@gingkobud5502]

Also, because I know about “AI” enough, I don't think people realize how many jobs it can replace are nearly endless. Like I've seen people say, “Oh well, the trades are safe,” like any job with predictable patterns, etc, are up for grabs. This isn't even doom-saying. The only reason why the art sphere is first is because it doesn't require physical robots to work. Without regulations, it's not a matter of if, but when. This is why regulation will probably be the most important thing in the coming years to prevent a future where everyone is quite literally replaceable.

[@Octal_Covers]

I'm a programmer. I don't like programming with AI. Not just because of the moral standing with it. Programming for me is about solving problems, and about learning. AI takes that away, because it does all the work. You can't solve problems or learn if someone else tells you what to do, and those are what makes a technical skill fun. Sure, AI will most likely take programming in the corporate space, but there will always be humans programming, as much as there will always be humans doing art. It's part of our nature to be creative, we will always be creative.

[@deedoubs]

Different programmers want to work on different challenges. I don't particularly love working with AI because it's an inscrutable black box myself.

[@rasuru_dev]

Sometimes I love being creative with programming. I will put AI away. Other times I have a larger creative goal and programming can become more of a means rather than an end. In that case AI's help is very nice. See it no different from using a third party library. So basically good for offloading tasks that don't interest me

[@Octal_Covers]

@@rasuru_dev that's a valid point tbh. I prefer to have a lot of control over my code so I don't end up using many libraries. It's part of the reason I'm making my own game engine for my game instead of using a premade one.

[@rasuru_dev]

@@Octal_Covers Based

[@loganbarksdale8300]

THANK YOU! At my college they've recently changed our CSE program to be centered on learning to use AI tools. Most of my classmates in my Python class barely even know what a function is, let alone how to implement one without just copy-pasting from chatgpt. This method of "learning" is infuriating because it's not making us better at programming, it's just making us more dependant on the AI and killing any desire to actually learn a creative skill. I wish more people had your mindset instead of the 'adapt or die' rhetoric we're being fed.

[@tanto64]

The only kind of A.I. I would want in video games are the same kind that have always been there since the beginning: CPU opponents, enemies, and moving stage parts.

[@YoshiMario69]

16:00 OMG Thank you Arlo, you are an artist yourself I knew you would understand what art means and why it´s just an oxymoron to consider the possibility or the desire for machine´s visual productions to be included in what the human movement of Art has been. It´s a whole other thing, that didn´t exist before, but the moment the person ceases to touch it, it´s no longer a human product, so why put it anywhere near the pedestal that belongs to human triumph?

[@lasercraft32]

I thought robots were supposed to take over the jobs that require physical labor, not take jobs that require creativity and art. :(

[@mogalixir]

AI might let someone with a CS degree express themselves in art. Oh no! Stop that nerd!

[@jasond.b-w]

AI is intended to take over any job that requires a human being to be hired and paid, plain and simple.

[@BigRoyBad]

​@@mogalixirActually it won't, since they will never create art with AI.

[@mogalixir]

Yep. Buttmad artists.

[@logicalfundy]

That's what I've heard too - that all of our technology was supposed to take over the mundane, the things people don't like to do. Now it's taking over things people actually like doing. One of our local stores has a cashier that likes to draw stuff in his free time, and he's pretty good at it. His chances of getting a job when he graduates is dropping like a stone.

[@inorganicphosphate9755]

I saw the chatgpt 4o or whatever it's called demo, honestly I want that in games. In like 20 years putting on a VR headset interacting with NPCs when they're almost life like is what I would want.

