Thread 96245752

>watch a video on how to design games
>starts railing against AI art and using it at any stage, from production to prototyping
So is it better to never release a game and never pay any artists, or prototype with AI art and use that a springboard to pay for real art?
I got 210 cards I need to do art for I can't doodle this shit

>>96245752 (OP)
thousands of indie games were published without AI

>>96245846
But they didn't hire traditional draftsmen, I imagine they hired people who used photoshop

>>96245846
Before AI was a thing. They also didn't pay artists and used their own shitty doodles or nome at all.

>>96245752 (OP)
Did the video producer give a reason for avoiding AI art?

>>96245752 (OP)
Just keep in mind that your game will be rejected out of hand as more slop if you use AI.

>>96245752 (OP)
> I can't doodle this shit
Why not? Did your hands fall off or something?

>>96245924
This.
Example: Me.

>>96245911
>ai is theft!

Use public domain art wherever possible instead. Much classier that way.

>>96245752 (OP)
Neat thing about advice is you don't have to take it.

>watch a video on how to design games
>I got 210 cards
Why are you only now watching videos about how to make a game when you're already so deep into making the game?

>So is it better to never release a game and never pay any artists, or prototype with AI art and use that a springboard to pay for real art?
Why do you need to waste time generating images when you probably already have an idea of what the card is and what should be on it? Just tell the guy you're paying "here's what I want" if you actually believe that to be an option and cut out the robot middleman.

>>96246618
>GIVE
>ME
>MONEY

>>96246641
I never told him to pay artists, he brought it up himself in the OP post. Really, good flourishes in the margins is all he needs to make the cards visually appealing. I don't care about the ethics of ai, I just selfishly want the world to be less ugly.

>>96245752 (OP)
why do you need art at the prototype stage anyway? it's just filler
also though if you think you can sell the prototype to people to pay artists, then doodles are the more sound commercial decision
the people that are going to buy some shelf queen indie card game want DIY "sovl", they don't want to look at some shitty AI illustration

>>96246641
What’s the issue with paying someone to make it look good and give it a unique flourish to attract future customers?
>it costs money
Yes, all investments do. Frankly, you don’t get something for nothing. You can either do the job yourself, scrape by with whatever public domain stuff you can find, or pay someone to make it look good.

>but muh ai of the future
If OP needed a yes-man, he’d be asking chat gpt instead of asking a Mongolian basket-weaving forum. The card game itself should be functional, I don’t see why he can’t spend an afternoon doodling some pictures for alpha/field testing and then look to spruce the art up with professional assistance to make his cards stand out fro. The competition

>>96245752 (OP)
People would rather sell their soul to an artificial alien god than LEARN TO DRAW


Why do you need art assets for a prototype game anyways? Nearly all art for prototype games are placeholders. In fact, art is one of the last things you add when making a game

>>96245850
>Muh draughtsmen

>>96245752 (OP)
Why would you need art in a prototype? I mean unless you're doing a public sale's pitch and need the shinies.

>>96246916
>If OP needed
OP needed to engage in bait and you know it
delete the thread
nothing of value would be lost

>>96246940
>people would rather type a few words and press a button than spend thousands of hours learning a skill
No shit.

>>96245752 (OP)
>I got 210 cards I need to do art for I can't doodle this shit
If you are talking beta art, yes, you can.

Will it take time? Sure. It'll also take time to prompt the AI well enough.

>>96245752 (OP)
>So is it better to never release a game and never pay any artists, or prototype with AI art and use that a springboard to pay for real art?
You will forever have the stink of AI clinging to your game and people will use it to tell others not to play it because it has a bad reputation.
>But I think AI is good/I feel like that shouldn't happen
Cool, but it doesn't matter how you feel or what you think. People who hate AI will shit on it and avoid it, and if your game isn't shit (And the Pareto Principle says it probably is unplayable dogshit anyways), it will have no growth potential.
So you know what? Go ahead, it's probably gonna flop anyways.

>>96245752 (OP)
>Internet gets self-righteous about something
It's better to ignore it and do whatever the hell you want.

>>96246940
How is it any different from CNC machine tools replacing manual ones? Aside from the fact that it's threatening the jobs of people who thought that sort of thing only happened to the peasants.

>>96247562
>Rational conversation
>With someone bloviating on the internet
You're not talking to them about the topic. You're talking to them about their sense of self-worth. That's not a conversation you can win, anon. They've tied their self-worth to being mad about Thing on Internet. Why do they bring it here instead of Twitter? Who knows. With hystrionics like using AI is selling you "soul to an artificial alien god," do you really think you're about to engage in a rational conversation?

>>96247591
>>96247562
get a room

>>96247603
Stop being a voyeur, weirdo.

>>96247562
>t. can't rptate the apple
>the wobbot wiww do it fow me :3

>>96247562
>How is it any different from CNC machine tools replacing manual ones?
Maybe I've been miss-informed, but I don't think CNC machines ever required global industrial espionage and IP theft just so that they'd power up when you flip the switch.

>>96247562
The basic problem is that if you want to make the art look acceptable, you need to put in time and effort, but no sloppa wants to put in time or effort, and furthermore lacks the aesthetic sense to even come back from dinner to a completed gen of 100 pics and select the one that looks best.

>>96247562
LLM machines are only really good for replacing the kind of art nobody pays attention to anyways, not for the kind of artwork that actually stands out from the competition. That along with model collapse means people will stop caring in about a few years.

>>96245846
And they largely lost their creators money

My money is precious and dwindling.

Why should I spend what little I have on something you didn't put the effort to make?

Got to some art school or smth and ask kids to draw shit for you for pennies.

>>96246916
>I don’t see why he can’t spend an afternoon generating some pictures for alpha/field testing and then look to spruce the art up with professional assistance to make his cards stand out from the competition
Why is doodling shit prototype drawings better than generating decent ones?

>>96247864
It's going to be replaced with competent art later, so it's unironically faster that way

>>96247591
>>96247095
>stop discussing this
>stop having conversations
>this conversation I don't find value in is worthless and needs to end right now
yikes

>>96247824
Are you paying me for a game or for goon material? I'm a game designer not an artist

>>96247877
>I'm a game designer
Good one, anon! I almost snorted at it.

>>96247877
>Are you paying me for a game or for goon material? I'm a game designer not an artist
Art in game books is prolific for a reason, anon, and that reason is it's what the audience wants. The days of a 40 page book with ten B&W pieces are long gone.

>>96245752 (OP)
>So is it better to never release a game and never pay any artists
Obviously it's better if most peple who can't power through the basic process of creating something don't use a system to create a thing and then say they did made it. It's a waste of space and time.

