Home
Artists
Search Recent Random
Posts
Search DMs Popular Hash Lookup Tags Random
Importer
Import FAQ
Register
Partychan Telegram Find&Fuck Waifus ThePornDude
Home Artists Posts Import Register

Should the GMTK Game Jam allow AI-generated material? (Patreon)

Published:
2023-05-10 08:48:29
Imported:
2023-05

Content

Hey! I'm getting very close to announcing the date for the 2023 GMTK Game Jam, but I feel like I need to make a decision on something before I do. And that's this: should we allow or ban the use of generative AI?

In the last 12 months there has been an explosion of tools that can be used to write code, create art and music, and pen dialogue. And so I need to make a stance - one way or another - on whether this stuff should be part of the jam, or kept away from it.

I have some thoughts and feelings, but I don't want to bias the poll. So please use the poll below to have your say. And you can use the comments to expand if you wish.

Thanks!

Comments

Anonymous

I think the focal point of your concerns should definitely not be "do I want to reflect the state of technology for code and art". The state of technology for transportation is we have planes and cars, but would it be suitable to allow them at marathons ? I think one needs to consider the interest of holding a Game Jam and where to place the cursor : is the Jam about limitations, is it about making the best possible game in the time frame, is it about coming together to make something with complementary skills, etc. My other concern about AI - solely on the field of art, I don't know code enough - has to do with ethics. I fully agree with Naif Alrayes' earlier post and cannot fathom how it can be so that we are letting these things be trained on shady data banks of stolen art without any regulation to this day. Should, in the near future, there be an ethical system of control that clearly identifies art that the author allowed for AI training, I would say 100% go for it. In the meantime it feels like peak capitalistic wild west, complete disregard towards artists, copyright, and the very meaning of art and human expression themselves,

Paul-Hugo Dlugy-Hegwer

i voted ban all, but more than anything i dont want AI art because while some of the code ai tools are ethical relying on using open source code, AI art tools overwhelmingly stole artists content without their consent. I am also concerned that if you do allow ai art and have the users use a tag, you are going to end up with users review bombing each other over it. Some will review bomb ai art games, and others will review bomb games made without it and it will just make for a far more negative space.

Willhart

I don't get why people keep saying AI art steals art. It is fundamentally misunderstanding how AI tools work, and what they were created for. Training with online data should be fair use, as long as the output is transformative enough. That can easily be ensured by using negative prompts for example, since how do you detect the opposite of something? Or you can try combining multiple different models, and hypernetworks to further finetune the results to be more unique. (Each prompt and network can have a strength value set, like 0.5 or -2). I've also trained my own models, and that way I can make sure the output takes only the "feeling/colorscheme" of the source data, and not the details.

Willhart
>>108256187

One of my favorite tricks is to use a model trained on simple flat style, and set it to negative, thus adding more details and texture to any image.

Anonymous

It's a difficult question, especially when you look at prospective Game Jams over the next five years. Disallowing AI-generated material out-of-hand will increasingly feel like pushing back the wind, but allowing it in its current state feels like building a dry campfire and hoping nobody brings a match. While I went with "Allow All", I wonder if there's some way to draw a line around the current state of AI content without denying it. Namely, what's the feasibility of maintaining two categories, one for projects that *do* contain AI-generated content, and one for projects that *do not*? I understand that this would likely have to be on an honor system as it's very difficult to prove when judging from the outside, but I also feel like the kind of people who invest the time and thought to participate are a relatively honorable lot overall. It involves a lot of trust in the audience, but so does leaving a decision like this out to the community.

Anonymous

The reality is game development software has been automating development workflow for a long time. LLMs and generative AI are the next evolution of that. That being said there's a strong argument that using artist's work as training data without their permission is unethical. As with all other tools, allow its ethical use and ban its ethical misuse. It may be hard to determine what was done ethically or not, but that's true in general.

Parachuting Turtle

It's not "just a tool" if you don't know whose original artwork it was trained on without their consent.

Anonymous

Ban All or Allow All are the only reasonable options in my opinion - too high chance of someone claiming a misunderstanding otherwise. And of those, I think Ban All causes the least possible criticism, because it is essentially the state as of a year or two ago. It also allows for allowing it in the future as things become more settled in this space.

Malcolm

I'm going to ultimately say no to all AI materials. Something very wonderful about game jams is the opportunity for collaboration, and allowing AI generated code or art will allow coders and artists to forgo the other. In a game jam where the process is just as important as the end product, discouraging collaboration is a no no.

