People have been talking about Awaken Realms using AI for AGES in the Gamefound comments. People have asked Awaken Realms DIRECTLY about why they are using AI in games like Stalker, Dragon Eclipse, Nemesis new game, etc. and Awaken Realms ignored Every. Single. Comment. I suggest you go through those campaigns and search for those comments before Awaken Realms censors them. That would be a good follow up video with HARD evidence of people showing the exact art they are ripping off using AI
I can save some time there. I specifically asked during both Stalker and Dragon Eclipse. In the Stalker campaign I was answered by AR that no AI art was being used. During Dragon Eclipse they refused to answer and after I asked several times I finally got a response from AR that “they didn’t want to discuss AI in any way since it’s such a hot button issue”. I’d wager that Dragon Eclipse is where they started using AI art and trying to hide it. I work as a professional artist and am pretty anti-AI art (though I do think it can have positive implementation during things like prototypes and if training sets can be legitimatized I think that solves a lot of issues). At the VERY least though I think not wanting to disclose its use is incredibly scummy. Consumers absolutely have a right to know what they are buying and supporting with their money.
If the final product cost don't lower it doesn't make sense because if it's cheaper and faster because you don't need to pay an artist it should make the game cheaper, so don't increase your profit margin. I am not talking specifically about this game but in general.
100% agree. The only reason they are doing this is to maximise their bottom line and profits and they wont past any of this onto the consumer. The consumer will continue to bear the risk too.
The only way to “complain” is to not buy the product if you don’t feel it’s up to snuff or don’t want to support AI. No way will these companies reduce prices. This is all 100% about these companies increasing profits/revenue.
I've been backing many AR games and was looking forward to these new announcements. I'm generally okay using AI art as long as it was noted to the consumer that they are leveraging the AI technology. However, what upsets me in AR case is that they have specifically advertised the game as "human artist made" and yet the cover art was full of AI art that wasnt even done with the final touch of human. I feel cheated that they are not open about it and basically lying. Wouldnt they have had a single thought that consumers would catch it? Definitely not a good business practice when you start lying and hiding things from your supporters (or investors of their games via funding). Also it is a shame that they didnt come out clean and clarifying the situation ever since this AI suspicion started from Dragon Eclipse. I'm not backing their games anymore : (. Let me know your thoughts!
I think we are getting to the point where any modern company not using AI would be equivalent to not using the wheel or electricity. However, responsible use and open discussion of how it is used is a must. Always remember that if you are advocating for AI to replace somebody's job, at some point AI will be used to replace your job.
Using AI should, by all means, lower cost and time needed to produce these games. I would hope that they would pass these savings on to the people who are bearing all the risk - the actual consumers who purchase the product. But I doubt it. This is all for more profits.
I have no problem with companies using AI to create, so long as it's properly conveyed to the consumer they're paying for a product that is at least partially AI created. IMO, this needs to be regulated. AI creations need to be branded in some manner - there needs to be a disclaimer. Then, a consumer can make a choice, which should be a right for everyone to make. Hiding the use of AI - AR won't answer questions regarding this as part of their Dragon Eclipse campaign - is damaging. I love AR. But if I find out they're hiding this from consumers, I'll be cancelling my pledge(s) and not backing anything else they make until they start letting me (the consumer) know if AI was used or not.
I am a fan of awaken realms, I have a few of their games but if they use Ai art I might just ignore their products. There are just so many board games and so little time. Not getting a game because it uses Ai is a good way to sift through the mountain of options. I'm not going to pay someone 400 plus dollars for a board game made with Ai. I got into this hobby because of the human passion behind it.
This is a non issue for me at THIS STAGE. It’s a pre launch for the campaign. IF the actual campaign was up and running with what is expected to be finalised art and vision for the game that’s a completely seperate thing. AI art is forever going to be a thing, it’s all about using it properly and making it your own and not just spitting out an image without personalising it
since the stalker trailer they have been heavily using AI. the stalker illus were full of midjourney artifacts, dragon eclipse had these spell cards and many of the settlement illus AI started. and probably many more (those are just the obvious ones). and nemesis retaliation had the isometric perspective rooms looking suspiciously how Open AI makes them look if you prompt for 'looking down at', 'isometric perspective shot of', 'birds eye view of' etc. also the stretchgoal box cover looks very AI generated (nonsensical detail masses give it away). youd probably find many more backgrounds, card illus, monster sketches etc AI generated if you start looking..
@@zenster1097I post time lapse videos to instagram from time to time as reels. That would certainly demonstrate “not made by AI”. Plus streaming as well as traditional media all demonstrate actual craft.
I'm not seeing an issue here to be honest. Trust - I am not aware they ever have said that they will not use AI, so the trust in that matter could not be broken, only someone's expectations were not met. Use of AI itself, it is another tool we have on our disposal and we should use it. If not allowing AI, why allow for example Photoshop, which uses functions using AI for image processing for years? Why stop at picture processing apps? Let's stop using computers at all. Let's draw or paint pictures by hand only. It's just new tool, which makes art creation cheaper, which in the end will benefit all of us. You will always be able to pay extra for human art, same way you pay extra now for handmade items rather than mass produced. The only issue I see here, and that's a big one, is someone's negligence when creating and approving the picture. It was a bad art with defects (different tool, different defects), but I would be equally disappointed if a human draw a bad quality picture. If someone likes AI art or not really depends on the taste, personally, I still prefer art create "by hand" than using AI, but the difference is smaller and smaller.
I agree. Companies usually do not disclose any of their art processes or development processes. I do not care if AI is used. I think there are creative limitations of AI where a human touch can help, but am not one to challenge people for its use like any other tool available to them. I like designing games and creating characters but I suck at art. If I spend time fine tuning an AI algorithm to create the image and evoke certain ideas that I envision, I do not think you should be punished for working within your skills and tool kit.
Making something by hand or by computer doesn't destroy job or image processing still relies on an artist to exist and make it. But an AI creating art literally replaces artists in its entirety where an entire image is created. This is a false equivalency. Let's not pretend this won't have an impact on people livelihoods.
@@zenster1097that is incorrect. The situations described by the OP are 1 for 1. Using AI still creates jobs, someone maintains the AI and underlying infrastructure and someone has to provide the input for the AI in the form of queries. The person building the queries is equivalent to someone putting the raw materials into the machine that stamps art on them. This is increasing efficiency which allows for more art to be produced cheaply in the same way machines manufacture more efficiently, in either case though the need for human labor didn't stop but the jobs changed.
I personally don't like AI stuff, a company could potentially just bang out a bunch of AI, insert some rules and base the lore around the AI art, its very disingenuous and lazy and hurts human artists, I have taken a big step back from considering to back this game.
If they are using AI that they trained on images from their own in house artists, I'm much more open to it. When companies use AI that was trained on stolen artwork where artists were never compensated, that's a hell no. However, that they are using it, and how they're using it should ABSOLUTELY be mentioned in every project.
I have no problem with companies using AI to create, so long as it's properly conveyed to the consumer they're paying for a product that is at least partially AI created. IMO, this needs to be regulated. AI creations need to be branded in some manner - there needs to be a disclaimer. Then, a consumer can make a choice, which should be a right for everyone to make. Hiding the use of AI - AR won't answer questions regarding this as part of their Dragon Eclipse campaign - is damaging. I love AR. But if I find out they're hiding this from consumers, I'll be cancelling my pledge(s) and not backing anything else they make until they start letting me (the consumer) know if AI was used or not.
I think this was a missed topic that could've been more intellectually stimulating than just to talk about gamefound "doing something"- the topic of luddism. The impact on artists as a field with this rising technology and their job security anxiety (rightfully so). And their pushback on it. But on the flip side, the ability to reduce costs to produce a game and allow more people the ability to make games. And where do artists stand in this evolving industry? Do they have a place? And if artists will die out in a serious professional way along with artisan passion that comes with creating truly original art with human passion, to the soulless machine of AI generation of command prompt, crushes everything in its wake, used by people who would effectively destroy jobs of others? Or is this a liberating technology that allows everyone to try their unskilled hand in creating dreams and wonders, which doesn't destroy the artist occupation, but rather democratizes it? Such a thing allows new possibly new genres and ideas not thought of? And such a development shouldn't be feared but embraced? This is where class and technology clashes. Something that never has gone away but has come back time and time again in new forms, as often in history. Starting with the Luddites of the last 19th century Britain, who rebelled against textile machines that were replacing their jobs, and spurred them into smashing such machines and attacking those who brought them.
