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

Valve is not willing to publish games with AI generated content anymore?

old.reddit.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 420 posts

Re: Valve is not willing to publish games with AI generated content anymore?

#391

Post by RoyalHenOil »

chii wrote: post #387
soerxpso wrote: post #383

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The tool used to create said art has no bearing on the final art with regards to copyright. This is still an open question with regards to AI art generation tools. Do you have recent legal precedent to cite that I don't know about, or are you just making things up?

> This is still an open question with regards to AI art generation tools. While it is an unanswered question with no legal precedence, i am a believer that what isn't currently illegal is and should be considered legal, until harm has been shown and thus require legal ruling.

Valve may be anticipating that it will become illegal, in which case they would have to pull games from the store and issue refunds. They may be waiting to see which way the wind blows on this before they get their revenue stream mixed up with it.

Re: Valve is not willing to publish games with AI generated content anymore?

#392

Post by jwestbury »

__loam wrote: post #351
gcampos wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> we cannot ship your game while it contains these AI-generated assets, unless you can affirmatively confirm that you own the rights to all of the IP used in the data set that trained the AI to create the assets in your game. Yep, you are absolutely right.

This is exactly how this stuff should work. Greedily scraping whatever content you want hurts people who made that content and ultimately hurts AI developers who still need more high quality data.

I'm still not convinced by this argument. All human-generated art is also a result of the artist's experiences, and is strongly influenced by other art they have consumed. So why should GenAI not be allowed to blend the work of other artists?

If you want to argue that we should fundamentally treat machine- and human-generated works differently, that's fine -- but it's a different argument from "looking at a bunch of art and then synthesising ideas is bad," because that's exactly what many (most?) human artists do.

Re: Valve is not willing to publish games with AI generated content anymore?

#393

Post by usrusr »

shultays wrote: post #349
usrusr wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"all Valve has to do is remove the game from Steam." And take the reputation hit that would go along with that. Valve's business is 30% technology and 70% the reputation of being much less untrustworthy than the alternatives. If they lose that they can close shop.

Valve's business is its user base, as long as it has that I think they will survive.

How are reputation and user base not the same?

Re: Valve is not willing to publish games with AI generated content anymore?

#394

Post by shultays »

usrusr wrote: post #393
shultays wrote: post #349

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Valve's business is its user base, as long as it has that I think they will survive.

How are reputation and user base not the same?

99.9999% of user base won't care about a few game Valve removed from its store. And they will care even less if they decide to not publish a game at all like they did in this instance. Valve is not really losing any reputation among users for not releasing some games

Valve might lose some reputation among the devs if they keep rejecting or removing games but that is far from reality, at least for now. Things perhaps might change if game studios starts picking up AI generated stuff more and more and Valve decides to blanket ban them. But even then the users of Steam is a juicy target for devs and it is a hard market to ignore.

Re: Valve is not willing to publish games with AI generated content anymore?

#395

Post by johnnyanmac »

RoyalHenOil wrote: post #391
chii wrote: post #387

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is still an open question with regards to AI art generation tools. While it is an unanswered question with no legal precedence, i am a believer that what isn't currently illegal is and should be considered legal, until harm has been shown and thus require legal ruling.

Valve may be anticipating that it will become illegal, in which case they would have to pull games from the store and issue refunds. They may be waiting to see which way the wind blows on this before they get their revenue stream mixed up with it.

It would be so nice if they reflected that in their submission policy if that is the case.

But that requires Valve to be transparent to developers, and we know how well they are with that.

Re: Valve is not willing to publish games with AI generated content anymore?

#396

Post by __loam »

jwestbury wrote: post #392
__loam wrote: post #351

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is exactly how this stuff should work. Greedily scraping whatever content you want hurts people who made that content and ultimately hurts AI developers who still need more high quality data.

I'm still not convinced by this argument. All human-generated art is also a result of the artist's experiences, and is strongly influenced by other art they have consumed. So why should GenAI not be allowed to blend the work of other artists? If you want to argue that we should fundamentally treat machine- and human-generated works differently, that's fine -- but it's a different argument from "looking at a bunch of…

There's a pretty big fucking difference between the organic experience of a human being and a massive VC funded hellsystem that can process 400 million exact copies of images and generate thousands per day.

I honestly can't believe people are still making this dishonest, bad faith argument. It's obviously problematic if you think about it for more than 3 minutes.

Re: Valve is not willing to publish games with AI generated content anymore?

#398

Post by johnnyanmac »

naet wrote: post #193
thrashh wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I bet it's 2 because OP said they used "admittedly obviously AI generated from the hands" and a lot of AI generation makes really funky hands that you have to fix because it looks so bad. So it sounds like OP slapped some half-assed generated images into a game and tried to submit it. Valve now can't really trust someone that does that to have done any due diligence.

The OP's only other reddit post says that they want to start a corporation to avoid associating their name with the game, which is a pretty big red flag to me. "I've been developing a game for a while now, and am near ready to release it on Steam. I'd prefer it not to be associated with my name (as in I'd prefer people googling my name and future employers being unable to find out i developed this game )."

ehh, I've thought about it too. It's almost recommended if you want to make adult games. Even if I don't care about employers who'd reject me for that stuff I don't want crazies harassing my family just because I wanted to make a game with penises in it.

Re: Valve is not willing to publish games with AI generated content anymore?

#399

Post by fakedang »

dang wrote: post #327
i_like_apis wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah this seems like the title should be edited. @dang (not sure how to get his attention)

@dang is a no-op. The only way to get reliable message delivery is to email hn@ycombinator.com. Fortunately someone did that. I'll take a look at the title situation now.

Alternatively, typing "@dang (not sure how to get his attention)" seemed to work. :)

Re: Valve is not willing to publish games with AI generated content anymore?

#400

Post by Filligree »

mehlmao wrote: post #220
mock-possum wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AI doesn’t copy and paste art though, it generates new art based off of patterns it’s seen in its training material. If it’s training material heavily features red squares, and you prompt it to generate a new piece, chances are you’ll get something with a red square - not because it copied that red square from any particular piece, but because it was a common element. There’s a difference between reproducing common e…

https://arxiv.org/pdf/2301.13188.pdf Stable Diffusion spits out slightly blurrier versions of the pictures in its training set.

If you deliberately try to make it do so. Even then it usually doesn’t work.
Post reply on HN