Clair Obscur won multiple awards but used generative AI art as placeholders during production.

The Indie Game Awards revoked Clair Obscur’s Debut and Game of the Year after the AI disclosure.

IGAs reassigned the awards (Blue Prince, Sorry We’re Closed) and reignited debate on gen-AI use.

  • zbyte64@awful.systems
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    13 days ago

    Did genAI help you write this response? Because that would explain not understanding the difference between using tools to be creative and using tools to plagiarize.

          • zbyte64@awful.systems
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            13 days ago

            I would say that this is conflating different issues. The original issue is whether or not the entry followed the stated rules, they did not. Then you brought up whether using any tool at all is cheating or plagiarizing, obviously it is not. Now we are on a 3rd issue which is whether using genAI for placeholders is actually creative, obviously it is not because it isn’t part of the final creative product. And a 4th issue as to whether using AI is a “sin” or not, that is less obvious not because it depends on one’s moral framework and their values. For instance, if one values authenticity then they would likely agree using AI as part of the process makes a less authentic product, while someone who values profit or time more than authenticity would not see an issue with its use.

              • zbyte64@awful.systems
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                13 days ago

                Like I said, when talking about morality you’re talking about a subjective perception of value. All the other issues I mentioned, like them not following the rules, have objective criteria to say “yes they broke the rules”. If your perception of authenticity includes gathering inspiration not from the originator but from a tool that samples art for you, then you would obviously conclude the end result is authentic. If however you define authenticity as something uniquely in the domain of the living, then they would not agree with you.

                  • zbyte64@awful.systems
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    13 days ago

                    The rules being “idiotic” is a different issue from whether using pre-existing assets as placeholders is okay. For instance, one could argue that genAI, even during the concept phase, is an unfair advantage like taking steroids for a sports competition. For the purpose of fairness they have a blanket ban on genAI, not simply because “AI bad”.