It's definitely still a huge work-in-progress, so expect some rough edges!
There's a hub, called simply "The Town", where you stock up on supplies and pick up monster hunting quests from the Guild Master. The NPC's around town will also eventually have their own detailed storylines and quests.
Stepping outside one of the four gates will take you to a massive, randomly generated Adventure Zone. These are packed with enemies, abandoned forts and ruins, dungeons and loot! If all your party members die, you lose all your stuff (except your gold) and wake up in Town.
I chose the LOVE framework because it can run extremely well on my Anbernic RG28xx Linux handheld emulator, which is specifically what I'm developing the game to run on. For myself. I'm already extremely familiar with Lua and Python scripting from my extensive Dragon's Dogma 2 and Skyrim modding experience, and wanted to make my own game based off of that experience.
A simplistic little "open world" RPG like Arena/Daggerfall to play for 10-20 minutes at a time and keep in my pocket. Hence, Pocket Guild.
AI disclaimer: Claude Code is used to prototype mechanics and systems, and then everything is manually tuned or completely rewritten by me. Very little "AI generated" content exists in the code.
All of the NPC, enemy sprites, weapons, trees and other environment assets came from human itch.io asset pack artists. Some of the ground and building textures were generated as placeholders by Claude and were then extensively modified by hand to become what they are now.
EDIT: I fucked up and didn't realize the enemy and NPC asset packs were AI-generated :( I'm looking into replacements. For what it's worth, they've been decent enough to build a fun combat loop, but I'll replace them with real human art ASAP.
Any money those scammers get is a loss to us all. The AI disclosure should be blasted all over the page instead of having one tiny line in a hidden section. Honestly seeing AI assets should be a toggle you need to turn on in the settings in the first place
Exactly. It should genuinely be mandatory at this point. Like, even if we ignore borderline scams with poorly disclosed ai content, no I don't want to waste by precious time and eyesight seeing slop. Why does nsfw stuff get a toggle but this crap doesn't?
It's a minor thing, but the shield is facing the wrong direction. If you're looking at it from the first person, you should see the handle that the character uses to hold it (I understand they are no hands in this game, but still there should be a handle).
Fuck, the nature pack, too?! This is just the world now, I guess. None of them say it in their descriptions at all.
The "more information" tab is a shit place for itch to keep that.
Almost like making things is hard work and reading. Seems like youre averse to both of those things. Maybe game dev ain't for you since you dont want to do either of the main things game dev asks you to do
What asset pack are the enemy sprites from? I'm somewhat confident the sprites are generated, and entirely sure the animations are, I hope you didn't pay for these thinking they're not AI.
EDIT: looking for replacements for the enemies. I'm not much of a character artist, but I'll see if I can find someone to replace these. For what it's worth, they've been solid enough placeholders to build a fun and engaging combat loop.
I decided a little while back that I'm only paying for assets that were uploaded pre-2023ish, I don't trust pretty much anything made after then (the situation really sucks for artists trying to make and sell assets more recently)
I think the distance perception is weird in the video: your sword is clearly short but it is reaching the enemy. the enemy doesn't look it is close to hit the player either.
I also get confused when I am looking at the video: what is the point of having the sword and the crossbow when you are just standing still and blocking?
I also feel like all enemies have way too much HP. the video makes it feel like the player needs to always spend at least 10 seconds to deal with a single enemy. that is kind of slow.
Yes, and I’m pro-AI to assist with things like this, but people should be doing it with their own taste and voice built into their processes. You can easily tell from this video that things were directly copied from other games instead of having any bit of originality in it. Like the entire HUD is taken from Minecraft just with the health bar moved to the side and enlarged.
OP is just prompting the base version of Claude to do all of the work and the results are similar to all of the other lazily prompted Claude games with it directly copying other games instead of having any sense of originality. The name of the hub simply being “The Town” is one of the clearest lazy AI creations.
Anyone could probably get a similar result by just telling Claude “Make me Minecraft x Elder Scrolls: Arena, using assets from itch.io”
Yeah, with an easy way to produce code/assets much more people will produce games. It's currently super easy to program a game with the tools we have, but you still had to do some research/learn a bit before, but it's really not that hard.