You couldn't even get 3 friends together to try out some ideas you had, what makes you think you'll get the thousands needed to make it rentabke? You might have spent too much time with chatgpt being your yes man and now sound deluded.

>>96247899
Good thing making art is cheaper and faster than ever with generative AI, if art is what the people actually want
>no no they want artists making the art
This just reminds me of that AI child drawing of sonic and people cooing over that. People don't know what they want, they only know AI was supposed to eliminate jobs for dirty truckers not le enlightened arteests

>>96247911
>You couldn't even get 3 friends together to try out some ideas you had
This thread is about the art for the game though, not the game itself, friend

>>96247914
>This just reminds me of that AI child drawing of sonic and people cooing over that. People don't know what they want, they only know AI was supposed to eliminate jobs for dirty truckers not le enlightened arteests
You're free to huff this copium, but there's a reason this thread was made. AI art is trash sloppa people hate, one guy on 4chan successfully tricking retards here doesn't change that.

>>96247929
AI art is trash sloppa, which is why it is fine to be used in the prototype stage because that's where trash sloppa exists. Claiming that AI art has no place at any point of a game's development is silly and anti-progress

>>96247936
Uniorinically, if someone is so apathetic as to turn to AI art for their prototype work, then they might as well just take an even faster and far lower effort route to steal shit from google image search. Cause AI slop is literally everywhere and you don't need to waste your own electricity to make another piss-colored animu waifu image when a trillion already exist on the internet.

>But that's theft
Lol
Lmao even

>>96247953
So at the core you agree with my and my sentiment that using throwaway art for the prototype stage is fine, as long as you don't try to go on and sell those actual AI art pieces as part of your game.

>>96247963
It's not my game, anon, so I literally don't care what OP does or doesn't do. I've been one of the people saying that just mspainting your images would be a good stop-gap here, after all. I disagree that using AI art is the most efficient manner when I've highlighted two other methods that are far faster, just mspainting it or google image search placeholders, but that's a matter of opinion at the end of the day.

Though I'm definitely not going to act like I have any hope in OP, because starting a thread trying to defend the use of AI before he's even done it indicates he only started the thread to get asspats and assurance he's "doing the right thing", not cause he cares that much about getting his game off the ground.

>>96247936
I don't have anything against AI art in the prototype phase; Mythic Bastionland used some, then paid for some very nice pieces from an actual artist that gave it unique character.

(I'm not >>96247953)

>>96245880
Mothership still uses the crappy original art for the covers because it had built momentum with just the designer doing the art.

>>96248011
I am OP friend, I've developed a game and 200 cards around it. It was faster for me to generate the images for those 200 cards than it would have been to MSpaint doodle, or to even find random google images that meet what I want.
I don't intend to sell a finished product using AI art, but I heard an opinion that AI art doesn't belong anywhere even in the prototyping stage and I wanted to bring that discussion here

>>96248026
Then good for you, now focus on getting your game done instead of wasting time here

>>96246641
can you believe those fucks want me to pay for a hamburguer? how entitled can you get?

>>96246940
>Why do you need art assets for a prototype game anyways?
because he's so AI poisoned he never actually asked around how the process works, made no connections with anyone with experience in the field where he wants to work, and assumed everything is popped out already finished like an AI picture.

>>96248035
Wasting time here having these kinds of discussions are small things that contribute towards the final product. If you don't like the discussion in this thread you are welcome to leave it

>>96248049
I've worked in the board game industry for 6 years and traveled across the country doing convention work. You are poisoned by anti-AI sentiment that you've become rabid

>>96247914
>Good thing making art is cheaper and faster than ever
I heard that artists only require half a gallon of water to stay hydrated, but that must be an Anti-AI lie because I can't draw for shit, no matter how much water I drink.

>>96248026
>I am OP friend, I've developed a game and 200 cards around it.
Earlier it was 210.

>>96245880
>>96245846
this but free public use pics/ bring do small and obscure that no one cares if you took art.

>>96247914
why didn't you post a good example then?
The pylons aren't consistent with the one right after and the road is made for giant three wheelers.
You ask a company to make you a picture, they gave you shit and you came here to tells us how nice they are.

>>96248053
If you want me to be frank, OP, then there's not much to really discuss. While I somehow doubt that you can't just steal 200 images from 4chan alone, if you've already committed to doing AI even before the thread is over, then that's your decision. I wouldn't, but only cause I don't personally consider AI art to be worth the waste of electricity.

>>96248075
>The pylons aren't consistent with the one right after and the road is made for giant three wheelers.
Works for a prototype

>>96248098
I'm committed to having a discussion on the use of AI for prototyping because I have used AI to prototype the images for my cards

>>96245992
>>96245911
You can't copyright it, so anyone can use the art

>>96248111
Then you have your answer. "Do whatever, it's your life."

>>96247923
he wouldn't be looking for any purpose advice videos and discussing it here if he had people trying out his game.

>>96248060
sure you did, that's why you make pity threads on /tg/

>>96245752 (OP)
AI Art doesn't offend me I've never cared. I guess it mostly sucks but whatever, all art sucks these days. Unless it's of Elves, elf art can still be good.

What must be totally excised from reality is AI writing. I can spot ChatGPT's atrocious verbiage from a mile away and it makes me want to kill myself every time I see it.

>>96248136
>how dare he continues to learn and develop as a game designer
lol

>>96248111
I will note, the only reason I know Mythic Bastionland used AI art in its prerelease form is that a guy's review/discussion of the game spent ~4 minutes of the 15 minute runtime bitching about it and saying that it's basically just that this was done a ways back/by a guy he likes/that he's said over and over that it's just placeholder that means he will talk about the game at all.

>>96248158
Buddy, if you have 5+ years of experience in a field you don't need the advice a youtuber is gonna give you. I don't even believe you have 5 years of experience jacking off.

>>96248201
Buddy do you think working in the board game industry means I worked specifically as someone who designed the games?

>>96247914
>This just reminds me of that AI child drawing of sonic and people cooing over that.
If you'd read the actual thread nobody was "cooing" over that. People called the poster retarded and he had very obviously replied to himself.
But I don't expect a slop poster to be able to discern details lmao

>>96248319
>he was only replying to himself
From the people that brought you hits like
>every meme is a psyop
And
>talking about something means you're a marketer

>>96245752 (OP)
The reason most normal people don't like AI slop isn't because anyone can make it and it hurts le artists, it's because of how you can't go anywhere on the internet without stumbling upon AI slop due to big corpos and xitter grifters pushing it non stop for years, to the point where everyone is fucking sick of it.

