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

341–350 of 421 posts

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

#341

Post by PoignardAzur »

latexr wrote: post #129
skibidithink wrote: post #21

The AI witch hunt claims its first victim, apparently over some placeholder textures. https://english.elpais.com/culture/2025-07-19/the-low-cost-c... > Sandfall Interactive further clarifies that there are no generative AI-created assets in the game. When the first AI tools became available in 2022, some members of the team briefly experimented with them to generate temporary placeholder textures. Upon release, insta…

From the submitted article: > "When it was submitted for consideration, representatives of Sandfall Interactive agreed that no gen AI was used in the development of Clair Obscur: Expedition 33. In light of Sandfall Interactive confirming the use of gen AI art in production on the day of the Indie Game Awards 2025 premiere, this does disqualify Clair Obscur: Expedition 33 from its nomination." Whatever placeholder you…

> Saying they used none when they did is not cool and rightfully makes one wonder what other uses they may be hiding (or “forgetting”). Especially when apparently they only clarified it when it was too late.

The article where Meurisse admitted to using AI in the pipeline is from April. You're implying a level of dishonesty that clearly isn't there.

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

#342

Post by starkparker »

Kim_Bruning wrote: post #302

There's an interesting question about scope. The IGA FAQ states, in its entirety on this topic: "Games developed using generative AI are strictly ineligible for nomination." [1] Sandfall probably interpreted this reasonably: no AI assets in the shipped product. They say they stripped out AI placeholders before release (and patched the ones they missed). But the IGA is reading it strictly: any use during development d…

Nobody's probably thought this through, but if I had to guess, the first revision to the rule will be "no _assets_ generated with gen AI" because the most upset parties about gen AI use in gamedev are asset creatives who create textures, models, and audio, perform music and voice acting, etc.

Upscaling technologies are transformative but post-processing. The uproar isn't over what happens in the render pipeline but in the creative process.

Same reason why auto-LoD generation wouldn't and hasn't pissed anyone off: it's not generating LoDs of a mesh that's problematic, it's generating the source model that an artist would create.

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

#343

Post by pseudalopex »

Kim_Bruning wrote: post #302

There's an interesting question about scope. The IGA FAQ states, in its entirety on this topic: "Games developed using generative AI are strictly ineligible for nomination." [1] Sandfall probably interpreted this reasonably: no AI assets in the shipped product. They say they stripped out AI placeholders before release (and patched the ones they missed). But the IGA is reading it strictly: any use during development d…

> Sandfall probably interpreted this reasonably: no AI assets in the shipped product.

Developed and shipped are different words.

> But the IGA is reading it strictly

You meant they meant it strictly? They wrote the policy.

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

#345

Post by CamperBob2 »

queenkjuul wrote: post #337
MattRix wrote: post #314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is not the sort of thing people are referring to when they use the term “generative AI”. It’s basically a completely different technology and the ethical concerns around data sourcing and energy usage are not the same at all.

It's extremely tiring how people pretend like there's no difference between these technologies. The comments on the article are the epitome - "oh they used a computer to make a computer game, the horror" Just a cudgel to shut down discussion

There is no difference. What about a dungeon hack game that uses generated mazes? Random level generators put level designers out of work, but you never saw anyone carrying signs and carrying on about those.

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

#346

Post by starkparker »

pona-a wrote: post #61
hambes wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe, but that is a different issue. The use of generative AI for art is being rightfully criticised because it steals from artists. Generative AI for source code learns from developers - who mostly publish their source with licenses that allow this. The quality suffers in both cases and I would personally criticise generative AI in source code as well, but the ethical argument is only against profiting from artists…

> Generative AI for source code learns from developers - who mostly publish their source with licenses that allow this. I always believed GPL allowed LLM training, but only if the counterparty fulfills its conditions: attribution (even if not for every output, at least as part of the training set) and virality (the resulting weights and inference/training code should be released freely under GPL, or maybe even the ou…

This cuts to the bone of it tbqh. One large wing of the upset over gen AI is the _unconsenting, unlicensed, uncredited, and uncompensated_ use of assets to make "you can't steal a style" a newly false statement.

There are artists who would (and have) happily consented, licensed, and been compensated and credited for training. If that's what LLM trainers had led with when they went commercial, if anything a sector of the creative industry would've at least considered it. But companies led with mass training for profit without giving back until they were caught being sloppy (in the previous usage of "slop").

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

#348

Post by CamperBob2 »

surgical_fire wrote: post #124
gyomu wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't find it that surprising. The creatives that are against generative AI aren't against it only because it produces slop. They are against it because it uses past human creative labor, without permission or compensation, to generate profit for the companies building the models which they do not redistribute to the authors of that creative labor. They are also against it due to environmental impact. In that view,…

That should be the crux of the issue, and stated plainly. This is just another scheme where those at the top are appropriating the labor of many to enrich themselves. This will have so many negative consequences that I don't think any reactions against it are excessive. It is irrelevant whether AI has "soul" or not. It literally does not matter, and it is a bad argument that dillutes what is really going on. There is…

This is just another scheme where those at the top are appropriating the labor of many to enrich themselves. This will have so many negative consequences that I don't think any reactions against it are excessive.

When's the last time someone with your opinion turned out to be right in the long run?

Post reply on HN