I don't care about a company being able to reduce costs unless that reduction is reflected in their prices. The thing is, without regulation around this - without the company having to add a disclaimer that so-and-so was created using AI - they can hide the fact, reduce their costs, but not reduce their consumer-facing pricing. You would EXPECT a cost reduction in making X game would result in the consumer paying less. I have no faith whatsoever companies will actually do that.
as i posted in BGG before being moderated by the Gestapo over there, this is a done thing. its happening. it works, its cheap, its time efficient. in 5 years this wont even be a discussion. there is no stopping it. if it makes one decent sized company money, the rest will follow. its how markets work. - making tech resemble nature so closely that you dont notice is always the goal. eventually you wont notice. it wont matter. it will sell.
@@stevenharris6161 Is that the only appreciable metric? What about if the games don't get more expensive? What about if you get 300 unique art assets instead of 75? What if you get higher quality casts? There's lots of ways that money can be allocated, and sadly, in the current market the vast majority of backers seem to want bigger instead of cheaper.
@@krahnjp Prices of board games are going up already and everyone knows it’s harder to find a good deal on crowdfunding anymore. The backer is already paying for this, for every aspect of shipping and also bearing all the risk. Have AR been transparent about their AI use? Hardly, they have decided not to address it and to ignore any fanfare about it. Stop defending these big businesses that only care about one thing: profit.
Do they need to be transparent? Are they transparent in what other tools their artists use? And yeah. that's basically what I said. Consumers don't want cheaper, they want bigger. AI is pretty much inevitable given the demand for both size and number of releases. The solution is easy, don't buy their products. If enough people care about it, and don't buy their products it will reshape the market. But, if as I suspect, the vast majority could care less, than they will break more sales records, and things will continue exactly the way they have been going.
I love AR games. Now that I know they are using AI I will not be backing them. Which on the bright side will save me money. Probably spent more on AR than any other company.
If they are going to use AI and then just touch it up then they need to be reducing their costs of the products they sell that they've done that with. If the main portion of the art is done by a machine we shouldn't be paying the full costs that get passed along to artists as part of the product. We are already getting price-gouged by the board game industry there needs to be a cut back in price somewhere.
Hah! Bloodborne holds a special place in my heart, and I tie it closely not just with witch hunter style wardrobe, but the HP Lovecraft twist it has on everything and I didn't see that here so much. At least not yet!
Thank you for this video. As a board game artist I completely agree with you that AI can be a useful tool (although I do not use it). But there are still many problems around it, the compensation for artists whose work was used for training for once. But ethically used AI can be a great tool in the future. Of course I appreciate a lot that you, and many others I am sure, value the human touch. I don't know how the future with AI will be like (for me) but I think we have to try to be ethical consumers in all parts of life. And as you said, AI can not only replace artists and writers but nearly all human work, inventing games. And of course 'prompting'' are part of these replaceable work fields.
It’s a double edged sword. Creation of art will become much easier which might mean better board games and cheaper board games. However, I’m sure you can or will soon be able to type into a computer……”Make art, 50% Vincent Dutrait and 50% Andrew Bosley” and voila…..it will copy their art style. This seems very unfair for an artist to spend years crafting their style only to have some A.I. “steal” their style. I’m not sure there is a law against mimicing someone’s style but this is where we are headed. I have already heard songs made by A.I. that sounded exactly like the original artist.
Did you actually leave your channel logo on the white wall behind you? That would be true art and definitely a great surprise for the owner after you. 👑❤️🔥😄🤙
Those touchups would have taken 3 minutes. If they didn't run it through touchups before publishing, what other corners are they cutting??? These are lazy campaigns and I'm worried about the future of AR. Gamefound should have projects disclose AI like kickstarter does.
I’m ok with AI art as long as it’s not being passed off as man made. And even if someone tried to pass off as man made when it’s not, my issue would be around deception and what else is the company lying about. But not about AI art itself.
As long as they pay their sources, I don’t mind AI. But if they use AI in all their art; I’m expecting the price of the game to half. This is only fair since IF they are cutting costs on art, the price of the product should mirror
In my opinion, AI and Art are opposites. AI is too smooth, not lively enough, just absolutely artificial. Something like this becomes boring for the eyes and the brain after a short time. AI is certainly okay for initial concepts, but not suitable for final processes and certainly not for final art work. As I said: my opinion 😉✌️
Did you reach out to AR for comment. Is this an AI thing or an Artist's comp sketch being put up whilst they wait on the finished pre-launch imagery? And if it is AI, they wouldn't just do the cover, everything on that page would be AI, but go you for using click bait.
Has AR ever said they would not use AI? If not than there's no trust issue here. If we assume something but it was never stated that does not make it a betrayal. I'm asking a genuine question as I don't recall AR saying they would not use it but I might have missed that.
The key problem with AI generated images is the lingering copyright problems. Not the plagiarism claims, but the Naruto v. Slater decision from the 9th Circuit that sets a baseline for non-human generated copyright claims. Bigger publishers have already sworn off AI for this very reason.
It seems they got a little sloppy and cut corners and got caught. Lesson learned. I don’t think these game developers are going to all of a sudden stop using AI art if it means they can cut a few corners here and there and save some expenses. I don’t personally mind AI art as way to get some mock ups or explore an idea you may have. I think it could go along way in giving artist directions on what kind of art and theme you want to go. Ultimately, I would like to see artist being in charge of the final production, but that may be wishful thinking.
That's the theory I've seen and i can see it being accurate. Maybe even some during the campaign until it funds, then while finishing development they finish the art. They are so well known for their artwork, I can't see them throwing that reputation away given the climate around AI art.
You are telling me AR doesn't have the resources to get an artist to draw something up for a pre-launch page? After this it will be "but it's just the KS page it's not the actual game art". It was never an issue to have art beforehand, I can guarantee you they did it to test the waters and see how people react.
@@bassmeo3937 You may not be aware, but they announced/launched the pages for all of their 2024 projects on Gamefound on the same day, so yes, I believe they may have been stretched thin.
The internet should have been banned in the 90’s as it destroyed the encyclopaedia industry and libraries. The pc should have been banned in the 80’s as it destroyed jobs in accounting and productivity. The cloud should be banned as it destroyed traditional it jobs ……. Don’t call for bans on things ….. for every innovative change a whole new set of opportunities come along with them. Being a Luddite is never the option
@@NeilY1000 I don't use luddism as a pejorative. There is cases I believe it's valuable. Autonomous driving for instance, the danger is too high and yield safety concerns that cannot account for every situation. Mind you, you have to factor in how many jobs would be lost and people would have no job to feed themselves or their families is not something to be brushed over. After all, the Luddites would burn factories, kill assassinate factory owners, terrorize. It became so bad the government established martial law and even enacted the death penalty for those engaging in it. So the upheaval of millions of people who make driving a living would be a serious issue. In other cases, like giga casting for car parts to reduce price and accelerate production of ev cars means I'm against luddism. Because climate change takes precedence. And the amount of jobs destroyed would be a lot less.
I have no issue with AI used in any digital or physical media, as long it is disclosed. It would be preferable if established companies who can afford the awesome art of experienced artists did so. If they don't, it will not deter me from purchasing their products it is something that will somewhat sour the experience. However, if a game uses 100% AI art, then I might consider not buying. I love art, especially fantasy, and I enjoy exploring the artist pages on artstation and deviantart so I feel it would be a shame if aspiring artists start feeling they don't have a place in the gaming industry.
HEY! did you see they have some dice set out that’s also using a bunch of AI art? I saw that and immediately came to your channel to see if you were talking about it :P th-cam.com/users/shorts0IjqzD6Mvt8?si=_V9D366F-WKAEyIx
No one cares AI art I don't even know why we're talking about it ffs. This just reminds of artisans being mad when they slowly got replaced when we started using machines to do clothes ...
Personally, when I care about human art, I want physical media, oil paints, pastels, pencil, acrylics, etc. Digital art is all about shortcuts, AI is just another shortcut. How many or few a given artist uses is pretty hard for the end user to tell, in most cases. The problem here, for me has nothing to do with AI. It was that the artist looked at it, and said "Yeah, that's good enough." Although I see some of the things different from you, for example, I don't see a short bow. To me it looks like a recurve, curling across his back and down his left thigh. But I think part of that is the shadows, and where you happen to have crossed it with the white circle. But I could see an artist seeing the same thing on a quick once over. But it should be given more than a quick once over before being released in the wild.
Isn't there going to be a copyright issue for the companies that start heavy using AI generated content? As in you can't copyright the base content that the AI generated, just the minor touch-ups?