Go ahead and use AI for your game or whatever you want to do. Just don't be surprised when there's massive rejection from anyone who would actually want to interact with it, since the only people who want to see AI slop are the ones using it themselves, and they're more likely to just take your shit and AI generate their own from it for their newest grift.

>>96248369
There's also that whenever there's an update you get a month of new looking stuff before it's been exploited to the point you get sick of seeing it because it's fucking everywhere.
No matter how it looks, people will turn it into corporate memphis.

>>96248363
Yes anon, conveniently the replies were all spaced to within a minute of eachother, it's pure coincidence, AI is truly soulful!

>>96248917
Anon the image itself has two posts that are only 6 seconds apart. You're getting monumentally blown the fuck out right now.

>>96245752 (OP)
AI slop looks like shit and "amateur game designers" are likely to use whatever they get from their prompt without trying to fix or modify it at all.
If we're using AI slop, why not ask a chatbot to write a game for free instead of paying "game designers" to do it.

>>96249340
I didn't pay a game designer to get my game designed, why should I be required to pay an artist to do my prototype art?

>>96245752 (OP)
If I see AI art I dismiss whole thing as slop.
If I see shitty stick figure doodles it signals to me that creator is willing to pour his heart and soul into his game, and this is something I can support.

Simple as.

I think this all stems from the migration of hyper commies and leftists in to the gaming space. The people railing against AI art i think are the same kinds of people who imagine they'd be poetry teachers in a communist regime. These 'artists' took refuge in a hobby that was about crunch and objectivity and are slowly whittling it down to objective garbage.
These people were never supposed to be put out of work by AI, they were supposed to be the one immune profession and they get taken out first

>>96249389
>required
And there it is, the sign you're doing this just to get assurance that those filthy "ai haters" are against you. Like cripes, just do it if you really want to, nobody's stopping you

>>96249485
>only commies think AI slop looks ugly
No, just anybody with eyeballs.

>>96249389
You're prototyping, you double nigger. Youy don't need art at ALL during prototype stage. Curb your autism, draw some funny shitdoodles and focus on making a mechanically good game first.

>>96249485
Nah, I'm as right-wing as it gets and I recognize AI as symptom of jeetery/general brownness.

>>96245752 (OP)
I think you should consider how AI art and the perception of such will affect your potential sales. I gotta wonder what you need so much detailed art in your prototype for so bad though.

>>96245752 (OP)
Just use the ai art if you don't think it's such a big deal

>>96249556
Its one thing to think it's ugly or brown coded, but another to rabidly fight against any use of it at any point in a games development

>>96249592
If you use AI for commercial purposes you're spiritually brown, sorry pal, them's the rules.

>>96249613
I see

Who knew 4chan was the home for all the corporate shills?

>>96250025
The artist corporate shills or the game design corporate shills?

>>96248062
funny thing about flesh and blood artists is that they want water, electricity and housing, same as GANs, but they also want things like 'food', 'prestige', and 'profit', all of which cost money and none of which are demanded by GANs
the unfortunate reality is that they'll have to compete with a machine to produce throwaway slop art, and considering the degenerated ability of the average individual to genuinely appreciate art, the fleshie artists are pretty much already priced out. furry fapcore artists are gonna have to double up on their dayjobs, and generic fantasy doodlers will have to start working on the design side rather than the execution side if they want to stay fed.

progress marches forward and cares not for those crushed beneath its tread.

>>96247628
>muh IP theft
you do realize, anon, that when an artist posts an image to some manner of hosting service to display it to the public, that they no longer retain universal distribution rights in perpetuity? that art 'theft' isn't happening because the holders of the distribution rights--the hosting service--allow their services to be crawled by bots, which in turn feed the art--acquired perfectly legally under the terms of use and/or corporate use agreements--to the AI that then produces uncopyrightable compositions thereof.

while i agree that the artist should retain those rights in full, feelings and ideals don't override contractual agreements. if they didn't read the Ts&Cs before they put their art out there, there's nobody to blame but the uploader.

>>96249556
>I'm as right-wing as it gets
We're you born retarded or did you get hit on the head later in life?

>>96245850
Do you have any fucking idea who draftsmen even were and what was their job?

t. one of the final years until they closed the school, because AutoCAD was everywhere.

>>96250568
>you do realize, anon, that when an artist posts an image to some manner of hosting service to display it to the public, that they no longer retain universal distribution rights in perpetuity?
They actually do. Automatic copyright applies as soon as the work has been created and can't be voided unless you explicitly enter into an actual contract. The hosting service you mentioned generally don't care and don't control who uploads the image, so they can't sensibly claim that their TOS grants them the right of the commercial use of anything hosted on their services.

Also stealing your product to train a machine that is literally meant to shit into your sandwich (and that could not identify a sandwich without millions of people having been forced to point at all manners of sandwiches for years) is not a case of fair use.

>>96250745
>It's theft because I don't like it!

>>96245752 (OP)
>translation: I came here to stir a fake AI outrage thread
Fuck off. You created nothing, not even AI generated, you're here just for attention, you whore

>>96250814
I can upload images of Mickey Mouse and they'll still claim that they have entered into an agreement with me regarding their commercial use of the Mouse.
Best they can do is vaguely claim that they have the right to control the transfer the data package that makes up the image, which is being hosted on their service, and hope that Disney won't fuck them to death.

But if they transfer it to some crawler who uses it to train his lake sucking shit sandwich dispenser, then that use is very obviously outside of their TOS.

>>96248022
>crappy
Well, look at Mr. High Standards over here.

>>96250865
The thing is though, it's not actually making their trade marked images.
It's a more expedited version of artistic influence at best.

>one of the things ai consistently fails at drawing is dice
lol

>>96250702
>We're
Saar...

>>96248026
>AI art doesn't belong anywhere even in the prototyping stage and I wanted to bring that discussion here
That's absolutely right.
There is no discussion, AI art doesn't belong anywhere.

>>96250829
>aaaaaagh I specifically go in to threads for discussions I'm not interested in and get mad!
>and I'm going to make that your problem
Lol

>>96250933
Im curious why you have such a backwards stance though. Are you an artist yourself or are you just retarded enough to piss in the wind of technological progress?

>>96250907
Other people tried to be smart like that, they called up Tom Waits to sing for one of their commercials and when he turned them down, they hired a tribute act for the job.

Which made Tom Waits sue because his specific style of singing is literally the brand he has developed and that the company was making commercial use of his brand was fairly obvious.

>>96251003
So it wasn't AI then.