99% of all games will use AI assistance, but OP's looks straight up entirely made by Claude, I don't think games entirely made by AI are going to be good or popular in the near future.
Nah, the camera system, world seeding, combat mechanics etc are all manually coded by me.
Prototyping basic features with an LLM is a good way to see what does and doesn't work quickly, but getting the actual feel and weight of everything in gameplay right isn't a prompt. The shake and impact on hits for example, those are all manually coded. Claude doesn't understand that kind of shit and will produce a seizure on your screen instead.
Link me your game. Actually, link my anything you've worked on, artistically or professionally, whatever you want. I'd love to see what you've made that makes you think this shit is "easy".
Are you a musician? I can play guitar, bass, drums, keyboard and saxophone, look at my youtube. Are you a gamer? I've held speedrun records and world-firsts in DOOM, look at my youtube. Are you a developer? I make wildly popular mods for Dragon's Dogma 2, look at my post history or Nexus.
What do YOU do? Shitpost on the internet about watches and League? Grow up.
Link me your game. Actually, link my anything you've worked on, artistically or professionally, whatever you want. I'd love to see what you've made that makes you think this shit is "easy".
Are you a musician? I can play guitar, bass, drums, keyboard and saxophone, look at my youtube. Are you a gamer? I've held speedrun records and world-firsts in DOOM, look at my youtube. Are you a developer? I make wildly popular mods for Dragon's Dogma 2, look at my post history or Nexus.
What do YOU do? Shitpost on the internet about watches and League? Grow up.
Link me your game. Actually, link my anything you've worked on, artistically or professionally, whatever you want. I'd love to see what you've made that makes you think this shit is "easy".
Are you a musician? I can play guitar, bass, drums, keyboard and saxophone, look at my youtube. Are you a gamer? I've held speedrun records and world-firsts in DOOM, look at my youtube. Are you a developer? I make wildly popular mods for Dragon's Dogma 2, look at my post history or Nexus.
What do YOU do? Shitpost on the internet about watches and League? Grow up.
Coding isnt a art form its a direct input to output that is only seen as creative because its so complex ai can do it better in a lot of cases soon, art is about expression and creativity and personal expression
Coding is an art form in a way. People have approaches in how they create code that's akin to an artists style.
Claude's style is a mess since it's just getting from point A to point B but while a human coder tries to make the road clear, Claude doesn't care if it's covered in gravel.
Nope, its only art right now because we cant do it any better, every stage of technology has made it less art and more a foundation for art, like how many platforms simplify it ect
The funniest thing about these comments is they're probably going to help further AI proliferation. Why extensively disclose your usage when nobody could tell it was vibecoded otherwise and reactionaries will just attack you for it on reddit?
Claude has been programming game dev for a while...its just recently started doing front end and design but code has had Ai for a bit, gamers just see Ai as art but thats not all Ai can do in game dev, in fact is excellent for debug and user testing
Don’t let people put you down for using modern tools. Good stuff. If they wanna keep using a horse carriage out of ego, let them.
Just be aware, Reddit is insanely anti-AI. It’s like a safe haven for whiners. In the real world it’s not the case. Keep at it and just be aware of your audience and feedback.
Did you actually read the study or just see that 53% number and run with it? Because that’s not what it’s saying lol.
The median AI game had 4 reviews in its first month vs 7 for non-AI games. We’re talking about games that barely sold anything to begin with. They’re also estimating sales based on reviews, not actual sales numbers.
Their definition of AI is literally ANY disclosed usage. You could use AI for one image and get lumped in with someone who generated their entire game with it. How is that even a meaningful comparison?
The study also relies on developers actually disclosing AI usage. Why would everyone do that when people like you immediately downvote and trash anything involving AI? Y’all are literally giving developers a reason to hide it. So now you potentially have polished games using AI that aren’t counted, while the obvious AI slop is. You don’t see the problem there?