I don’t think you can even copyright the touch ups unless you change the overall picture enough to be considered a new piece of art. Which is a pretty substantial amount of change.
i'm a bit mixed on this : IA is a tool and should be used as such, glad their fantastic artists worked on visuals. what is important to know is : What kind of IA did they use : Midjourney is fa past these "artefacts" problems, and i dare say "hands" problems aswell. IF it is an IA trained over THEIR work. i'm very fine for them using it as resource to increase their creative assets
I agree, I think "was it made by a human" is going to be something people look for. And that gives me hope as a consumer, as an artist, and as an aspiring game designer. I've used AI in the place of a mood board, the same way I use colour swatches and postcards and pics from artists with interesting techniques. I personally wouldn't trust AI-generated pieces (how close are they to whatever they're sampling from?); and the anatomy is often wonky in more subtle ways than a missing foot or eighteen fingers, so they're both a terrible way for a new artist to learn and a slippery way for an experienced artist to let weird mistakes creep in. That said, I'm not going to fuss about dagger number-whatever out of a boatload being AI generated, as long as some sort of art director is reviewing it and making sure it works for the project.
As long as it doesnt look like the typical lazy AI gibberish and they actually touch it up and make it look cool and logical, I dont mind how much they use. Obvisouly I much prefer real art created by humans but at the same time as long it looks cool and plays great, thats all I care about. Some people get really butt hurt on AI art used in games which I dont understand tbh.
I think some people that don't understand the "issue" with AI art, aren't artists. I gave up on making art for a living a long time ago, but certainly anyone that aspires to that is genuinely threatened by computers that can generate endless art with little to no cost or time. You're right that there is still an artist that has to fix the art generated, but for how long? Also, it's a little like calling me a chef because I put frozen lasagna in the oven =D
@@AtzaltlCoatl I understand that 100% and I know that it is rough on the real artists out there. But the harsh reality is that AI art works and it's always getting better. Now, I don't think anyone thinks that AI art is better than "real" art and I don't think that will ever change. But for creators and developers that don't have the resources to use real art, AI art is a god send.
Cause AI is being used as a shortcut to replace artists. Studios would rather have a computer do the work then spend the money on artists. I can see AI being a tool help artists but studios would rather replace the artist all together to save money.
Imo if you use ai art use it for fillers in a rule book or as part of the process in the art books etc. But main box and expansions should always be hand drawn because that's where the uniqueness comes from in games etc. People won't notice as much using it in smaller items
Honestly, this is all promo stuff for campaigns that aren't even launched yet or being delivered. This big stink about AI art is rather ridiculous to me. You cannot sit there, as an artist and tell me you didn't steal techniques or idea from others, that you didn't learn from what other people have done in the past and made it into your style or even copied the style; looking at all the Anime art people make. There is a distinct difference between using AI to steal thing, like facial images and actor voices, and using an AI tool trained on art, just like every artist that has ever existed, to enhance your art or get a concept out. If you don't like or want AI art, then I guess you aren't backing games considering most of them are probably using is to some degree.
I've always thought most things in Tainted Grail looks like AI art, and it's always been something I disliked about it. I am not arguing against the use of AI art morally. My issue with it is that it feels undefined without a cohesive picture and art direction. This means all the art does not really work together to tell a story. It just gives a general feeling and loose style, without an art narrative.
I can see that being a thing. Currently you can train AI in a certain way, for instance you can train it to make art of you as a person when you give it your name, but nothing as robust (yet) as keeping a consistent new theme/vision.
Honestly who actually cares?? Ai art works and is great. Just make sure the image is clean and represents what you want it too. If you don’t want to support it don’t, but if it moves production along faster and represents what they want, use it! How dare Ford use an assembly line. How dare companies find cheaper ways to become more efficient and get the product out. I am pretty sure people would rather have a game sooner than wait an extra 2 months for art to be made.
I'm strongly against AI art, and will not buy it if i can see it's AI made (of course with the advance of the technology, it will be harder and harder to spot it, but until i can't, i will always try to be selective). Call me old fashioned or romantic, but this is not like a dishwashing machine, where you save time to do other stuff, art as a whole is a celebration of life, and i can't understand how people accept this souless amalgamation of stolen art (and don't come near me with this photoshop argument, it's completely different). Miyazaki said it better, AI art is an insult to life itself...
As you said, it's a bit jumping the gun without knowing the backstory, for all we know it's a model trained on art made by their in-house artists to help out with "prototyping" (for lack of a better word.) their art and/or increasing productivity for them to not have to hire more artists if they want to increase the amount of products they want to deliver on across the year(s). That being said I work in IT and we use AI almost daily nowadays, generally speaking generated code needs a ton of touch-ups if you let it be generated by an AI but that will change. Either people don't realize it (yet) or they don't want to realize/accept it, but a decent amount of people have already accepted that this will most likely be the future when it comes to this sort of stuff. I feel that people in IT have just accepted this as an inevitability while a lot of artists just haven't or don't want to accept it. Yes, people can decide for themselves once we get stuff labeled with "100% Human made" or "AI assisted", but I don't think that will change much. It's not like when the supermarket started to introduce self service registers that a lot of people started to run the streets saying "the poor cashiers jobs!". This will be a lot bigger scale though so we'll just have to wait and see. Only the future will tell.
I’m so fucking stoked with my glasses and laying out while we do this shit to ourselves. I o ly wish I had kids, if only they could look back and say, the Dude had it sooo good
I personally don’t feel a need to use AI in my creative writing. However, if an artist wants to use AI as part of the creative process, but the finished process is carefully planned and edited by the artist then that’s fine. AI is just a tool in this case. what awaken realms is doing is quite reasonable.
AI Art? Big nothing burger in my book. Technology marches forward in everything. It's like saying your not going to drive a car because you would be putting carriage drivers out of business.
What's most important to me is that the art design and direction is clear, captivating, and cohesive. It all makes sense in the world they exist in. If the art is on fire and collectively it creates a beautiful, captivating, believable world, I don't even really care if the art is AI Art. I do expect the art to be clean though. Even if the art design is rough and more abstract, I would still expect it to not have random AI derived artifacts. But yea, if the art is fire, I don't think I really care too much.
For me personally there is no "AI conversation". It's a: No! Plain and simple. Graphic design is a job and people need to get paid for that, period. I've backed out of pledges instantly when I found out AI was used.
@@TheKingofAverage In general? Good question. If they go about it like this: then no. I have feelings about how the big game producers handle things anyway, so the AI thing makes it even harde for me to want to give my money to them. It's a principle thing for me.
I believe I can shed light on concerns surrounding the use of this technology. As a Software Developer, I regularly utilize Copilot, an AI assistant. However, does this imply that I am not a programmer without AI? Does it suggest that my work is inferior or solely attributable to AI? Absolutely not. AI serves to handle the more repetitive tasks, freeing me to concentrate on problem-solving. It grants me more time to devise and optimize solutions instead of laboriously coding everything myself. Similarly, artists can speed up their work processes, concentrating on the final design rather than spending hours crafting every detail. Just as no one feels compelled to disclose that their software was developed with AI assistance, I do not believe it is necessary for AW to emphasize such aspects. We interact with AI-powered features daily, such as those found on TH-cam, without giving it a second thought.
Why stop there, we should question everything. Think about walking into a building, was it designed by a human or AI? Where the pre assembled welded joints done by humans or AI driven robotics? Or maybe your car, Was the frame or safety features designed by humans or AI? We already know a lot of the welding on a car is robotic. There's a lot more than board game art to worry about, AI board game art will not jeopardize your safety in a high rise or automobile. There are many more examples of how AI could be used to cheapen the design of everyday items. And sometimes is, but not always, to our benefit.
So they used AI, who really cares? I don’t. Another pointless video. This channel is becoming more about politics and behind the scenes stuff plus clickbait titles and less about actual games and playing them. Go and watch other channels, yes they actually play games, have them out on the table, not talk about everything going on behind the scenes of publishers and drama. Oh! AI art, oh! Leo got a death threat, oh! this publisher closed now 20 people don’t have a job anymore. My wife has lost jobs, who cares about that? Nobody. One of the reasons I unsubscribed is hearing stuff irrelevant to me. I wanna hear what’s going to spark my interest in a particular game, mechanics, how a game turn is played etc. Show me a game, tell me if it’s any good or not. That’s all I want to know. I don’t care what goes on behind the scenes. And yes I’m here because these videos come up on my feed. I didn’t go looking.
Isnt this AI-assisted art? When AI can save hours or days of an artists time, not to mention giving some inspiration and a starting point, why is this a bad thing? We want less expensive games. Let them use the tools available to speed along the dev time and possibly pass those savings on to the consumers. The art was touched up by a human. This didnt replace their job but modified their job's process...
I could follow this argument if the cost savings actually got passed onto the consumer. But let’s be honest, they are going to charge you even more to follow pricing trends and pocket the savings. This is a moot point.
