Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Clair Obscur having its Indie Game Game Of The Year award stripped due to AI use

thegamer.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 421 posts

Re: Clair Obscur having its Indie Game Game Of The Year award stripped due to AI use

#191

Post by rpdillon »

protimewaster wrote: post #60
spencerflem wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

It's not meant to be clever. They have a rule that says, in its entirety, "Games developed using generative AI are strictly ineligible for nomination." Do they count procedural level generation as generative AI? Am I crazy that this doesn't seem clear to me?

No, we're at the phase with AI where people have extremely strong feelings, it's not well understood, and the definitions are not clear. I am with you in that rules like this seem dogmatic and hard to understand the implications of.

Re: Clair Obscur having its Indie Game Game Of The Year award stripped due to AI use

#192

Post by Devasta »

Hamuko wrote: post #78
oneeyedpigeon wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It feels like a similar trend to the one that NFTs followed: huge initial hype, stoked up by tech bros and swallowed by a general public lacking a deep understanding, tempered over time as that public learns more of the problematic aspects that detractors publicise.

NFTs have way less downsides than LLMs and GenAI, since the main downside was just wasting electricity. I didn't have to worry about someone cloning my voice and begging my mom on the phone for money.

If you look at daytime TV in the UK, there are a lot of ads targeting the elderly talking about funeral cover and life assurance and so on.

I for one cannot wait for a future where grandparents get targeted ads showing their grandchildren, urging them to buy some product or service so their loved ones have something to remember them by...

Re: Clair Obscur having its Indie Game Game Of The Year award stripped due to AI use

#193

Post by Devasta »

theshrike79 wrote: post #155
sergioisidoro wrote: post #121

This is crazy. Tools like photoshoot have gen ai tools in them. Does that mean that Photoshop is now a minefield for artists? If a single artist uses the wrong tool once they disqualify the entire final product for awards, even if the asset is fully removed on the final build.

IDEs now have “AI” autocomplete; will a game become ineligible if a single dev accidentally presses tab instead of writing the whole function by hand? If a script writer uses ChatGPT to generate ideas, straight up ban? Where does the organisation intend to draw the line?

> Where does the organisation intend to draw the line?

The answer to this question is always "somewhere". Just because I can't proclaim an exact number of trees that constitute a forest doesn't mean the concept doesn't exist.

Re: Clair Obscur having its Indie Game Game Of The Year award stripped due to AI use

#194

Post by reactordev »

This is a travesty. Where winds meet uses LLMs, yet everyone seems to love that. Wtf.

More and more AAA games are going to have AI. Whether it’s AI content, AI dialogue, AI driven storytelling, or AI driven animation.

Having game of the year title stripped over some texture use is some next level petty BS.

Re: Clair Obscur having its Indie Game Game Of The Year award stripped due to AI use

#195

Post by JKCalhoun »

spuz wrote: post #32

There is a small irony that the Indie Game Awards rejects nominations of games using AI but The Game Awards does not. It is independent teams of developers who are less likely to be able to afford to pay an artists who may be able to produce something of value with AI assets that they otherwise would not have the resources for. On the other side, it is big studios with a good track record and more investment who are…

Simple fix, they need a separate categories for a game art award—no AI—and the rest of the categories (perhaps including game of the year, best new game) should allow AI.

Right now the rules they're using are going against larger forces in the world that are going to become standard (if they're not already).

And to your point, these are indie developers that are David's going up against the AAA Goliath's that have a bottomless purse with which to shower money on a "product". I dabble in art (and wrote some indie games decades ago) and I am fine with AI-generated art (despite my daughters' leanings in the opposite direction).

Re: Clair Obscur having its Indie Game Game Of The Year award stripped due to AI use

#196

Post by spuz »

Devasta wrote: post #182
spuz wrote: post #32

There is a small irony that the Indie Game Awards rejects nominations of games using AI but The Game Awards does not. It is independent teams of developers who are less likely to be able to afford to pay an artists who may be able to produce something of value with AI assets that they otherwise would not have the resources for. On the other side, it is big studios with a good track record and more investment who are…

> To me, art is a form of expression from one human being to another. An indie game with interesting gameplay but AI generated assets still has value as a form of expression from the programmer. How though? If questions about style or substance can be answered with "because the AI did it, its just some stochastic output from the model" I don't see how that allows for expression between humans.

In this case, you'd be judging the AI made assets as simply AI made and the human made gameplay and programming as human made. I'm not suggesting the AI assets would be transformed into art just because they are part of some human creative work.

Re: Clair Obscur having its Indie Game Game Of The Year award stripped due to AI use

#197

Post by mlok »

"While the assets in question were patched out, it still goes against the regulations we have in place. As a result, the IGAs nomination committee has agreed to officially retract both the Debut Game and Game of the Year awards"

Looks like "regulations nitpicking". In the end it doesn't represent the players best interests.

Re: Clair Obscur having its Indie Game Game Of The Year award stripped due to AI use

#198

Post by DangitBobby »

theshrike79 wrote: post #150
GaryBluto wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People were told by other people to dislike LLMs and so they did, then told other people themselves.

Ha! You’re actually exactly right. We’ve observed this in AI gen ads (or “creatives” as ad people call them) They work really well, EXCEPT if there is a comment option next to the ad - if people see others calling the art “AI crap” the click rate drops drastically :)

I think that's a hint that people already dislike AI ads on principle but it's good enough now to fool them, and the comment section provides transparency.

Re: Clair Obscur having its Indie Game Game Of The Year award stripped due to AI use

#199

Post by Mkengin »

oneeyedpigeon wrote: post #38
spuz wrote: post #32

There is a small irony that the Indie Game Awards rejects nominations of games using AI but The Game Awards does not. It is independent teams of developers who are less likely to be able to afford to pay an artists who may be able to produce something of value with AI assets that they otherwise would not have the resources for. On the other side, it is big studios with a good track record and more investment who are…

I agree that this holds in theory, but in practice? All the overhyping of AI I've heard from the gaming sector has come from the big studios, not indies. And, as you point out, Clair Obscur isn't the 'most indie' of indies anyway.

It doesn't have to be hyped to be used, for example today I found these two building their passion project using GenAI, which would otherwise maybe not possible, who knows: https://reddit.com/comments/1prqfsu

Re: Clair Obscur having its Indie Game Game Of The Year award stripped due to AI use

#200

Post by Kim_Bruning »

The game won GOTY on its merits. Then the AI disclosure came out and it got stripped. If AI use produces obviously inferior work, how did it win in the first place? Seems like the objection is to the process, not the result.

Doubly so if the usage was de minimis.

I think it's the artists, not the tools, that make the art. Overuse of anything is gauche; but I am confident that beautiful things can be made with almost any tool, in the hands of a tasteful artist.

Post reply on HN