>>96251003
He sued the tribute singer?

>>96250907
Also, if I steal all the parts required to build a boat from Home Depot, the transformation will still not have been sufficient to save my arse from doing time.
The same will apply if I steal all the parts required to build a machine that can produce a wide variety of boat-shaped objects.

>>96250969
NTA and I hate to make this analogy, but AI is McDonalds of art - cheap, barely any nutritional(artistic) value and made of mystery mix of ingredients put into blender and then shaped into vague amalgamation of what it meant to resemble. It's not something that I see ever getting away from the stigma. Of course big companies will use it because they don't care about end product, just about profits (and if new edition of Big Thing sells 60% less copies but costs 90% less to produce it's profit!). Now you have to decide for yourself whether you are okay with consuming slop.

>>96251043
What if you design a machine using inspiration from components that have been perfected over thousands of years?

>>96250969
>talks about backwards stances and technological progress while defending a currently unsustainable technology
Are you willfully ignorant, or just completely retarded?

>>96251091
Ooo I'm curious to hear you expand on that. It gives me "the internet is just a fad" vibes.

>You VILL eat ze bugs
>You VILL live in ze pod
>You VILL get ze vaxx
>You VILL get ze chip
>You VILL vatch AI entertainment
>You VILL own nothing
>And you VILL be happy (or else)

>>96251019
He sued the company who made the commercial. The tribute singer obviously can't replace the original IRL.

Which makes it even funnier that Scarlett Johansson didn't sue the shit outta OpenAI, but then again, I doubt she actively does more day to day than tell brightness from darkness.

>>96251130
That's retarded though, why wouldn't he sue the singer who specifically copies what the man claims is his brand? Did he go around and sue every customer the tribute singer ever had?

>>96251075
What if I cook up a big batch of the Wunderbare Wunschpunsch and bless your health?

>>96251074
The analogy works on a basic level, but ignores how wasteful AI is.
AI is like the McDonald's of art, sure, if McDonald's slaughtered three whole cows for each 4oz patty and threw away the rest, while pumping ten times the total amount of methane in that moment those cows produced their entire lives.

>>96251120
We're on the internet, you do your own research. I'm neither your dad nor your teacher, kid.
Look up freshwater and electricity consumption, and carbon emissions, fuckstick.

>>96251164
Yeah, I forgot to mention that. Incidentally that's also the answer to >>96251120.

>>96251120
>It gives me "the internet is just a fad" vibes.
The state of ai is like watching a 50x50 px video on the 1990s internet and a bunch of indians are telling me "online video has already replaced tv"

>>96251075
The legal cases deciding if the construction of Stable Diffusion and similar models (i.e. on copyrighted art that the creators do not have any particular rights to use) is still as yet unfinished (Andersen v. Stability-AI, if you're curious).

If you think you know in advance whether AI will win, consider that National Comics Publications, Inc. v. Fawcett Publications, Inc. found that Billy Batson infringed on Superman's copyright, while Cariou v. Prince found that chopping up a photographer's work up and scribbling over it wasn't copyright violating (at least, in 25 of 30 cases at issue). It's all just whatever the judge felt like that day.

>>96251243
The law doesn't care about ethics, anyway.

>>96251266
You do realize that "Haha ethics can't stop me" is not a good argument, right?

>>96251190
Sorry bud but if you're going to claim an entire technology is unsustainable while refusing to back up your claim, I'll simply dismiss it like I'm doing right now
Turns out the internet was not just a fad

>>96251481
How's the nft trade going? Have your monkeys replaced the economy yet, son?

>>96251509
Your argument for why the entirety of AI is unsustainable.... is NFTs?
Lol dismissed

>>96251625
Nah, my argument for LLMs being unsustainable is a combination of model collapse, laziness, apathy, and focus on short term profit over long-term sustainability. I'm personally pointing out NFTs as an example of never putting the cart before the horse given that even now everyone is convinced bitcoin and nfts will become so big they'll outright change the economy overnight when all they've done is just made more ways to grift people and suck up far more resources than before. Never presume line will go up forever, it's going to either start tapering off once the hype dies down or crash hard and forcibly stabilize itself once all the people artificially propping it up leave the last suckers holding the bag. AI is going to be a huge thing, but ai art is never going to be the industry-replacing gold printing machine the techbros tricked you into believing it'll be. It'll just be another option by companies to nickle and dime the lowest common denominator on via shitty artwork nobody wants for worthless products, much like OP.

>>96251702
Already dismissed, anon. Sorry you bothered writing all that

96251755
Thankfully I wasn't writing it for (You)

96251768
k

>>96245846
Got it in one.
AI is not necessary for anything that was ever made in mass before it existed, and that's an obvious fact.

>>96251329
Of course it isn't a good argument, because corporations would gladly kill children and kick puppies for even the smallest profit increase, if they knew they could get away with it.

>>96251481
>I win if you don't spoonfeed me
Willful ignorance it is.
Enjoy your day, you actual waste of oxygen.

>>96251846
>backing up your own claims is spoonfeeding
Stop using words you don't know

>>96251266
Ok and retard? Thats like saying "theft is only bad if they catch you"

>>96251755
NTA but going, "elaborate on that", and that dismissing the elaboration is extremely funny. It just proves that you never wanted to have a discussion in the first place.

>>96251793
>Trucks were not necessary for obtaining goods before they were invented and that's an obvious fact
Maybe stating facts isn't quite the argument you think it is. Free societies aren't restricted to "what's necessary."

>>96251932
>How thing
>Well NFTs are dumb!
Anon's response wasn't an elaboration. It was incoherent hysteria.

>>96251932
Not really. Making the thread means I wanted to have the discussion but I'm not going to waste time on someone who makes a ridiculous claim and offers no back up.

>>96252074
I highly doubt you did. Every time someone does give forth their opinion, you go "but I dun wanna pay money bawwwwwwwwwww". Which is a valid point, but it's the only one you've come up with, even when others point out other cost-saving measures. Otherwise you just bitch about wanting a discussion yet giving nothing to discuss in turn.

I doubt that you even have a game and that you didn't make this thread to bait people, frankly.

>>96252128
>Which is a valid point
Thank you, the rest of your post was inane garbage seeing as you agree with the whole central point of the thread I made

>>96245752 (OP)
The only people who actually like AI anything are those who are completely soulless and without imagination. Since tabletop games are pretty much exclusively for people with imaginations mixing the two typically does not end well.