The argument things become less expensive and passes to consumers is one of the arguments I find least convincing. It rarely passes onto the consumer. The price stays the same. The overhead lowers. That's it.
Most people don't want cheaper, they want bigger. The best way to compete in crowd-funding isn't to pass on the savings, it's to spend the money on making the game a bigger than the competition's. Especially in the circles that are routine AR customers.
If they clean up the art, who cares if they use AI generated art? As long as it looks good, why not use it? I'm sure the price of hiring artists is only going to go up.
Who cares? So what if they use AI art. Caught red handed is a bit of a strong title. Caught using modern tools which will be mainstream from now on maybe?
The main issue is if they are going to use AI art then the price of the games should come down considerably. There are no artists to pay for real art. But most companies will not do that. Games will keep going up while less effort is put in to the game.
For what reason does conversation about AI use matter? 1. If it is about quality of art - art is not final and will probably be perfected before production - as you said AI will eventually get better 2. If it is about the abundance of artist - using an AI still requires workers - AI puts people off business on everywhere so why do we care so much about artist, never heard of anyone complaining about cashiers getting fired / not getting hired because we have self use booths now
Nobody wants to be a cashier though. Nobodies passion is to work at a mcdonalds. But being an artist, writer, or game designer is a passion. I find that using Ai to make our entertainment is just a shame because Ai does not know the human experience and can only mimic it.
I know lots of people that like being a cashier (not at mcdonalds though). Kinda easy going, gets you at least salary to do stuff on your own time and doesn’t stress you out
Also if I were to be an AI artist and was passionate about isn’t the AI work technically product of my passion? If I couldn’t get any jobs because people find AI oppressing for artist wouldn’t we actually find ourselves in a paradox where another persons passion is cancelled
@@peetu734 I was a cashier at one point. Its not the worst job but its not a position someone strives to be in its one you settled for. Its not a dream job. Being a artist is different then giving people their change and telling them to have a nice day. I don't know what the solution is to Ai art but I personally will always seek out things made by humans.
@@peetu734 Sure I think you could be passionate about being an Ai artist but I think it will be hard to find a job for it because anyone can use it. I think its a passion that will be oppressed/canceled out simply because anyone can do it. Why would a company hire you when they can just do it themselves. Ai might not ending up creating many jobs and only taking them away. The thing about Ai is its like a tool that does the work for you with little input from the user. its like a pen that writes by itself.
I've personally met with their artist and they do custom art for influencers fairly often. I can't say for certain of course, but I've seen the early sketches and such at least
The final art based on AI conceptualization - what a great way to take the weight off of an artist. I would imagine creation and then selection of the box art theme was much improved thanks to AI. The alternative used to be forcing an artist to create multiple different concept arts, which seem like a very time consuming process.
I like A.I. art. I" d rather have beautiful art on a game. I do not mind if any part of a game is produced using A.I. art. The cover of the box is also a great place for A.I. art. I'd rather have a.i art than some mediocre art style chosen due to financial and time restrictions.
What I find most likely, they hired an artist to create the artwork, the artist isn't inherently talented and used the easy button to fake their way through the job. We see this in our industry where a developer's only skill is going out to Google to take code someone else has already written. Why? because it is easy. Until someone has some oversight to check the employee, they tend to get by with it. Even then it is difficult to catch. Unless this is an established practice in AR, I have a feeling there are internal reviews going on at the company to find out how it occurred. Maybe that is just my optimism because I like AR, but I see this in every field where you have people faking their way through their job until they get caught. Then it is damage control on the company side and never in the view of the public when it is avoidable.
I think this is a vast overreaction and the video could have been better researched and more nuanced. I totally respect anyone who has a strong anti-AI stance, that's their prerogative and I wouldn't blame them for advocating for transparency laws regarding AI use. Personally, I don't care, AI is a tool and, as any new tool, will cause some Luddite-style concerns when introduced. I am disappointed that this is framed like "people noticed and they went back and fixed the art" when the announcement trailer and AR Next videos, show the "fixed" cover art being used before this was raised as an issue by the community. This is clearly a case of an earlier image being uploaded by mistake. I would also caution from jumping from "it has an unrealistic style" to "it's AI generated". If you have seen a painting by Picasso, you know what I mean. As the last note, I will disagree that using AI in the creation of hundreds of item cards for a final product is better than using it in a prototype picture of a game that is probably two years out from delivery. Isn't the argument allowing the artists to continue making a living?
Everyone uses AI everyday of their lives. It is just a tool we all benefit from in so many ways and have for decades. Just move on with your life. They made some crappy art then fixed it. That is the entire story.
I don’t care if they use AI, unfortunately it’s what the future will be. My main care would s that it is an amazing game that’s fun to play and doesn’t break the bank doing it.
Hmm I gotta say I really like KoA channel, great reviews and detailed unboxings. But I don't like these other type of videos - looking for a sensation like a tabloid... I would rather like this channel to be a professional Board games channel instead.
I disagree. News about important topics in this industry are important. I don't want a channel that just does unboxings and reviews. There's tons of those already.
Like it or not, just like every industrial revolution, AI will drastically dercrease amount of people needed for many jobs we previously believed to be relatively safe, and art is not an exception. Eventually we'll get to the point that there will be no way do determine if any digital art piece was created by actual person and not AI. We can not like it, we might even fight it, but what's the point? 90% of publishers would replace artists in a blink of an eye if they could have one AI assisted person do work of entire departament, it is just inevitable. I work in IT and I see how drastically these tools improved efficiency of my work, it also caused many layoffs in the industry, and I realise my job is not as safe as in the past, but in our economy company will always prioretize profit over their "human resources", we can adapt and get ready for even more sweeping changes, or we can become reactionaries that will end up swept will all people unwilling to go with the spirit of times.
Big deal over nothing…. Why would I buy a game based on one piece of art.. we haven’t paid anything for this game so why should they spend a fortune (as you says art is expensive) throwing something out just to appease those fickle enough to get angry about it? We all know AW produce high quality games with amazing art ( even if AI is used) so why do people question this? What I would say to AW is don’t come out and explain yourself … there is nothing to explain…. Btw I watch all of your videos, but this one sadly was a waste of time.
The video doesn't really explain it well but it's about technology possibly replacing people's jobs and driving people out of the industry (artists). For a lot of people, it's a big deal (least all artists who are making it a big deal because it's their jobs under threat).
Seriously, not one AI-wakened Realms joke in the comments? It's just me? 😅
GJ!
Hah!
People have been talking about Awaken Realms using AI for AGES in the Gamefound comments. People have asked Awaken Realms DIRECTLY about why they are using AI in games like Stalker, Dragon Eclipse, Nemesis new game, etc. and Awaken Realms ignored Every. Single. Comment. I suggest you go through those campaigns and search for those comments before Awaken Realms censors them. That would be a good follow up video with HARD evidence of people showing the exact art they are ripping off using AI
I can save some time there. I specifically asked during both Stalker and Dragon Eclipse. In the Stalker campaign I was answered by AR that no AI art was being used. During Dragon Eclipse they refused to answer and after I asked several times I finally got a response from AR that “they didn’t want to discuss AI in any way since it’s such a hot button issue”.
I’d wager that Dragon Eclipse is where they started using AI art and trying to hide it.
I work as a professional artist and am pretty anti-AI art (though I do think it can have positive implementation during things like prototypes and if training sets can be legitimatized I think that solves a lot of issues). At the VERY least though I think not wanting to disclose its use is incredibly scummy. Consumers absolutely have a right to know what they are buying and supporting with their money.
If the final product cost don't lower it doesn't make sense because if it's cheaper and faster because you don't need to pay an artist it should make the game cheaper, so don't increase your profit margin.
I am not talking specifically about this game but in general.
Lol @ thinking this will make games cheaper. Of course they'll up their profit margin whatever way they can
@@bassmeo3937 the problem is that mentality. If you never complain they will never change even when you know is hard to different.
100% agree. The only reason they are doing this is to maximise their bottom line and profits and they wont past any of this onto the consumer. The consumer will continue to bear the risk too.
The only way to “complain” is to not buy the product if you don’t feel it’s up to snuff or don’t want to support AI. No way will these companies reduce prices. This is all 100% about these companies increasing profits/revenue.
I've been backing many AR games and was looking forward to these new announcements. I'm generally okay using AI art as long as it was noted to the consumer that they are leveraging the AI technology. However, what upsets me in AR case is that they have specifically advertised the game as "human artist made" and yet the cover art was full of AI art that wasnt even done with the final touch of human. I feel cheated that they are not open about it and basically lying. Wouldnt they have had a single thought that consumers would catch it? Definitely not a good business practice when you start lying and hiding things from your supporters (or investors of their games via funding). Also it is a shame that they didnt come out clean and clarifying the situation ever since this AI suspicion started from Dragon Eclipse. I'm not backing their games anymore : (. Let me know your thoughts!