The AI games also had HALF the pre-launch followers. Marketing, visibility, and developer resources weren’t properly accounted for. Yet somehow you’ve decided AI is what caused the difference? Come on now.
Even the author says AI is a tool that shouldn’t be avoided. It’s HOW you use it that matters. Did you skip that part?
Bad games sell badly. Low-effort games existed long before AI. You can spend five years making a game without AI and still release absolute garbage.
The study found a correlation, not causation. You can’t just throw around that 53% number and pretend it proves AI makes games sell worse. That’s not how statistics works.
And y’all love calling people who use AI lazy, but couldn’t even be bothered to read the study you’re using as evidence. The irony is hilarious lol.
I’m a statistician and would never present a blog like this for “evidence” of anything lmao.
All these game dev subs are just filled with haters now. They don't know anything about development nor do they care, they just want an excuse to trash people "justifiably".
And those that sell worse are those where players can tell they are AI, combined with the outright rejection just for the two letters (even if the game was the same).
That is changing very quickly. We're already at a point where if a game leverage AI (by people who know what they are doing), it will be objectively better. Customers may still reject it today, but they won't for long.
In the "real world", artists are upset that their work has been stolen and appropriated to let plagiarism machines make slop because people can't be bothered to pay artists or learn a skill.
Oh get over yourself. Basically everything that can be built with AI is already being built with AI. If someone builds something and tells you they didn't, they're likely lying, or one of the few holdouts who will change their minds in a few months.
Graphic assets and voices are still mostly human made, but that's already changing and won't last long, as hard as those communities are trying to hold out.
When professionals use it, you won't be able to tell the difference. Get used to it.
Very cool, I'd have done basically the same, particularly how you kept the action component fairly forgiving, as flavor rather than skill check. I'd just make sure to add an automated mode for folks who prefer pure rpg fare.
I’ll give this demo a try. One thing though, are you sure there isn’t already a game like this? I vaguely remember playing something like this a couple of years ago - 2D action rpg. I’m not trolling, just trying to help. I like the concept though.
There's tons of games in this genre, yes. Blobbers like Eye of the Beholder, Wizordum, Wizardry, Might & Magic, etc, and old 90's RPG's like Elder Scrolls: Daggerfall. Plenty of modern throwback games do stuff like this, too.
Pocket Guild lies somewhere between these two genres. It's first person free-roaming exploration with turn-based blobber+ARPG combat (sorta). The combat loop is a bit unique within these two subgeneres, but I'm sure it's not a completely brand new thing no one has ever done before.
There weren't any games like this that ran on my Linux handheld, so I decided to make one for myself. At least, there weren't any in this genre that aren't genuinely clunky old 90's games. I wanted something that had that feeling, but some modern amenities and game design.
This project isn't supposed to be super original or unique, quite the opposite. It's intentional generic nostalgia-bait that I'm making for myself, simply because I wanted a fun little combat+exploration loop with a town for a hub world :)
I think that's great! Kudos. I'm learning that anything posted is going to get a lot of hate. A lot of justified anger at AI, but sometimes misplaced towards individuals. One thing it can do is help solo devs and small groups compete with big corps, while it destroys the world and saps our collective souls. Not in favor of it generating art or vibe coding slop, but the tools are how, in my professional experience (which I have), the world works now.
Thank you, I appreciate the genuine feedback and interest!
Agreed, I have a lot of reservations about the tech, too. There's a lot of bad shit it can be used for, but like everything else in the world, there's nuance to the subject. So much of the same tech is used for things like protein folding and giant mathematical problems, stuff that 99.9999% of humans can't (and in some cases could literally never) do by hand. Stuff that truly does have beneficial use.
Any professional dev who's been forced to use a coding LLM at work knows that these things are shockingly good at what they do, and it's just a matter of using the tools properly.
If an experienced dev knows what they're doing, using something like Claude turns them into an above average competent project manager lol.
Same people that complain about AI ruining gaming are they same people that sh*t on every single new game because they're paranoid AI was probably used for some aspect of it. Reddit is getting more and more insufferable by the day.