>>96245752 (OP)
I would rather see your ameturish stick figure art than something that has less than surface level "polish"
At least then I would know you put something of yourself in the creative process, you lazy piece of shit

>>96252198
So presenting you with a fully fledged game isn't part of the creative process? A game only becomes a real creation when an artist gets paid to put a stamp on it?

>>96252009
You're talking like AIs add any utility, when they just make everything slower and lower in quality.

>>96252277
No, you're just the salesman at that point.
You've had as little to do with the making of the game as the marketing team.

>>96252277
I'm not talking about hiring an artist. I would prefer the author doodling to art made by a computer wholecloth. You're being disingenuous

>>96252307
A person who creates the rules, creates the cards, and creates the interactions has no part of the creative process? Crazy

>>96252318
You said you used an AI, so you didn't do any of those.

>>96252308
Why don't you care if the art was doodled on traditional paper or not? Are computer drawings real art?

>>96252330
Why are AI fags unable to read? you keep trying to argue things that aren't said.

>>96252322
Read the thread, silly. I used AI for the prototype card art but the rules are my own
>nuh uh
K

>>96252345
Ah, so you just wanted to add a thing to your theoretical game to make it shittier, I see.

>>96252142
Brother if it is so dire, why are you still here? Seeking validation? You're not getting any here

>>96252336
Im simply curious about where your line is. If you abhor new technology, why wouldn't you embrace the old

>>96252356
Apparently thats how arteests take it. I like seeing better prototype art to better imagine what my game could be, its a good motivator to help get past those middle humps

>>96252359
My line is when it's incredibly shit.
I would love AI if it was actually AI, could think, and could make things of value.
Instead it's an investment firm trap that costs extreme amounts of money, while torpedoing the business of any early adoptees trying to use it.

I don't like things that are low in quality.
>>96252364
I'm not an artist, you AIfags just churn out infinite low quality shit.

>>96252357
Brother just close the tab, I'm still here because its my thread but you are doing nothing here but shortening your lifespan my dude

>>96252330
Is a human holding the pen?
If yes, it is art
If no, it is slop
Simple as

>>96252364
"Better art", nah. AI slop you will create will be much worse art. It might be a more pleasant picture but it will be much better art for it was dreamt up by an algorithm plus touch of randomness, there is no inherent purpose to every part of it. It is in a way soulles imitation of the real thing

>>96252330
Yes anon, when someone does an actual computer drawing using digital tools, they are doing art because they are actually following the same principles as in "traditional" works. I know your mongrel low IQ subhuman bugperson faggot ass is going to purposefully miss the point of this answer so I'll just round it up saying you should kill yourself.

>>96252377
I am shitting on AI slop. It is a hill worth dying on.

>>96252295
That's still not an argument, anon. Free societies get to do things you think are "slower and lower in quality," too.

>>96252414
No, it is an argument, just not one you are prepared to deal with.
Shit's actively parasitical and produces no utility, and will stop existing the moment investors find the next thing.

>>96252401
If you don't need to sharpen your pencils how can you really call yourself an artist

>>96252425
You're describing artists though, as evidenced by AI plowing through their industry before even truck drivers

>>96252443
No, not even a little bit. Artists are famously not invested in until long after they die.

Why are AI fags so unable to produce basic thoughts?

>>96252451
>investors care about dead artists
You don't even know what you're arguing about at this point, you're simply rabdily anti AI anything at all ever and thats pretty sad. Like watching an old man yell at a refrigerator

>>96245752 (OP)
>So is it better to never release a game and never pay any artists, or prototype with AI art and use that a springboard to pay for real art?

Correct.

If this is a hard concept for you to understand, then I can already guarantee that whatever ideas you have are dog shit and you're not a creative individual.

Perhaps you should kill it yourself?

>>96252471
Investors care quite a lot about dead artists, as it's one of the oldest and safest tax evasion schemes out there.
It's kind of the entire fine art industry.
I'm not sure how you can be so wrong so many times in a row, it's wild.

>>96252425
>It isn't necessary
>I don't like it
That's not an argument why people shouldn't use an AI. You're right: it's not necessary. But you're not making any argument that people should not be allowed to do unnecessary things, are you? If so, start by explaining why it's "necessary" for you to post on 4chan. And you don't like it? Cool man. It's so generous of you to have an opinion you're willing to share with us. But that has nothing to do with anyone but you.

>>96252488
I didn't say it's not necessary, I said it produces no utility.
Why are AI fags so consistently unable to read?

>>96252425
>Shit's actively parasitical and produces no utility
The utility of LLM bots is shitting up online spaces with whatever the paying customer demands. It's next-level invasive advertising and trolling.
The pushes for ID registration are fairly obviously so that they can have some level of certainty that their bots aren't targeting each other.

>>96252501
Okay, I'll give you that, these new bots allow you to shitpost in more places than the previous shitpost bots.

>>96252443
oh, yes, AI has replaced every artist.
No, I'm joking, I'm sure that AI that is currently too expensive to keep working without money from actually productive things could be expanded to do millions of things better than it does now and somehow become profitable in the way. Art in particular is known for being a profitable field.

>>96252497
>I didn't say it's not necessary,
See >>96251793
>AI is not necessary
To which I responded >>96252009, to which the response was >>96252414, to which the response was >>96252425, to which the response was >>96252488.

Jesus, why are anti-AI fags so consistently unable to read?

>>96252484
Please tell me what that has to do with art in the board game industry, anon. Do board game company investors only care about dead artists making new art for their upcoming products? Or are you a desperate, grasping retard?

>>96252513
That's not me, retard.
Literally only two of the quotes in your entire post are me.

>>96252517
I'm sorry your three attempts at red herring-ing the conversation didn't work out, now you return to "the quality is shit", the argument you desperately were trying to avoid.

>>96252501
That's a baseless and pretty schizo take, but I like it a lot and might repeat it in the form of
>I've read that
>Some people have been saying that
or something else that makes it sound based on something.

>>96252529
Quality arguments stem purely from assmad artists

>>96252548
AI fags insistence that only artists don't like incredibly low quality work is fascinating.

>>96252562
I remember the unending cope when an AI picture won an art competition judged by humans

>>96252624
Other way round, it was an man made picture that beat the AI ones.

>>96252624
Oh, yeah, those guys became a laughingstock for a while.
Then they started having to add means to filter out AI work since they were getting spammed with so much low quality trash.

>>96252660
>>96252668
Hmm who is right? Let the cope commence

>>96252700
probably different competitions.
do you not know what cope means?