I thought some of the dragon eclipse item cards looked Ai generated.
I think we are getting to the point where any modern company not using AI would be equivalent to not using the wheel or electricity. However, responsible use and open discussion of how it is used is a must. Always remember that if you are advocating for AI to replace somebody's job, at some point AI will be used to replace your job.
Using AI should, by all means, lower cost and time needed to produce these games. I would hope that they would pass these savings on to the people who are bearing all the risk - the actual consumers who purchase the product. But I doubt it. This is all for more profits.
I have no problem with companies using AI to create, so long as it's properly conveyed to the consumer they're paying for a product that is at least partially AI created. IMO, this needs to be regulated. AI creations need to be branded in some manner - there needs to be a disclaimer. Then, a consumer can make a choice, which should be a right for everyone to make. Hiding the use of AI - AR won't answer questions regarding this as part of their Dragon Eclipse campaign - is damaging. I love AR. But if I find out they're hiding this from consumers, I'll be cancelling my pledge(s) and not backing anything else they make until they start letting me (the consumer) know if AI was used or not.
There is no such thing as AI "art". Only AI "images". To call it "art" is an insult to artists. And it is theft
Ah I actually like the distinction! I'm telling ya, "Human Made" we'll be a selling point for most created stuff here within the next decade.
I am a fan of awaken realms, I have a few of their games but if they use Ai art I might just ignore their products. There are just so many board games and so little time. Not getting a game because it uses Ai is a good way to sift through the mountain of options. I'm not going to pay someone 400 plus dollars for a board game made with Ai. I got into this hobby because of the human passion behind it.
This is a non issue for me at THIS STAGE. It’s a pre launch for the campaign. IF the actual campaign was up and running with what is expected to be finalised art and vision for the game that’s a completely seperate thing. AI art is forever going to be a thing, it’s all about using it properly and making it your own and not just spitting out an image without personalising it
Ar dice are allready delivered and one card have dude with 7 fingers.
since the stalker trailer they have been heavily using AI. the stalker illus were full of midjourney artifacts, dragon eclipse had these spell cards and many of the settlement illus AI started. and probably many more (those are just the obvious ones). and nemesis retaliation had the isometric perspective rooms looking suspiciously how Open AI makes them look if you prompt for 'looking down at', 'isometric perspective shot of', 'birds eye view of' etc. also the stretchgoal box cover looks very AI generated (nonsensical detail masses give it away). youd probably find many more backgrounds, card illus, monster sketches etc AI generated if you start looking..
funny, when I saw this cover I thought it looked a lot like an image I generated with Bloodborne lore...
In future 'not AI art' will be luxury.
How would you prove that? Except "trust me bro."
@@zenster1097I post time lapse videos to instagram from time to time as reels. That would certainly demonstrate “not made by AI”. Plus streaming as well as traditional media all demonstrate actual craft.
I'm not seeing an issue here to be honest. Trust - I am not aware they ever have said that they will not use AI, so the trust in that matter could not be broken, only someone's expectations were not met. Use of AI itself, it is another tool we have on our disposal and we should use it. If not allowing AI, why allow for example Photoshop, which uses functions using AI for image processing for years? Why stop at picture processing apps? Let's stop using computers at all. Let's draw or paint pictures by hand only. It's just new tool, which makes art creation cheaper, which in the end will benefit all of us. You will always be able to pay extra for human art, same way you pay extra now for handmade items rather than mass produced. The only issue I see here, and that's a big one, is someone's negligence when creating and approving the picture. It was a bad art with defects (different tool, different defects), but I would be equally disappointed if a human draw a bad quality picture. If someone likes AI art or not really depends on the taste, personally, I still prefer art create "by hand" than using AI, but the difference is smaller and smaller.
I agree. Companies usually do not disclose any of their art processes or development processes. I do not care if AI is used. I think there are creative limitations of AI where a human touch can help, but am not one to challenge people for its use like any other tool available to them. I like designing games and creating characters but I suck at art. If I spend time fine tuning an AI algorithm to create the image and evoke certain ideas that I envision, I do not think you should be punished for working within your skills and tool kit.
1000% agree
Making something by hand or by computer doesn't destroy job or image processing still relies on an artist to exist and make it. But an AI creating art literally replaces artists in its entirety where an entire image is created. This is a false equivalency. Let's not pretend this won't have an impact on people livelihoods.
@@zenster1097that is incorrect. The situations described by the OP are 1 for 1. Using AI still creates jobs, someone maintains the AI and underlying infrastructure and someone has to provide the input for the AI in the form of queries. The person building the queries is equivalent to someone putting the raw materials into the machine that stamps art on them. This is increasing efficiency which allows for more art to be produced cheaply in the same way machines manufacture more efficiently, in either case though the need for human labor didn't stop but the jobs changed.
I personally don't like AI stuff, a company could potentially just bang out a bunch of AI, insert some rules and base the lore around the AI art, its very disingenuous and lazy and hurts human artists, I have taken a big step back from considering to back this game.
If they are using AI that they trained on images from their own in house artists, I'm much more open to it. When companies use AI that was trained on stolen artwork where artists were never compensated, that's a hell no. However, that they are using it, and how they're using it should ABSOLUTELY be mentioned in every project.
Goodness you move a lot. I hope your doing well, moving can be very hard and stressful.
Yeah :( very unplanned but I finally have a job that won't keep me working well into the night
I have no problem with companies using AI to create, so long as it's properly conveyed to the consumer they're paying for a product that is at least partially AI created. IMO, this needs to be regulated. AI creations need to be branded in some manner - there needs to be a disclaimer. Then, a consumer can make a choice, which should be a right for everyone to make. Hiding the use of AI - AR won't answer questions regarding this as part of their Dragon Eclipse campaign - is damaging. I love AR. But if I find out they're hiding this from consumers, I'll be cancelling my pledge(s) and not backing anything else they make until they start letting me (the consumer) know if AI was used or not.
AI art at this stage in the process is a nothingburger to me. It's a few images to show the feel of the game.
I think this was a missed topic that could've been more intellectually stimulating than just to talk about gamefound "doing something"- the topic of luddism. The impact on artists as a field with this rising technology and their job security anxiety (rightfully so). And their pushback on it. But on the flip side, the ability to reduce costs to produce a game and allow more people the ability to make games. And where do artists stand in this evolving industry? Do they have a place? And if artists will die out in a serious professional way along with artisan passion that comes with creating truly original art with human passion, to the soulless machine of AI generation of command prompt, crushes everything in its wake, used by people who would effectively destroy jobs of others? Or is this a liberating technology that allows everyone to try their unskilled hand in creating dreams and wonders, which doesn't destroy the artist occupation, but rather democratizes it? Such a thing allows new possibly new genres and ideas not thought of? And such a development shouldn't be feared but embraced? This is where class and technology clashes. Something that never has gone away but has come back time and time again in new forms, as often in history. Starting with the Luddites of the last 19th century Britain, who rebelled against textile machines that were replacing their jobs, and spurred them into smashing such machines and attacking those who brought them.
I don't care about a company being able to reduce costs unless that reduction is reflected in their prices. The thing is, without regulation around this - without the company having to add a disclaimer that so-and-so was created using AI - they can hide the fact, reduce their costs, but not reduce their consumer-facing pricing. You would EXPECT a cost reduction in making X game would result in the consumer paying less. I have no faith whatsoever companies will actually do that.
as i posted in BGG before being moderated by the Gestapo over there, this is a done thing. its happening. it works, its cheap, its time efficient. in 5 years this wont even be a discussion. there is no stopping it. if it makes one decent sized company money, the rest will follow. its how markets work.
- making tech resemble nature so closely that you dont notice is always the goal. eventually you wont notice. it wont matter. it will sell.
If it’s for cost are they going to make games cheaper though?
@@stevenharris6161 Is that the only appreciable metric? What about if the games don't get more expensive? What about if you get 300 unique art assets instead of 75? What if you get higher quality casts? There's lots of ways that money can be allocated, and sadly, in the current market the vast majority of backers seem to want bigger instead of cheaper.
@@krahnjp Prices of board games are going up already and everyone knows it’s harder to find a good deal on crowdfunding anymore. The backer is already paying for this, for every aspect of shipping and also bearing all the risk. Have AR been transparent about their AI use? Hardly, they have decided not to address it and to ignore any fanfare about it.
Stop defending these big businesses that only care about one thing: profit.