[@Yeags]

I feel like you can already see the negative effects on game design with something like Starfield’s procedurally generated planets

[@bendonatier]

I think a big part of the problem is trying to parse out what "ai" is, because there are several different technologies at play here that are worth considering, even if they all fall under the umbrella of "generative artificial intelligence". The audio component which is being used to voice these npcs is perhaps the greyest of areas, since if it is required if you're going to voice these interactions, but publishers would love nothing more than to replace all non major characters with bots, and just say "we wouldn't have paid a va for this anyway, it's fine. The art component, the visuals, are another issue. I see it as largely a net negative, a spring board at best, but even then it should always be disclosed, and if we give them an inch the developers will take a mile. Finally you have what the demo you covered is doing which is just a very advanced npc controller, and I think that's a great thing for an immersive sim. For gameplay purposes this is still just as tweaked and fine tuned as anything else, the artists making it are still 100% in control, and no one is loosing their job for it's implementation. For games that have to be living worlds as open ended puzzle boxes, this is the next step. The problem with the Ai conversation is that it isn't one issue it's thousands, all at once, being presented as a singular mass.

[@Dreamuchuu]

You can't unconvice me that the reason these AAA gaming companies are SO interested in AI NPCs is so they can cash in on Larians success to make their own corpratized versions of what BG3 accomplished with their massive world of complex NPCs and multiple romanceable companions without having to put in the heart or hardwork (or time and employees) that went into making BG3 so special to players in the firstplace.

[@supremeoverlorde2109]

As someone who's under 30, I hate to come across as someone just stuck in the past and afraid of progress, but... yeah. I'm genuinely scared of AI. And I think when it comes to art in particular, the reason I find it so objectionable is because, unlike with a lot of other jobs and tasks that have been made easier with new technology, most people who create art and go into artistic jobs do it because they're passionate about it. Because it's something they genuinely care about. A person is absolutely living the dream if they end up managing to make their passion into a career. The idea that companies will be able to, and likely WILL take that away from people in favor of cheaper alternatives sounds like a dystopian nightmare to me. The ability to create art and use our experiences to interpret it is a fundamental part of what makes us human. But AI is only getting more advanced, and I fear what will happen once we stop being able to tell what's real and what's not. I fear that companies will slowly edge it in while booting artists out over time, and eventually society will get complacent and stop caring. And art we consume will stop being an expression of the human heart and instead nothing more than a shadow of it copied by corporations to make themselves richer.

[@dragonicbladex7574]

I can't help but think like, was there really nobody passionate about those other jobs? There had to have been at least a few

[@supremeoverlorde2109]

@@dragonicbladex7574 It wasn't my intention to suggest there aren't plenty of other jobs people can be passionate about. My mother, for instance, was very passionate about photography as a young adult, but eventually most of the studios closed down because people don't have to pay for professional pictures anymore. And that's very sad, admittedly. What I meant was simply that more often than not, people go into art because they are passionate about it. Art isn't the kind of profession one typically gets into just to pay the bills like many (not all) other jobs out there. For that matter, art is typically not something essential to survival, but people do it because they want to. And I find the idea of that being taken away or diminished in any way tragic. More importantly, though, I just think art is, as I mentioned, an important expression of the human heart. It's one of the ways we communicate, share ideas, and inspire each other. I think the idea of that being pushed out of our mainstream is really upsetting.

[@weeklystruggle4205]

I love your comment!

[@supremeoverlorde2109]

@@weeklystruggle4205 Thanks. Personally I find the topic a bit distressing, but I'm glad what I said resonated with you. I hope I didn't sound too much like I was diminishing or making light of other jobs that have been replaced or changed by new tech. Art is just an area I feel very strongly about. Many technologies have had some positive uses/impacts, like making certain jobs easier and even safer. But I have a hard time imagining how we will adapt as a society if AI continues to creep into the artist landscape.

[@HappySuperFace]

@@supremeoverlorde2109 if you're passionate about art then making money off it is secondary. Nobody is stopping you from making and posting free art. Nobody is taking anything away.

[@weeklystruggle4205]

THANK YOU FOR MAKING THIS! Im an artist and they are slowly replacing jobs in the industry. 3D artists get AI as reference and then need to make sense of what they see, its a mess. Amazing 2D artists lose their job because the company feels confident enough that they dont need them. Art directors are not getting anything productive done for months because they just “play around” with AI. Hope people will realize that generative AI is nothing more than an advanced google search.