Anonymous

I don't often comment but I will do so here. Using AI-generated art or code may not be identical to straight-up using someone's copyrighted art or code but it's too close for me, especially when we know that the AI models were trained on corpora of copyrighted material compiled without license. Ban All is the best answer here, to keep the Game Jam ethical.

Mandelbrot

I voted to ban all. But considering that the Game Jams are about creative ideas that are more than just specific art assets or code, maybe it could be allowed with a clear requirement that all AI generated content must be declared.

Chris Rothove

Do you have a reliable way to figure out if something is AI generated to begin with?

Anonymous

I think Ai Art is okay, and having a way to tag / clarify so we can still celebrate the passion and effort in hand-crafted work is important. Some people are strong in a skill, and these tools make it accessible for those who aren't. As long as people aren't being rewarded for work they didn't do, then I see it as more helpful than hurtful.

droid

I think this is covered by the rules for previous jams, though perhaps not in an obvious way. Which isn't to imply nothing should change or be clarified. >What assets can I use? The game should be developed during the jam, but you may use pre-existing code and can use whatever art and audio assets you have the legal right to use. A generative AI is a model with the parameters of the model set during a computationally intensive training process. So unless a jammer trained a model from scratch during the jam, the model, and therefore its output, would be a pre-existing asset. So by the old rules the assets would be permitted, but one would not be allowed to check the "all art/music was created during the jam" checkbox. "Legal right to use" might be more complicated. I'm not going attempt to figure that one out.

Anonymous

Mmmm, seeing as all these predictive algorithms have been trained on stolen content without the creator's consent (public crawl just grabs any image on the internet, and copilot just uses everyone's github code without asking), I feel like allowing it in the jam would be encouraging / condoning some pretty unethical practices... I'm all for using predictive / generative algorithms as part of the creative process - I don't think it diminishes the result - but until there are more robust protections and laws surrounding people's data (for example a mandatory GDPR-esque opt-in for your data being used as training data etc) then it's hard to see what's currently being branded as AI as anything but exploitative; our own data being stolen and then sold back to us by massive corporations 😒 As others have posted - there's no way to confirm whether a submission was produced this way, but we all follow your content out of respect and admiration and if this is something you DO have a similar opinion on, then drawing the line in the sand could, itself, be a meaningful act.

Anonymous
>>108266267

Not all AI platforms are trained purely on data from everywhere, some models, like Runway, you can train on your own material, making it the perfect tool.

mhogar

I don't think AI can diminish ones Jam experience, only enhance it. As cool as these generative models are, they can't generate entire games for you. At best they can create some art, music (limited), sound effects, code snippets, ideas, etc. It basically removes a lot of the busy work associated with game creation and frees up more time for the creative aspect, which I my opinion is a win for everyone. I'm not going to speak for the legal/ethics aspects; I have my opinions but this isn't the place to voice them. However, perhaps adding another option to the "I created all art and music during the jam" selection to signify the creator used AI to generate art and music would keep it fair for those how still want to do everything themselves. Personally I would only use AI for code generation to save time over frantic Googling, but would prefer to create the art and music myself. However, if others still want to generate art and music, I wouldn't have an issue with that.

Anonymous

I vote for allow all since there's so much time you have during a Jam. Allowing use of AI generated material allow much more time savings for jammers and more creative work to be created. I think it'll bring much more value to the end in term of game jam. AI art has helped me tons as a solo dev who has 0 art skills.

dido

Game Jam is about rapid game development. AI placeholder art and code we'll allow creators to iterate so much faster. And allow more people with great ideas but less group members or drawing skills to participate too.

Anonymous

I feel like I want an option somewhere in the middle between ban/allow *all*. As trepidatious as I am about a lot of this tech, I can't argue that it isn't a perfect fit for developing prototypes and game jam content. While I feel like it would be in poor taste for someone to generate huge portions of the game with it, some amount of AI assistance seems completely logical. I think the most important thing is the rules be *very* strict about declaring what elements of the game were AI generated/assisted and what AI was used. As for the ethics of using any specific AI model due to what content it was trained on and if they had the rights to actually ingest that content...well I'll concede to others on that complex topic.

Brendan Gilet

AI is a little controversial. It might be better to wait it out until everything calms down a little. Maybe ban them this year but consider allowing them next year?

Miro Hudak

Never introduce rules you can not enforce.