Do they need to be transparent? Are they transparent in what other tools their artists use? And yeah. that's basically what I said. Consumers don't want cheaper, they want bigger. AI is pretty much inevitable given the demand for both size and number of releases.
The solution is easy, don't buy their products. If enough people care about it, and don't buy their products it will reshape the market. But, if as I suspect, the vast majority could care less, than they will break more sales records, and things will continue exactly the way they have been going.
@@krahnjp i mean it’s great it doesn’t bother you.
I love AR games. Now that I know they are using AI I will not be backing them.
Which on the bright side will save me money. Probably spent more on AR than any other company.
If they are going to use AI and then just touch it up then they need to be reducing their costs of the products they sell that they've done that with. If the main portion of the art is done by a machine we shouldn't be paying the full costs that get passed along to artists as part of the product. We are already getting price-gouged by the board game industry there needs to be a cut back in price somewhere.
I'm amazed you compared Grimcoven to so many things but not Bloodborne. Still in PTSD with CMON's version of the game?
Hah! Bloodborne holds a special place in my heart, and I tie it closely not just with witch hunter style wardrobe, but the HP Lovecraft twist it has on everything and I didn't see that here so much. At least not yet!
Thank you for this video. As a board game artist I completely agree with you that AI can be a useful tool (although I do not use it). But there are still many problems around it, the compensation for artists whose work was used for training for once. But ethically used AI can be a great tool in the future. Of course I appreciate a lot that you, and many others I am sure, value the human touch. I don't know how the future with AI will be like (for me) but I think we have to try to be ethical consumers in all parts of life. And as you said, AI can not only replace artists and writers but nearly all human work, inventing games. And of course 'prompting'' are part of these replaceable work fields.
It’s a double edged sword. Creation of art will become much easier which might mean better board games and cheaper board games. However, I’m sure you can or will soon be able to type into a computer……”Make art, 50% Vincent Dutrait and 50% Andrew Bosley” and voila…..it will copy their art style. This seems very unfair for an artist to spend years crafting their style only to have some A.I. “steal” their style. I’m not sure there is a law against mimicing someone’s style but this is where we are headed. I have already heard songs made by A.I. that sounded exactly like the original artist.
Did you actually leave your channel logo on the white wall behind you? That would be true art and definitely a great surprise for the owner after you. 👑❤️🔥😄🤙
Those touchups would have taken 3 minutes. If they didn't run it through touchups before publishing, what other corners are they cutting??? These are lazy campaigns and I'm worried about the future of AR. Gamefound should have projects disclose AI like kickstarter does.
Well put!
I do take issue with robots making the art while humans grind away at physical labor.
I’m ok with AI art as long as it’s not being passed off as man made. And even if someone tried to pass off as man made when it’s not, my issue would be around deception and what else is the company lying about. But not about AI art itself.
I thought you just moved
Right? We did >.
As long as they pay their sources, I don’t mind AI. But if they use AI in all their art; I’m expecting the price of the game to half. This is only fair since IF they are cutting costs on art, the price of the product should mirror
King, I wish you good nerves and a lot of power during the move and I look forward to hearing from you (Masters of the Universe). 🙏😉
In my opinion, AI and Art are opposites. AI is too smooth, not lively enough, just absolutely artificial. Something like this becomes boring for the eyes and the brain after a short time. AI is certainly okay for initial concepts, but not suitable for final processes and certainly not for final art work. As I said: my opinion 😉✌️
Did you reach out to AR for comment. Is this an AI thing or an Artist's comp sketch being put up whilst they wait on the finished pre-launch imagery? And if it is AI, they wouldn't just do the cover, everything on that page would be AI, but go you for using click bait.
Has AR ever said they would not use AI? If not than there's no trust issue here. If we assume something but it was never stated that does not make it a betrayal. I'm asking a genuine question as I don't recall AR saying they would not use it but I might have missed that.
"our talented in-house artists..."- are referred in their updates a lot. i think that´s all you could interpret from
The key problem with AI generated images is the lingering copyright problems. Not the plagiarism claims, but the Naruto v. Slater decision from the 9th Circuit that sets a baseline for non-human generated copyright claims. Bigger publishers have already sworn off AI for this very reason.
Makes me feel like they are just announcing product that has no real gameplay yet. That said, I will follow...
It seems they got a little sloppy and cut corners and got caught. Lesson learned. I don’t think these game developers are going to all of a sudden stop using AI art if it means they can cut a few corners here and there and save some expenses. I don’t personally mind AI art as way to get some mock ups or explore an idea you may have. I think it could go along way in giving artist directions on what kind of art and theme you want to go. Ultimately, I would like to see artist being in charge of the final production, but that may be wishful thinking.
I am certain they just did it to get their pre-launch page up. It doesn't bother me.
That's the theory I've seen and i can see it being accurate. Maybe even some during the campaign until it funds, then while finishing development they finish the art.
They are so well known for their artwork, I can't see them throwing that reputation away given the climate around AI art.
You are telling me AR doesn't have the resources to get an artist to draw something up for a pre-launch page? After this it will be "but it's just the KS page it's not the actual game art". It was never an issue to have art beforehand, I can guarantee you they did it to test the waters and see how people react.
@@bassmeo3937 You may not be aware, but they announced/launched the pages for all of their 2024 projects on Gamefound on the same day, so yes, I believe they may have been stretched thin.
AI art should be banned in media. Thanks for pointing out... boycott at the ready!
The internet should have been banned in the 90’s as it destroyed the encyclopaedia industry and libraries. The pc should have been banned in the 80’s as it destroyed jobs in accounting and productivity. The cloud should be banned as it destroyed traditional it jobs …….
Don’t call for bans on things ….. for every innovative change a whole new set of opportunities come along with them. Being a Luddite is never the option
@@NeilY1000 I don't use luddism as a pejorative. There is cases I believe it's valuable. Autonomous driving for instance, the danger is too high and yield safety concerns that cannot account for every situation. Mind you, you have to factor in how many jobs would be lost and people would have no job to feed themselves or their families is not something to be brushed over. After all, the Luddites would burn factories, kill assassinate factory owners, terrorize. It became so bad the government established martial law and even enacted the death penalty for those engaging in it. So the upheaval of millions of people who make driving a living would be a serious issue. In other cases, like giga casting for car parts to reduce price and accelerate production of ev cars means I'm against luddism. Because climate change takes precedence. And the amount of jobs destroyed would be a lot less.
I have no issue with AI used in any digital or physical media, as long it is disclosed. It would be preferable if established companies who can afford the awesome art of experienced artists did so. If they don't, it will not deter me from purchasing their products it is something that will somewhat sour the experience. However, if a game uses 100% AI art, then I might consider not buying. I love art, especially fantasy, and I enjoy exploring the artist pages on artstation and deviantart so I feel it would be a shame if aspiring artists start feeling they don't have a place in the gaming industry.
HEY! did you see they have some dice set out that’s also using a bunch of AI art? I saw that and immediately came to your channel to see if you were talking about it :P
th-cam.com/users/shorts0IjqzD6Mvt8?si=_V9D366F-WKAEyIx
Glad so many people in the comments of that video were calling it out
I did not! :O
Seems it's becoming more common
@@TheKingofAverage with awaken realms at least :P
No one cares AI art I don't even know why we're talking about it ffs. This just reminds of artisans being mad when they slowly got replaced when we started using machines to do clothes ...
Personally, when I care about human art, I want physical media, oil paints, pastels, pencil, acrylics, etc. Digital art is all about shortcuts, AI is just another shortcut. How many or few a given artist uses is pretty hard for the end user to tell, in most cases. The problem here, for me has nothing to do with AI. It was that the artist looked at it, and said "Yeah, that's good enough."
Although I see some of the things different from you, for example, I don't see a short bow. To me it looks like a recurve, curling across his back and down his left thigh. But I think part of that is the shadows, and where you happen to have crossed it with the white circle. But I could see an artist seeing the same thing on a quick once over. But it should be given more than a quick once over before being released in the wild.
Isn't there going to be a copyright issue for the companies that start heavy using AI generated content? As in you can't copyright the base content that the AI generated, just the minor touch-ups?