[@anactualmotherbear]

Hey, it's nice to hear we have the same stance here on AI art. It's a novelty, and should never be treated as anything more than novelty. Do not use AI to make serious art or stories.

[@BillNyeTheBountyGuy]

We're in the 'Napster' era of AI, we won't see how it really shakes out until we start setting some real legal precedent. Not to mention, AI has given us the real definition of art at long last, art REQUIRES intentionality, a machine has no intentionality.

[@weeklystruggle4205]

good thing is lawsuits are already happening

[@Danominator]

The thing that kind of sucks about this, Arlo, is that you can't have the memes and trippy visual videos without the megacorporations eventually taking control of the same technology. It's all or nothing with developments like this

[@knuckleheadwestwind3585]

I think that there is a good use for generative ai and that’s in texturing. Texturing is a tedious nightmare, and being able to partially automate the process would either save a lot of time, or allow smaller teams to emulate the graphics of the larger triple A teams. That excited me.

[@henryhere]

I do think the AI NPC idea can be done right, but there's only one example of it. It's an indie game, (i forgot what it's called) where you play as a vampire trying to get people to let you into their homes so you can suck their blood, and honestly it's a really fun concept. Each character has things that they like that you can use to trick them, you can change your outfit to better lie about who you are, and the game just wouldn't be possible without the use of AI. But that's the thing, the AI stuff is the whole game, it's just a short little indie game so it's over before you get bored of the gimmick, and nobody had to lose their job to make it happen. It's not trying to integrate into the rest of a bugger game as part of it

[@cortster12]

Current AIs can't do it well because current AIs are still pretty dumb and limited. Because the tech is in its infancy. For some baffling reason, people seem to talk about current AI as if it's some peak thing, and it'll stagnate or something from here on. It's asinine.

[@rasuru_dev]

@@cortster12 You get it

[@DissociatedWomenIncorporated]

They should make a Star Trek episode about this. The Enterprise comes across a planet where only AI generated “art” that’s programmed to meet “consumer and corporate friendly guidelines” is allowed to be mass-distributed, and the away team meet a sad painter who just wants to be able to show her work to more than her friends and family.

[@mogalixir]

StarTrek literally has a holodeck.

[@DissociatedWomenIncorporated]

@@mogalixir yeah, but the programs are authored by humans. While you _can_ just say “give me a forest” and the computer will give you a pretty decent forest, the programs shown (and their narratives) often have a lot of detail and intricacy that was authored by a human. It’s the difference between using a tool to replace the artist, and using a tool to allow an artist to express themselves more clearly.

[@mogalixir]

It’s equivalent to a human directing an AI with prompt engineering and tweaks which is the AI artist workflow.

[@shcdemolisher]

I think that would be a bit too on the nose.

[@xoxo.pochacco]

​@@mogalixir There is no such thing as an ai "artist".

[@HedgehogY2K]

Oh my gosh, I never thought of AI as a ship of theseus kind of thing. Arlo just blew my mind!

[@DarthLocutus0]

Even the Holodeck, for all its power, still had *actual people* writing the software and (most of) the narrative boundaries of the stories.

[@baosia]

"Delete the wife"

[@mogalixir]

How is what they wrote in the holodeck different than a prompt? It isn’t.

[@JustForGaming_Alt-kf8lz]

@@mogalixir yo dude why are you spending so much time in this comment section on this video replying to so many people in a venomous way? if you like ai, go play with it. you aren't going to change minds by slapfighting like this. all it does is make you angry at people who disagree with you and make people who you're disagreeing with less amicable to your position. you could be doing 100000000000 things right now infinitely more productive than trying to start slapfights here.

