That sounds like a definition that discounts a *lot* of RPGs, but you do you.

I wonder what criteria YOU would use. Stat-based character progression, gear, quests, story-heavy, some meaningful decisions... what does an “RPG” need to have?

That’s... not at all what I was saying. I was suggesting a metaphor where the *trainers* tried to pass off trained behavior as broadly inherently natural. Here, let me simplify.

This is really closer to a dog trainer teaching a dog to stand on its hind legs, then trying to write an academic paper titled “canines naturally tend towards being bipedal like a human”

So break it down for us, Mr Professional Artist. How do you continue having a job when someone takes your work and the work of thousands of other artists and mashes it together into something far faster and cheaper than what you make?

I had been hoping that the ending of FFVIIR meant that I didn’t have to care about Genesis or any other CC-added characters. Sadly, Intergrade kinda shot that hope in the kneecap.

I think this is the wrong question. What is more applicable here is “how different is the general culture of mobile gamers to PC or console gamers?”

Programmer intent to pattern software after human brains does not equate to success in that endeavor, despite what overzealous fans would have you believe.

Ideally, any trained dataset would have to be certified “clean” (i.e. only trained on public domain or licensed images) to have commercial use.

Exactly. This entire debate going on here about “what is art” is an idiotic distraction.

Human learning and “neural net” statistical dataset training are fundamentally different processes, and continuing to draw direct comparisons between them is one of the biggest problems in this discussion.

Most damning argument against AI I’ve seen yet. Kudos, I guess.

And we’ve seen such a wealth of traditional animation from major studios in the past 20 years, right?

The tech isn’t the problem. It taking *your* art and feeding it into training the NN software without permission, then someone else using that trained dataset for commercial use it the problem.

Isn’t the “input and feedback” of the AI prompts one of the core arguments AI shills are making about the ‘creativity’ of prompt writers?

Tell me you’ve never commissioned art without telling me you’ve never commissioned art

I would be fascinated to see the body horror you’d get from portraits made by that a few generations down the line.

And when things are plagiarized, ideally people get in trouble for it.

First actual balanced take I’ve seen in this godforsaken thread. The problem is, as always, uncontrolled and unethical use of the new tech. Ideally? Any commercial use of neural net created imagery should have to be certified that it was trained on public domain or licensed images. You want to buy and feed an entire…

I cannot state this often and clearly enough. Regarding AI ‘learning’ vs human viewing of art.