>>96252716
Ah, so we admit that there was a competition judged by humans where an AI image won out over real breathing artists >>96252716

I'm going to say OP is full of shit with his claim that he made 210 cards for this non-existent game, and see if he's man enough to prove me wrong or continue malding about AI in this thread, lol

>>96252725
Are you entirely unable to read? One of the responses you got acknowledged that.
Why are AI fags so consistently unable to follow even basic conversation?

>>96252734
So one person is still coping

>>96252751
He probably is talking about a different competition, like I said.
You are leading me to believe you have no idea what coping means.

>>96252756
Funny even the competition we agree occurred had to change the rules so real artists could still compete. Crazy

>>96245752 (OP)
If you're creative enough to make a game I'd hope you would be viscerally hateful of ai as a concept, in principle and in instinct. Game design is a type of art, you should be spiritually repelled by fake art to the point of seeing it playing any role at any stage as a cancerous corruption of your vision that can only derail it. Even if the AI is eventually replaced, its like letting a toddler grow up watching Tik Tok. You'll never know the knock on, butterfly damage its done. Its like asbestos.

If you are putting non final images on these cards its presumably for play testing. For playtesting you just need to help differentiate the cards because you're just trying to see how the mechanics play out in real life over a representative sample of games. Any shitty doodles would do just fine. That's how most games look for playtesting.

>>96252764
Well, once one AI fag gets in, you then get thousands and thousands of samey AI works. And they tend to be shit the vast majority of the time, so you have to work to remove AI stuff.

Thankfully, the vast majority of AI works look kind of samey, so it's only difficult in that you have to get a guy who knows what an AI is to look at them. And if it sneaks past him, well, by god, it might be the one in a million not-horribly-disgusting work AI fags make on accident.

>>96252778
>looks like shit
>wins art competition
Lololol

>>96252769
Your first paragraph is a nice opinion, but no I don't feel rabdily threatened by AI

>>96252849
I've seen a banana taped to a wall win an art competition, anon.
It is NOT a high bar to pass.

>>96252863
Right, so when artists try to claim that I don't have a game without their stamp of approval I chuckle. They are not the industry

>>96252874
If you use AI art you will be critically panned and have a marked drop in sales, which is the repeated pattern any time one of you guys tries this, be it big business or small.
This isn't an artist thing, this is a general market thing.

>>96252863
>goes again to the banana taped to the wall
>doesn't realize that the entire "art" display is literally to piss on the concept of high art and what the art community considers "concept art"
>doesn't realize that the banana and duct tape are outright disposable and that the artist successfully sold the "right to display" aka the concept, thus proving his point further
>thinks this is a dig at AI and not that rich people are stupid
Lol

>>96252890
Would you prefer the smears of shit that won art competitions?
We both agree that the morons judging them aren't the standard to determine what makes good art. I even went on about how the majority of high art is just a tax evasion scam.

>>96252887
Yes in a commercial product I agree I wouldn't want to use AI art. The thread started with a discussion around using it at even the prototype stage which even that gets a surprising amount of rabid pushback

>>96252927
Well, yeah. Anyone actually trying to use AI will slow the entire process down in almost any project, and that's even before we get into things like "But the doodle is representative, while the AI art isn't"

>>96252900
Yeah, it is, I'm just tired of people immediately jumping to the "banana taped to a wall" thing as some dunk against art without noting the joke is in fact on the dumb fucks that think they understand art

>>96252933
I know this might be hard for some artists to grasp, but it was faster for me to sit at an AI prompter with a list of cards I wanted prototype art for than it would have been to doodle out each one by hand or even individually Google search them, both being the 'best' alternative solutions

>>96252942
>no no you dont get it the banana on the wall was truly revolutionary
>but its also just a money laundering thing
>but also cant you see the message brought to us by the banana on a wall?!

>>96247562
>Aside from the fact that it's threatening the jobs of people who thought that sort of thing only happened to the peasants.
>>96247914
>People don't know what they want, they only know AI was supposed to eliminate jobs for dirty truckers not le enlightened arteests
>>96249485
>These people were never supposed to be put out of work by AI, they were supposed to be the one immune profession and they get taken out first
Speaks volumes that this is the no. 1 defence of AI art I see on /tg/
I'm supposed to cheer on further ugliness in illustration because some fags with a victimhood fetish want to live out revenge fantasies and are imagining being bullied by a whole group of people to make the fantasy happen

>>96252946
I think you didn't actually do that and you're full of crap, OP

>>96252975
No bro thats just you projecting

>>96252977
That's fine, this thread will die and my Kickstarter will still fund

>>96252990
>Kickstarter
Now I KNOW you're lying

>>96252946
No, it's really not faster. Every single time this comes up, the AI guy makes some non-representative shit over the course of five minutes, wheras the doodler makes a doodle in like 30 seconds.
And I do mean doodling, you know, like a child does.

You would probably have an easier time using random public domain pictures instead of waiting for the image to finish and paying for tokens. But since you're not releasing a prototype to the public I doubt anyone will care.

I would more against AI if half of the artists I've dealt with weren't insufferable fags that couldn't stick to a timeline, communicate effectively, or deliver consistent work. Out of all the people I've hired to do stuff for me they have consistently been the hardest to work with and unless you're running something big enough to hire somebody to work in house, you're going to have to deal with a bunch of people that can't stop stroking their ego with coconut oil long enough to get anything done. Yes AI art is crude and bizarre now but give it 10 years or so and nobody will care.

Pic related.

>>96252983
No, he's using direct quotes, his statement is pretty accurate.

>>96253009
In 10 years, AI art will be almost entirely gone, since the investors will have moved on.

>>96252996
You're right I used indigogo in the past for my other project

>>96253024
Why are AI fags so unable to speak truthfully?

>>96252998
If you need five minutes to type "thing" and press prompt, you are probably an actual corpse. But your cope scenario is adorable, I dont know why some of you have such a hard time grasping that AI generation can be a time saver even if it doesn't meet your specific standards

>>96253024
If you're such a poorfag you're turning to AI art for a prototype, you're not getting funded

>>96253034
It consistently takes you AI fags about that long, yeah.
And that's for one image. For multiple images? Forget about it. Google man will be done with all of them while you're barely 15% there. Doodler even faster.

>>96253018
Like with all the cryptocurrencies- Their uses never materialized, and the critics were correct that they were exclusively for investment gambling and money laundering.
Or the NFTs, who just bombed entirely.
Or any new edition of windows, which nobody ever wants and has to be forced on them because the past one is almost always superior.

>>96253040
>if someone has to rely on crowdfunding they'll never release a product

>>96253054
Not what was said, -5 points to AI fag house.