[@travisemmanuel]

I also didn't realize Arlo was a fellow Trekkie... would love to see some Trek content on the channel now and then 😄

[@victini1martini971]

@@mogalixirwe get it, you’re an Ubisoft employee, so go somewhere else

[@blackestyang7528]

can we just appreciate how we're using A.I. to snuff out fulfilling careers instead of menial jobs nobody wants to do

[@deedoubs]

Oh relax. Both will happen.

[@HappySuperFace]

Seems pretty gross of you to place more importance on one person's job then another persons. Can you give an example of a "fulfilling career" and a "job nobody wants to do"?

[@Fralexion]

From the perspective of a CEO, paying employees to make things _is_ a menial job no one wants to do.

[@deedoubs]

@@Fralexion Right, that's kind of my point. All work is menial work to someone. When you say "oh but this person is an artist... I care about artists... I thought this technology would just make people I don't care about unemployed" you aren't actually expressing anything of merit.

[@Fralexion]

@@deedoubs generally, when I see the OP's sentiment expressed, it's coupled with the notion of reaching a point of technological advancement that makes it feasible to institute some sort of universal basic income so people can focus on doing the jobs they personally find fullfilling while machines handle other work on their behalf, rather than machines being mostly owned by companies to generate excessive profit with fewer employees.

[@smurfjegeren9739]

I dont want AI in games like that. Why should it be more accepted to have it replace the artistry of good writing in games, over books or movie scripts? To replace the feeling of discovery when a player tries something outside of the box, only to discover that the developers thought about it; and rewarded it with a clever joke or something else? Even if an AI would be able to "reward" stuff like that, it wouldnt come from creative thinking or foresight. But an algorithm trying to cover all bases based upon existing data. Keep art artful

[@leilarandall9518]

I refuse to call artificial generated images "art" Calling them "art" implies creativity went into their creation This is not true. They are just artificially generated images

[@mogalixir]

Buttmad

[@Crudely-Drawn-Cupcake]

Agreed. They are images, no more, no less.

[@Crudely-Drawn-Cupcake]

@@mogalixir Lack of skill?

[@lazyful3961]

@@mogalixir this is the second time ive seen you get angry in the comment section about people not liking ai. go educate yourself

[@HappySuperFace]

> Calling them "art" implies creativity went into their creation Says who? Because there sure are a lot of generic, bland, creatively bankrupt pieces of media out there.

[@Katiedid2040]

13:43 I love how that NPC's jacket is a blatant ripoff of Cyberpunk's base bomber jacket design. That's AI, folks!

[@Asaski09]

Fam, I don't think I've ever agreed with a video more. I kept going "Yeah! Plus, what about-" and "Oh, but what about-" and you basically covered it all.

[@JoshTheWoz]

1:01 we got arlo saying steamed hams, let's go

[@wurtknurte7283]

Me: "Hey, what towns are nearby?" NPC, confidentally: "Server error, please try again later."

[@Chronoflation]

What if an artist makes an AI as a part of his art? Honestly, the only difference between present AI and past is that it's now able to be generative and thus create or adapt, not just choose from a list of pre-selected options. Though, that isn't even really necessarily the case. More like it just has astronomically more choices now. The real, most effective way AI will be used is that it'll be used as a creation assistant tool, or a series of them. They'll be used to create base starting points that creators will work off of. All based off of prior works they've seen, not unlike how people learn from reviewing study materials, case studies, and other works. They'll be attempts to use AI to do all the work and mistrained AI cause they'll either over or under curate the materials, building in too much info that they have trouble filtering for correct output or (more likely) have built-in bias, respectively. That's in the short-term. Long-term, AI apocalypse, at which point it doesn't really matter that much

[@beauvoirferril]

AI should be a supplement to human existence, and not a replacement. Advancements in technology naturally diminishes the need for excess labor, and that's fine. But Generative AI (used for commercial purposes) takes *way* more than it gives. This will hurt the economy as it will replace more people than job opportunities will be created, and that's a problem. Not only does using AI to replace artists deprive products of their creativity, the bigger problem is that, in this world, people need jobs *to live.*

[@ChristopherFerguson]

Don't forget the energy/environmental costs. "AI" is essentially computers brute forcing a task until they learn enough to do something kinda right. Instead, they could hire programmers or artists to do something that isn't just artistic, but also efficient and streamlined! Saving time, money, and energy just by not brute forcing a task we already know how to do!