I don’t think you can even copyright the touch ups unless you change the overall picture enough to be considered a new piece of art. Which is a pretty substantial amount of change.
i'm a bit mixed on this : IA is a tool and should be used as such, glad their fantastic artists worked on visuals. what is important to know is : What kind of IA did they use : Midjourney is fa past these "artefacts" problems, and i dare say "hands" problems aswell. IF it is an IA trained over THEIR work. i'm very fine for them using it as resource to increase their creative assets
I agree, I think "was it made by a human" is going to be something people look for. And that gives me hope as a consumer, as an artist, and as an aspiring game designer. I've used AI in the place of a mood board, the same way I use colour swatches and postcards and pics from artists with interesting techniques. I personally wouldn't trust AI-generated pieces (how close are they to whatever they're sampling from?); and the anatomy is often wonky in more subtle ways than a missing foot or eighteen fingers, so they're both a terrible way for a new artist to learn and a slippery way for an experienced artist to let weird mistakes creep in. That said, I'm not going to fuss about dagger number-whatever out of a boatload being AI generated, as long as some sort of art director is reviewing it and making sure it works for the project.
Aligns with my feelings on it pretty closely.
As long as it doesnt look like the typical lazy AI gibberish and they actually touch it up and make it look cool and logical, I dont mind how much they use. Obvisouly I much prefer real art created by humans but at the same time as long it looks cool and plays great, thats all I care about. Some people get really butt hurt on AI art used in games which I dont understand tbh.
I think some people that don't understand the "issue" with AI art, aren't artists. I gave up on making art for a living a long time ago, but certainly anyone that aspires to that is genuinely threatened by computers that can generate endless art with little to no cost or time.
You're right that there is still an artist that has to fix the art generated, but for how long? Also, it's a little like calling me a chef because I put frozen lasagna in the oven =D
@@AtzaltlCoatl I understand that 100% and I know that it is rough on the real artists out there. But the harsh reality is that AI art works and it's always getting better.
Now, I don't think anyone thinks that AI art is better than "real" art and I don't think that will ever change. But for creators and developers that don't have the resources to use real art, AI art is a god send.
Are their storys Ai I wonder?
Even more reason to supprt KDM.
I really don't see the problem with using AI, it's just a tool. There was the same arguments when digital tools like Photoshop arrived.
Cause AI is being used as a shortcut to replace artists. Studios would rather have a computer do the work then spend the money on artists. I can see AI being a tool help artists but studios would rather replace the artist all together to save money.
Imo if you use ai art use it for fillers in a rule book or as part of the process in the art books etc. But main box and expansions should always be hand drawn because that's where the uniqueness comes from in games etc. People won't notice as much using it in smaller items
Honestly, this is all promo stuff for campaigns that aren't even launched yet or being delivered. This big stink about AI art is rather ridiculous to me. You cannot sit there, as an artist and tell me you didn't steal techniques or idea from others, that you didn't learn from what other people have done in the past and made it into your style or even copied the style; looking at all the Anime art people make. There is a distinct difference between using AI to steal thing, like facial images and actor voices, and using an AI tool trained on art, just like every artist that has ever existed, to enhance your art or get a concept out. If you don't like or want AI art, then I guess you aren't backing games considering most of them are probably using is to some degree.
I've always thought most things in Tainted Grail looks like AI art, and it's always been something I disliked about it. I am not arguing against the use of AI art morally. My issue with it is that it feels undefined without a cohesive picture and art direction. This means all the art does not really work together to tell a story. It just gives a general feeling and loose style, without an art narrative.
I can see that being a thing. Currently you can train AI in a certain way, for instance you can train it to make art of you as a person when you give it your name, but nothing as robust (yet) as keeping a consistent new theme/vision.
@@TheKingofAveragea consistent theme with AI art is uncanny nightmare fuel
Hah!
Honestly who actually cares?? Ai art works and is great. Just make sure the image is clean and represents what you want it too. If you don’t want to support it don’t, but if it moves production along faster and represents what they want, use it! How dare Ford use an assembly line. How dare companies find cheaper ways to become more efficient and get the product out. I am pretty sure people would rather have a game sooner than wait an extra 2 months for art to be made.
I'm strongly against AI art, and will not buy it if i can see it's AI made (of course with the advance of the technology, it will be harder and harder to spot it, but until i can't, i will always try to be selective). Call me old fashioned or romantic, but this is not like a dishwashing machine, where you save time to do other stuff, art as a whole is a celebration of life, and i can't understand how people accept this souless amalgamation of stolen art (and don't come near me with this photoshop argument, it's completely different). Miyazaki said it better, AI art is an insult to life itself...
As you said, it's a bit jumping the gun without knowing the backstory, for all we know it's a model trained on art made by their in-house artists to help out with "prototyping" (for lack of a better word.) their art and/or increasing productivity for them to not have to hire more artists if they want to increase the amount of products they want to deliver on across the year(s).
That being said I work in IT and we use AI almost daily nowadays, generally speaking generated code needs a ton of touch-ups if you let it be generated by an AI but that will change.
Either people don't realize it (yet) or they don't want to realize/accept it, but a decent amount of people have already accepted that this will most likely be the future when it comes to this sort of stuff. I feel that people in IT have just accepted this as an inevitability while a lot of artists just haven't or don't want to accept it.
Yes, people can decide for themselves once we get stuff labeled with "100% Human made" or "AI assisted", but I don't think that will change much.
It's not like when the supermarket started to introduce self service registers that a lot of people started to run the streets saying "the poor cashiers jobs!".
This will be a lot bigger scale though so we'll just have to wait and see. Only the future will tell.
At least AR delivers games unlike mythic an lazy squire
I’m so fucking stoked with my glasses and laying out while we do this shit to ourselves. I o ly wish I had kids, if only they could look back and say, the Dude had it sooo good
Wtf! Moving again?! I feel like you just moved!!
Me too! >.
I personally don’t feel a need to use AI in my creative writing. However, if an artist wants to use AI as part of the creative process, but the finished process is carefully planned and edited by the artist then that’s fine. AI is just a tool in this case. what awaken realms is doing is quite reasonable.
AI Art? Big nothing burger in my book. Technology marches forward in everything. It's like saying your not going to drive a car because you would be putting carriage drivers out of business.
What's most important to me is that the art design and direction is clear, captivating, and cohesive. It all makes sense in the world they exist in. If the art is on fire and collectively it creates a beautiful, captivating, believable world, I don't even really care if the art is AI Art. I do expect the art to be clean though. Even if the art design is rough and more abstract, I would still expect it to not have random AI derived artifacts. But yea, if the art is fire, I don't think I really care too much.
For me personally there is no "AI conversation". It's a: No! Plain and simple. Graphic design is a job and people need to get paid for that, period. I've backed out of pledges instantly when I found out AI was used.
So no more Awaken Realms games? :(
Weaver is also a job, do you stop buying machine made clothes now?
@@TheKingofAverage In general? Good question. If they go about it like this: then no. I have feelings about how the big game producers handle things anyway, so the AI thing makes it even harde for me to want to give my money to them. It's a principle thing for me.
@@Benjamin-zu6gh irrelevant comparisson.
@@Benjamin-zu6gh Isnt AI art basically stoken work? If not, my apologies. Else i think the comparison is very irrelevant.
I believe I can shed light on concerns surrounding the use of this technology. As a Software Developer, I regularly utilize Copilot, an AI assistant. However, does this imply that I am not a programmer without AI? Does it suggest that my work is inferior or solely attributable to AI? Absolutely not. AI serves to handle the more repetitive tasks, freeing me to concentrate on problem-solving. It grants me more time to devise and optimize solutions instead of laboriously coding everything myself. Similarly, artists can speed up their work processes, concentrating on the final design rather than spending hours crafting every detail. Just as no one feels compelled to disclose that their software was developed with AI assistance, I do not believe it is necessary for AW to emphasize such aspects. We interact with AI-powered features daily, such as those found on TH-cam, without giving it a second thought.
Not even an issue, unless your job is to make issues.
Why stop there, we should question everything. Think about walking into a building, was it designed by a human or AI? Where the pre assembled welded joints done by humans or AI driven robotics?
Or maybe your car, Was the frame or safety features designed by humans or AI? We already know a lot of the welding on a car is robotic.
There's a lot more than board game art to worry about, AI board game art will not jeopardize your safety in a high rise or automobile. There are many more examples of how AI could be used to cheapen the design of everyday items. And sometimes is, but not always, to our benefit.
I'm completely happy for them to use whatever tools they need for their artists to make amazing art. Reduces cost of development
So they used AI, who really cares? I don’t. Another pointless video.
This channel is becoming more about politics and behind the scenes stuff plus clickbait titles and less about actual games and playing them.
Go and watch other channels, yes they actually play games, have them out on the table, not talk about everything going on behind the scenes of publishers and drama.
Oh! AI art, oh! Leo got a death threat, oh! this publisher closed now 20 people don’t have a job anymore. My wife has lost jobs, who cares about that? Nobody.
One of the reasons I unsubscribed is hearing stuff irrelevant to me. I wanna hear what’s going to spark my interest in a particular game, mechanics, how a game turn is played etc. Show me a game, tell me if it’s any good or not. That’s all I want to know. I don’t care what goes on behind the scenes.