>>96253043
This is delicious cope, please keep serving it and telling me how long it took me to prompt my images

>>96252983
>projecting
I'm directly quoting you dorks, copetard

>>96253063
You've already passed the 3 minute mark on trying to generate one to prove me wrong.

>>96253056
But what you said was just as garbage, is the point.
>if you cant pay an artist you cant make a game
Lol

>>96253069
Obvious revisionism, -5 points to AI fag house.

>>96253018
Whether you like it or not AI is here to stay and only growing. Nobody is going back to hiring artists to make signs or other small things a business would need ever again.

>>96253067
Oh, did you convince yourself that I was going to try to disprove your claims of how long it took me to do the prompting I did?

>>96253072
>B-but it's here to stay!
The constant cry of the techbro about everything that isn't here to stay.
>>96253074
And five minutes. GG.

>>96253079
Oh nice you've even convinced yourself you won the imagined scenario. Congratulations! The total level of success has gone up in the world even if you're just a schizo

>>96253085
Cry about it, I guess.

Daily reminder that this AI bullshit is just a distraction from the fact that corporate entities like VISA and Mastercard are ensuing censorship. The discussion of AI is unproductive because it only serves as divide and conquer tactic between bottom feeders like artists and game designers.

>>96252429
>If you don't need to sharpen your pencils how can you really call yourself an artist
you told chatgpt to write you a story, how can you really call yourself an author?

>>96253638
If I write a novel but have AI generate the cover I'm still an author, no?

>>96252443
Bro, virtually no businesses use AI art in any substantial way. Literally any time there's AI art in any product, it's because it's a cheapo product without money for real art (e.g. indie vidya. tiny TTRPG publisher), and it frequently and immediately gets negative comments. AI art is fun to use to illustrate what the fat-titted bitches in my smut quest look like, but it is absolutely not crowding out any but the absolute bottom-of-the-barrel artists, for the absolute cheapest writers.

>>96253703
I dunno, you've been more than willing to lie many times, and seem to misunderstand basic concepts. I'd doubt it.

>>96253703
Yes. You're not an artist, though.

>>96253761
Authors are artists of the written word

>>96253765
That's not the definition we were arguing, but good work esl man.

>>96253789
Ah gotcha, in that example the artist is the author and the person who does the cover is an illustrator, not an artist

>>96253814
again, not the definition being discussed, but nice try mr. esl.

>>96253824
Can you link the post the working definition we're discussing was posted in?

>>96250814
It's theft because the law of every civilised country says so.

>>96247732
LLMs are not meant to generate art. It's just a feature that got tacket on for marketing purposes.

>>96247562
A CNC machine is more analogous to a printer that can quickly reproduce images rather than AI. The CNC technician still has to design the piece and program it into the machine before the machine can cut the final workpiece out of the metal/wood stock. A lot of times, the technician also has to tweak the program for the specific machine, tooling, and material stock they are using.

>>96253851
This is a retard content to argue "theft isn't wrong so long as you aren't caught!" and resorts to shit like >>96252420 when non-arguments fail.

Why this bait hasn't been wiped yet is a mystery.

>>96253872
Lololololol please I can only handle so much

>>96253843
I don't see why I would, you've been unable to understand basically everything up to this point.

>>96253879
>why is this discussion I don't personally approve of allowed to happen?!
>mods? MODS!!?

>>96253879
Did you have a stroke typing this, or have you reached your query limit for ChatGPT?

>>96253899
>Seething at being called bait
lol, they don't build trolls like they used to.

>>96247562
CNC tools do a much better job than LLMs do. There's no actual use case for LLMs other than spamming low quality garbage, which we could do already for pennies on the dollar.

>>96253889
Goes to show, you don't even know shit about the technical aspects of AI, all while sucking it off.

>>96253926
Nobody who is pro LLM knows anything about it.
Everyone know knows about it thinks it's finnicky as fuck and has to reach to find uses that weren't already done by older models, better.

>>96253899
How is this not an off-topic flamewar?
>>96253904
The "this retard" refers to OP and aifags like him. I agree with >>96253851. If you are the aifag then nothing needs to be added to >>96251266 and >>96251329. You are at best an apathetic dupe excusing yet more corporate shittery. Most likely just a troll though.

>>96253906
I'm always surprised at how anti discussion people can be on this site. Several replies above can't even fathom the genuineness of the thread

>>96253936
Report it and move on, babbers

>>96253942
Ah, no counterclaim? Thought not. Already have btw, moving on is neither here nor there as a retard with heels dug in will stick around out of spite bumping their shit to page 1 with or without me.

>>96253953
>as a retard with heels dug in will stick around out of spite bumping my shit to page 1
Be my guest, sir

>>96253961
>what is sage?

>>96253968
>I must be in this thread that I hate
This couples well with my theory of gaming being taken over by commies

>>96253915
not true, I can use it to automate google searches

>>96253929
Honestly it is quite nifty for text data processing tasks I would have to write a skript for otherwise, or that would turn into bussy work. And quite reliable in this regard as well.
Deep research can be of help sometimes, but I've measured performances with it and most of the time it doesn't warrant the ressources used by it. It will turn into a huge money sink when the bubble bursts. It can also fuck you over pretty hard, if a hallucination manages to slip by. But right now it's alright to use as long as the big players take a loss with it.

>>96254010
Yup. Fucking sucks that most long lasting utility of these things is poisoned by venture capitalists overhyping it and shoving it where it doesn't fit.

>>96253994
This is not automation.

>>96254064
I say "give me the most realistic plausible WW2 in the next 20 years" and it goes around a bunch of websites and summarizes results. Much easier than trying to do it myself.

>>96254141
>give me the most realistic plausible WW2 in the next 20 years

>>96254206
Sorry, WW3. Typo.

>>96245752 (OP)
Let's say you will not use AI and will not pay artists to do art assets. Learning to do art from literal 0 skill after age 13 will take you a damned long time. And another separate training period when you do start leaning towards a different medium or at least digital painting

You will be bogged down with the upskilling for art that will be 1/5th of the aspets of designing games. wtf.

>>96254010
It literally breaks spellcheck it's so bad at these tasks.
We have downgraded in search and word processing technology.

>>96253994
You can use it to downgrade google, congratulations.

>>96254259
Man, AI fags will find any excuse to produce terrible products.

>>96254283
Yeah, let me just search for something on Google, that way out of ten pages I can get Wikipedia, Reddit, and then 8 pages that are obvious AI sloppa within ten seconds of looking.

Google has already downgraded itself.

>>96254294
Ah yes, google is bad because it has AI results, now let's use an AI to automatically find me AI results.
As opposed to just looking like a human for things that are correct.