[@videoket]

I think the “art vs product” concept is really important. Yes, people want to make money from games, but most game designers are out to make GAMES. Thank you for saying this.

[@philipmoore9098]

I am seeing a lot of people who don’t differentiate between Generative ai and other ai tools. Ai should do what humans can’t or shouldn’t be bothered with. Using Ai to generate scripts and assets is going to make nothing games that everyone will hate. But games where ai pathfinding and other behaviors are aimed at assisted are harmless and the natural progression of technology. Ai never works without a lot of extra code, trust me I work in a robotics lab. When used on the right thing it’s nothing to fear, when used by a worthless piece of sh*t company to replace their artists with a cheap but inferior alternative it becomes an issue.

[@LoraCoggins]

Perfect use of "for lack of a better word". Literally no words. Just noises. Perfection.

[@robertbensch7748]

The same people who peddle the idea to remove all human interactions from life are the same who think AI will perfectly replace human action in creativity. Silicon Valley autism. No offense to "normal" autism.

[@brunnokamei9623]

"Oh, I can't spend 15 minutes drawing something. But I WILL spend four hours a day trolling people on internet and two hours typing a prompt for Dall-E." - Typical AI Bro mindset.

[@OntheOtherHandVideos]

And should we look down on a photographer who spends 2 hours taking photos of a sunrise, instead of 'spending 15 minutes' to paint it in water color?

[@fishyfishyfishy500akabs8]

@@OntheOtherHandVideos the sunrise was already there.

[@OntheOtherHandVideos]

@@fishyfishyfishy500akabs8 And yet we are not talking about the subject of an artistic expression's existence, we are talking about the merit and validity of various methods and tools one can use to represent and depict said subject. So your comment doesn't really add to the conversation.

[@HyperkalemiaSineWave]

@@OntheOtherHandVideos”AI Art” is argued to be a more “efficient” way of creating visual art, with less effort and better results. It lacks the emotional journey associated with creating art, but it can produce visually striking media nonetheless. However the commenter is suggesting that to actually get worthwhile results, you would need to invest a similar amount of time as actually learning the skill you are trying to imitate. They see this as silly, because unless you’re a very specific type of person this is less intuitive and definitely less gratifying than learning and applying the skill in question.

[@OntheOtherHandVideos]

@@HyperkalemiaSineWave Well of course some tools are 'more efficient' at certain tasks - that's why it's a tool. A hammer is more efficient at pounding in nails than a screw driver, and a screw driver is more efficient at using screw than a hammer is. We've had all sorts of digital tools for ages - cameras and photography aren't seen to "lacks the emotional journey associated with" landscape portrait painting, yet it is still "art" - it's just a tool that is better used for some projects. Every medium and tool has it's own strengths and weaknesses, and every tool that makes art creation easier raises the skill ceiling and make it easier for more people to participate in said art form.

[@IsaacCannonball]

9:54 Kane, whatever you put back there is making me laugh so hard I can't focus on what Arlo is saying

[@lucacarey9366]

My boy Arlo doing a better job covering this issue than 95% of general news providers.

[@uberculex]

I mean, not really? This is mostly an opinion piece.

[@hydrofrog6496]

The human indie videogame scene about to get a huge boost due to 'triple A' spamming out ai slop that saturates the market

[@oaalnkit2508]

Love how you managed to question the topic with such depth while keeping it understandable 👍🏼👍🏼👍🏼

[@LleytonSPD]

2 videos in a row about an AI related topic? Is ARLO AN AI NOW??

[@henryapplebottom7231]

Ai-lo?