And yes I’m here because these videos come up on my feed. I didn’t go looking.
Isnt this AI-assisted art? When AI can save hours or days of an artists time, not to mention giving some inspiration and a starting point, why is this a bad thing? We want less expensive games. Let them use the tools available to speed along the dev time and possibly pass those savings on to the consumers. The art was touched up by a human. This didnt replace their job but modified their job's process...
I could follow this argument if the cost savings actually got passed onto the consumer. But let’s be honest, they are going to charge you even more to follow pricing trends and pocket the savings. This is a moot point.
No saving will be passed on. You know that, we all know that
The argument things become less expensive and passes to consumers is one of the arguments I find least convincing. It rarely passes onto the consumer. The price stays the same. The overhead lowers. That's it.
Most people don't want cheaper, they want bigger. The best way to compete in crowd-funding isn't to pass on the savings, it's to spend the money on making the game a bigger than the competition's. Especially in the circles that are routine AR customers.
If they clean up the art, who cares if they use AI generated art? As long as it looks good, why not use it? I'm sure the price of hiring artists is only going to go up.
Who cares? So what if they use AI art. Caught red handed is a bit of a strong title. Caught using modern tools which will be mainstream from now on maybe?
The main issue is if they are going to use AI art then the price of the games should come down considerably. There are no artists to pay for real art. But most companies will not do that. Games will keep going up while less effort is put in to the game.
For what reason does conversation about AI use matter?
1. If it is about quality of art
- art is not final and will probably be perfected before production
- as you said AI will eventually get better
2. If it is about the abundance of artist
- using an AI still requires workers
- AI puts people off business on everywhere so why do we care so much about artist, never heard of anyone complaining about cashiers getting fired / not getting hired because we have self use booths now
Nobody wants to be a cashier though. Nobodies passion is to work at a mcdonalds. But being an artist, writer, or game designer is a passion. I find that using Ai to make our entertainment is just a shame because Ai does not know the human experience and can only mimic it.
I know lots of people that like being a cashier (not at mcdonalds though). Kinda easy going, gets you at least salary to do stuff on your own time and doesn’t stress you out
Also if I were to be an AI artist and was passionate about isn’t the AI work technically product of my passion? If I couldn’t get any jobs because people find AI oppressing for artist wouldn’t we actually find ourselves in a paradox where another persons passion is cancelled
@@peetu734 I was a cashier at one point. Its not the worst job but its not a position someone strives to be in its one you settled for. Its not a dream job. Being a artist is different then giving people their change and telling them to have a nice day. I don't know what the solution is to Ai art but I personally will always seek out things made by humans.
@@peetu734 Sure I think you could be passionate about being an Ai artist but I think it will be hard to find a job for it because anyone can use it. I think its a passion that will be oppressed/canceled out simply because anyone can do it. Why would a company hire you when they can just do it themselves. Ai might not ending up creating many jobs and only taking them away. The thing about Ai is its like a tool that does the work for you with little input from the user. its like a pen that writes by itself.
Into The AM uses AI no doubt looking at those shirts
I've personally met with their artist and they do custom art for influencers fairly often.
I can't say for certain of course, but I've seen the early sketches and such at least
Man you go after AW hard (that thumb nail… RED HANDED) but let Mythic slide for ripping customers off, like literally stealing their money.
Perhaps you missed several of his videos, but he has been quite critical of Mythic and their business practices.
@@cartoon80s90s nah I’m caught up. He’s never gone that hard on Mythic.
The final art based on AI conceptualization - what a great way to take the weight off of an artist. I would imagine creation and then selection of the box art theme was much improved thanks to AI. The alternative used to be forcing an artist to create multiple different concept arts, which seem like a very time consuming process.
Worst. Take. Ever
So what? I really don’t get why people make a huge issue of this non issue that it is IA art
I like A.I. art. I" d rather have beautiful art on a game. I do not mind if any part of a game is produced using A.I. art. The cover of the box is also a great place for A.I. art. I'd rather have a.i art than some mediocre art style chosen due to financial and time restrictions.
What I find most likely, they hired an artist to create the artwork, the artist isn't inherently talented and used the easy button to fake their way through the job. We see this in our industry where a developer's only skill is going out to Google to take code someone else has already written. Why? because it is easy. Until someone has some oversight to check the employee, they tend to get by with it. Even then it is difficult to catch. Unless this is an established practice in AR, I have a feeling there are internal reviews going on at the company to find out how it occurred. Maybe that is just my optimism because I like AR, but I see this in every field where you have people faking their way through their job until they get caught. Then it is damage control on the company side and never in the view of the public when it is avoidable.
this is your worst video ever. I can't even listen to it.
I assume you mean the audio quality? Sorry about that!
Zombicide is The Dead Keep
Oh wooow, so shocking and controversial (heavy sarcasm) Who cares ? Did they ever claim not not use AI ever ? No? Then again - who the fck cares...
oh no. not AI art.
Maybe I should buy some pearls so I can clutch them.
Joke's on you. They'd be cultured. 🤣
I think this is a vast overreaction and the video could have been better researched and more nuanced.
I totally respect anyone who has a strong anti-AI stance, that's their prerogative and I wouldn't blame them for advocating for transparency laws regarding AI use. Personally, I don't care, AI is a tool and, as any new tool, will cause some Luddite-style concerns when introduced.
I am disappointed that this is framed like "people noticed and they went back and fixed the art" when the announcement trailer and AR Next videos, show the "fixed" cover art being used before this was raised as an issue by the community. This is clearly a case of an earlier image being uploaded by mistake.
I would also caution from jumping from "it has an unrealistic style" to "it's AI generated". If you have seen a painting by Picasso, you know what I mean.
As the last note, I will disagree that using AI in the creation of hundreds of item cards for a final product is better than using it in a prototype picture of a game that is probably two years out from delivery. Isn't the argument allowing the artists to continue making a living?
Everyone uses AI everyday of their lives. It is just a tool we all benefit from in so many ways and have for decades. Just move on with your life. They made some crappy art then fixed it. That is the entire story.
Question? Who cares if its AI Art as long as the art is good and it contributes to the game?
Glad most ppl in the comments dont care and recognize it for the non issue that it is
ai is great. now artists can focus on makin art with it
I don’t care if they use AI, unfortunately it’s what the future will be. My main care would s that it is an amazing game that’s fun to play and doesn’t break the bank doing it.
Um. Who cares? I don’t see the big deal.
Hmm I gotta say I really like KoA channel, great reviews and detailed unboxings. But I don't like these other type of videos - looking for a sensation like a tabloid... I would rather like this channel to be a professional Board games channel instead.
I disagree. News about important topics in this industry are important. I don't want a channel that just does unboxings and reviews. There's tons of those already.
Like it or not, just like every industrial revolution, AI will drastically dercrease amount of people needed for many jobs we previously believed to be relatively safe, and art is not an exception. Eventually we'll get to the point that there will be no way do determine if any digital art piece was created by actual person and not AI. We can not like it, we might even fight it, but what's the point? 90% of publishers would replace artists in a blink of an eye if they could have one AI assisted person do work of entire departament, it is just inevitable. I work in IT and I see how drastically these tools improved efficiency of my work, it also caused many layoffs in the industry, and I realise my job is not as safe as in the past, but in our economy company will always prioretize profit over their "human resources", we can adapt and get ready for even more sweeping changes, or we can become reactionaries that will end up swept will all people unwilling to go with the spirit of times.
I'm seeiously disapointed in them. But, i will forgive and move on and still buy their stuff if they admit it, and fix it . Full accountability.
Big deal over nothing…. Why would I buy a game based on one piece of art.. we haven’t paid anything for this game so why should they spend a fortune (as you says art is expensive) throwing something out just to appease those fickle enough to get angry about it?
We all know AW produce high quality games with amazing art ( even if AI is used) so why do people question this? What I would say to AW is don’t come out and explain yourself … there is nothing to explain…. Btw I watch all of your videos, but this one sadly was a waste of time.
The video doesn't really explain it well but it's about technology possibly replacing people's jobs and driving people out of the industry (artists). For a lot of people, it's a big deal (least all artists who are making it a big deal because it's their jobs under threat).
Its just a tool so who cares.
what's wrong with AI art. if it lets them produce more awesome looking games at a cheaper price that's awesome for us
I couldn't care less!! If I like the art and it look good I don't see a problem!
AI art is fine
another clickbait video. some more and I will unsubscribe. can we have some quality videos about actual topics without clickbait titles please?
Uh what?
@@TheKingofAverage Not sure what this dude is talking about the video is fine. Don't listen to these weirdos.