>bought a sketchpad after work
I think I can get in to this. Here's my doodle for my Bonfire card

>>96254434
yeah, shit's not that difficult.

>>96254417
I don't think I've ever had an actual AI page spat out by Grok desu. It produced 174 results, some of which were clickbait sites but none of which look like AI at a glance.

>>96254212
>>96254141
Jesus christ imagine being so brainrotted you're too dumb to use a prompt.

>>96254472
>Jesus christ imagine being so brainrotted you're too dumb to use a prompt.
I typo'd in the post here, not in the prompt.

God. There are a few edge cases where AI is useful. Yes, overwhelmingly it's been used to pollute the internet with garbage nobody wants to see; that doesn't change this fact.

>>96254459
I don't think I've met anyone who uses grok who can think.

>>96254485
The only use case for AI is producing garbage to make everything worse. It's great at that, though.

>>96254485
>God. There are a few edge cases where AI is useful.
Like tricking dumb people out of their inheritances.
Or funneling money to India.
That's about it really.

>>96254486
@grok is this true?

>>96254491
>>96254497
No, there are other use cases. Arguing against this doesn't make your argument stronger, it makes it weaker, because many people can think of at least one (1) time when they wanted something and going to an LLM got it faster and/or better than just using a search engine, and you therefore discredit yourself.

>>96254259
>Learning to do art from literal 0 skill after age 13
Nigga it only takes 5 years tops

>>96254508
>No, there are other use cases.
I guess it can also be used to funnel money to kenyans and other third world countries. That's about it though.

>>96254508
If asking a Dalit to search things up for you is faster than doing it yourself, you're just dumber than even a dumb indian. Not exactly a point in your favor, anon.

>>96245752 (OP)
>prototype with AI art
Why? Just take a note from storyboards and just draw some stick men and blobs to hint at what you want. Lot faster than trying to render out enough pics that work for what you want.

>>96246618
NTA but you can always learn new stuff and change things while in the prototype stage.

>>96254520
Again, you are just saying something that directly contradicts most people who have actually used the technology's experience. It makes you look stupid and tendentious, it doesn't help the anti-AI case.

>>96254532
I can tell it search for X, then tab out, then come back to skim the searches to find what I'm looking for. It is, in fact, less effort than if I did that myself. I don't use it for every search, that would also be retarded, but if I have a broad topic it can in fact be faster. Again, you just make yourself look stupid and tendentious. There's no point continuing to talk with you because you will just say, "lol, there is LITERALLY zero time you would EVER use AI to help with ANYTHING, EVER," which is obviously untrue, and your repeated insistence on it makes it clear that you would respond to literally any actual use case this way. Farewell.

>>96254552
>most people
According to what?

>I can tell it search for X, then tab out
Oh so it's already taken longer than doing it yourself would.
Sorry anon, you're just dumber than the Indians considered so retarded they're untouchable.

>>96254552
Most people think AI is a bubble and does nothing but decrease workflow efficiency. Sorry you had to find out this way anon.

>>96253994
Well no because AI hallucinates constantly and regurgitates other LLM hallucinations too.
So whenever AI actually gets used for something, it'll give you results back quickly... But then you have to spend several times as much effort checking to make sure it's even slightly close to the truth, because it will get things so flagrantly and blatantly wrong that even an idiot wouldn't.

And if you don't, you just get shit that doesn't work or make any sense.
I guess it can work for people who just want to jerk off and "worldbuild"? But we had a thread the other day where someone had a mental breakdown because they realized talking to chat GPT had just produced masturbatory nonsense the moment they tried to show it to other people.

>>96254611
This simply isn't accurate. Dunno what else to say. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

While AI is can just randomly hallucinate, search-adjacent things directly link the sources so I can just click on them to confirm with a quick CTRL+F. Additionally, it generally only hallucinates when you ask it a question that doesn't actually have an answer (e.g. how old is GJ 1002).

>>96254645
This simply isn't accurate. Dunno what else to say.

>While AI is can
Lol.
>search-adjacent things directly link the sources
And half the time what they say is a mishmash of inaccuracies. The other half of the time, they're straight up hallucinations and reprints of AI generated articles and sources.
>Additionally, it generally only hallucinates when you ask it a question that doesn't actually have an answer
Anon, Chat GPT will hallucinate how many R's are in the word "Strawberry" and can't do addition without struggling. I was googling how to minmax AC at level 1 just a few weeks ago and it told me 10+5+5 is 21.
Sorry, but you're retarded if you use AI, you just don't notice it because your brain function has decreased.

>>96254680
After the Strawberry incident they just had to hardcore it so it always comes up with 3, but now it doesn't work for any other words. I asked Deepseek how many I's and how many A's are in the words "Jingle Jangle" and it told me the answer was 2 each time.
BuT iT dOeSn'T hAlLuCiNaTe!!!!

>>96254508
I can't think of a single time the LLM was faster, and everyone who insists it is take like six times longer than googling it.

>>96254645
It's so accurate that it's the most common complaint with AI, and is causing enormous legal troubles for AI users and companies every day.

>>96254701
>>96254705
Chat GPT told me you were wrong though.

>>96254711
See? Hallucination.

>>96254505
Nah senpai. Heil victory desu~

>>96254141
That's a terrible way to use it. You're basically summoning hallucinations and skipping the step where you check it's output.
>>96254010
Seconding this, but it's also great for looking for specific things e.g.
>Look for the article on X that claims Y. It was published more than 5 years ago by a Czech institute [...]. Also link the studies from the article.
It's great if something got buried in the sands of time, and you can easily check the result since you already know what you're looking for. But again this is it just doing grunt work. Also nice to shut up "SoUrCe"-faggots.

>>96250906
I actually kinda like pic related despite its quality. Or maybe because of it? I can't tell.

>>96254697
Why are you asking the AI to do things it's bad at, that are trivial for a human to do, then complaining that it's bad at them? Do you also get mad your car is bad at going up staircases?

>>96254680
>Anon, Chat GPT will hallucinate how many R's are in the word "Strawberry" and can't do addition without struggling. I was googling how to minmax AC at level 1 just a few weeks ago and it told me 10+5+5 is 21.
Try not using the AI to perform math, the thing it notoriously is dogshit at. It sounds like you are the retarded one with no higher brain function.

>>96257130
A car isn't built to climb stairs, so it is understandable when it fails to do so.
AI is built to be an intelligent problem solver, so it is understandable to fault it when it fails to solve even the most simple problems.

>>96257142
AIs seem to be notoriously dogshit at everything.

>>96254451
Just tedious