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.

  • TheObviousSolution@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    52
    arrow-down
    13
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    Oh no, they used gen AI filler art which they immediately replaced with human one. They did it the one way they could do it right, let’s demonize them into submission while the flagrant violators get away with murder because why bother?

    As someone who hates the AI bubble, this anti AI circlejerk is making me hate the circlejerk more than the bubble. Plan successful?

    • Rekorse@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      29
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      They lost the awards because they had positively affirmed there was no AI use in production, when the game had AI art in release for customers to see for five days.

      They were punished for being dishonest, not for AI.

      Edit: I’m sure their game sales already spiked from all the press of winning the awards. They still will benefit.

      • TheObviousSolution@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        23 hours ago

        So they lost because the promo material that seldom makes it into the game included AI this time around, for a very short while? Do you think that makes the people so judgemental look better?

        • Rekorse@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          edit-2
          23 hours ago

          No the game itself included it. It was also used in the development of the game. The studio told the award show organization they didn’t do either of those things. When it was found out that they did, they had to forfeit their awards. The game isn’t any worse though, still worth playing.

          Edit to add: I think the misunderstanding here is that I think the value of the video game awards are zero, so in my eyes clair obscur gained and then lost nothing.

          • TheObviousSolution@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            23 hours ago

            They also included filler textures which they kept track off and replaced. Going so asinine on this making the whole game being used with generative AI makes the term worthless, if that’s what people are hoping to accomplish.

            • Rekorse@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              23 hours ago

              How does it make it useless? If people find use in the term and its usage, by definition its useful. It doesn’t need to make sense to 100% of people either.

              This is a perfect game to bring about discussion in where the line is between an ethically created video game vs one that’s not ethically created. This isn’t just an AI thing either, people have boycotted studios over other types of poor treatment of their employees too.

              People don’t want art that comes from coercion or abused artists.

              • TheObviousSolution@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                22 hours ago

                Your definition is useless to my concerns about AI, and you don’t care about a discussion, you directly want to damn them - for using filler BS art that they made sure to remove and some promo? You want to throw them into the same lot as the same people vibe coding and generating a complete game out of AI, you do you. I just look at how they handle removing it and owning up to it after they use it. It’s funny how flawed people who only tolerate perfection are versus the people who are capable of valuing people grow from their mistakes.

                • Rekorse@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  21 hours ago

                  I’m literally playing their game now. The only thing I think was bad really is not disclosing it upfront, but I dont know if that was a mistake or intentional.

                  Its still important that consumers are capable of making informed decisions.

    • Ledivin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      It’s not because they used AI, it’s because they lied and fraudulently marketed (and continue to fraudulently market) the game as never having used AI.

      • TheObviousSolution@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        23 hours ago

        The game was not developed with generative AI. AI was used in promo and textures for a very limited time and then was substituted. If this is the war engine you are running, I want way off of it, my beef with modern AI is way different.

        • Ledivin@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          17 minutes ago

          How on earth is that not part of development? I don’t personally mind that they used it in that way, but it is not debatable that they lied and have been fraudulently marketing the game. Follow the rules of the fucking contests you enter.

    • artyom@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      23 hours ago

      while the flagrant violators get away with murder

      Who do you think is “getting away” with what?

      • TheObviousSolution@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        23 hours ago

        Ask RAM prices. Maybe you missed the whole entire AI industry based off of pirated content now getting even Disney to pay them.

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

          What does that have to do with video games? How are they “getting away” with it? Maybe you missed the insane amount of backlash associated with all of those things you just listed?

            • artyom@piefed.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              20 hours ago

              I keep asking and you keep failing to explain what “getting away with it” means. Who is getting away with what?

              • deathbird@mander.xyz
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                9 hours ago

                Basically all of the AI companies get away with violating basically all IP laws and norms, and manipulating the PC hardware market to the detriment of consumers. I believe that’s what he meant by “getting away with murder”. As a point of comparison to this relatively minor kerfuffle.