• FiniteBanjo@feddit.online
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    74
    ·
    3 days ago

    Honestly if we can just prioritize giving real developers a spotlight to be seen and heard, sorting specifically by no-ai and having awards and events for no-ai, then I could see this being a potentially good thing. The low effort game devs of the past will all naturally sort themselves into slopper categories and out of the market.

    The only problem is that perhaps not enough consumers are competent enough to care if a product is slop.

    • Bluegrass_Addict@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      28
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      3 days ago

      for me, step one is allowing me to block from sight, ANYTHING a by a supposed AAA developer. I do NOT want to see anything from ea, ubisoft, etc when searching for games.

      another would be, if the game is early access and has 30 DLCs… I never want to see that companies ‘products’ again.

      and honestly, that’s it for me. Idgaf about ai slop of clone games (yet), good chance they are still individuals doing it and not some massive corporation.

      I will always support the smaller teams whenever possible… I never want to see anything from rockstar, Ubisoft or whatever… all trash

    • Scratch@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      3 days ago

      Part of the issue with this approach is that you essentially get to something like a karma system, where well known developers are pushed to the top.

      This is something Valve just spent a lot of time and effort to undo, so small, new indie devs get as much storefront space as the veterans.

        • Seralth@piefed.seralth.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 days ago

          60/40 honestly.

          Is everything that isn’t their own games? They do fantastically being fair about.

          They’re more than happy to casino it up with their own s*** though.

          No one’s perfect

    • artyom@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 days ago

      Well. The real problem is that there’s no way to definitively detect AI. And slop scammers are certainly not going to volunteer that information.

      • Seralth@piefed.seralth.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        3 days ago

        Slopping asset flip and cash grab games have always been a problem. That’s nothing new. AI just made it easier to do.

        This is a problem that’s existed for 20 years basically. AI has only just made it more of a problem. It’s not new.

        If we could have solved this problem we already would have.

        AI disclosure at a minimum I agree with wholeheartedly.

        But basically every other solution everyone is throwing around is more or less just f****** stupid. Someone who legitimately makes a game for themselves. That is actually fun because they made it for the purpose of them themselves playing it. Even if they used nothing but AI is still probably going to be a better game than some half-assed cash grab or asset flip made by a legitimate human with no AI.

        The problem isn’t AI. The problem is s***** people making s***** games with no integrity or intent to play their own creation.

        If you want a fun game, you have to make a game you would play. How you enforce that is f****** beyond me though.

      • FiniteBanjo@feddit.online
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        3 days ago

        I think a lot of them will in fact volunteer that information, and there is definitely a definitive way to detect AI: ask the developers to show their work. Images have layers, 3D assets can be demonstrated. Code is only slightly more ambiguous. On top of all of that, there is an obvious quality difference.

        • artyom@piefed.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          16
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 days ago

          I think a lot of them will in fact volunteer that information

          LOOOOOLOLOL

          ask the developers to show their work

          Nothing about that is definitive. And Valve isn’t going to review it anyway.

          • FiniteBanjo@feddit.online
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            3 days ago

            Sloppers think it’s the future, most of them have no idea how hated they are. Their shitbots tell them “AI assisted tools allow you to do more, better, faster” and not “yeah boss everyone will hate everything we make”.

            How is asking them to prove they did or can do work that they didn’t and couldn’t do not definitive proof?

          • Sanctus@anarchist.nexus
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            3 days ago

            Nobody is doing schoolwork to sell a game. What an asinine take. Valve also isnt going to pay people to go through all that code.

        • Zarobi@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 days ago

          I remember a thread on here a month ago or something where the developers just asked the A.I. to generate some convincing looking work to show. Like layers and stuff as you say. It was truly shameless

          • FiniteBanjo@feddit.online
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            3 days ago

            Was that the Agent Pond game with the cybercows? Not convincing at all, and also not a work file like psd, xcf, or clip, but yeah they tried.