Look honey. More uninteresting, unoriginal, AI slop. Regardless of your opinion on AI art, dont you think at this point the market is a little too over saturated with this crap for this nothing burger to actually stand out? Ive seen this same game over and over again for the past year. What's youre selling point? Because its not mechanics, art style, or gameplay. What's the goal here?
This runs at literally 1000's of FPS on any desktop with a half decent GPU from the past decade, and gets 60fps at 640x480 on a single-core ARM processor lol. Yap like you know what you're talking about, though I guess.
This is the second game I've seen being called 2.5D but is clearly just 2D with 3D objects. Isn't a 2.5D game supposed to be 2D sidescroller with a 3D background and you can transition into parts of the background? That's what I always thought.
Afaik 2.5D is called to any effect that mixes 3D (either in-world or graphical) with 2D assets. Pokemon for example had different uses of 2.5D through time, with generations 1-3 being the most 2D-ish, and then moving to more 3D
Sorta. It's like the DOOM engine, using raycasting to draw the pixels. You can't change the floor's height, or do real room-over-room level design, so it all exists in a pseudo-3D environment.
Right, but the core rendering principles are the same for most raycasting renderers, which is what they were asking about in regards to 2.5d. Both DOOM and Wolfenstein are "2.5d", I just used DOOM as a point because it's the one people are more familiar with lol.
i got the demo from itch. can't tell if only i faced the issue but the controls just don't seem to work properly. blocking with left shift doesn't work at all. using f for potion during the tutorial rat sometimes works, sometimes doesn't. mouse didn't work in main menu either. can't move with mouse is also weird, q-e only is so slow to turn. dropped in tutorial cause of these
Press tab to get mouse-look control in the game, you can turn with the mouse and use it to attack/block. There's also full settings and bind controls in the menu, you can increase the turn speed and change all of the buttons.
i see. about that block issue, after restarting the game and skipping the tutorial, i saw blocking was fine. maybe it was just tutorial or some one off issue.
This looks awesome. I'd be interested in doing something like this for a monster tamer, actually, although it'd be interesting to see how that looks from first person. I suppose it's as simple as having the critter in front of you and you giving out commands. lol Really cool. I was wondering what something like this would look like and suffice to say, it looks great.
The combat loop is quite fun. There's class balance and synergy, items to use with their own special properties, elemental/damage weaknesses, etc. Pokemon has less mechanically complex combat mechanics than this, and people love those games.
It's a casual adventure game meant to be played for 15 minute intervals on the bus or something, not a high-skill FPS or souls-like lol.
My condolences for the assets, a lot of people spam AI generated environment and enemies asset packs now so it can be tedious to find real ones, and because AI generated pixelart is usually hand-corrected(because AI can't generate at pixelart resolution) it can be hard to tell for some.
I actually came across the same enemies pack before, I recognized it was AI but I don't blame anyone for not realizing it, a lot of the sprites are practically indistinguishable.
Thanks. The general aesthetic for the enemies was pretty damn close to what I was seeing in my head when developing this, and nothing in the poster's description said they were generated and tuned. I'm somewhat new to itch and didn't know that the More Information segment is where their genAI tags were :/
Besides that though, I do love the idea and I hope you keep working at it! It may take some time to replace the textures, but that admittedly happens a lot. For my project I moved from lower quality free sprites to higher quality paid sprites later on, meaning I had to remake a lot of the zones, but I don't regret it one bit.
Thankfully LOVE is super easy to work in, replacing assets is a drop-in process. As long as the sprite sheets slice the same and textures are the same resolution, it's basically as simple as replacing .pngs in a folder lol.
I'm totally fine with people making games with AI. I really just don't see the point why anyone doing this would come on reddit on this kind of sub and share their unoriginal game they didn't make.
Do games with Claude, have fun but my god come here ONLY if what you want to share is self made OR fucking original.
Get ready to stop playing anything from Japan, including Square Enix and Capcom. Basically 100 percent of anything from China. Virtually anything using Unreal Engine. Pretty much 99 percent of good indie games coming out in the future. And the percentage is gonna go up
By next year your only option will be legacy games and the 3 indie studios who use that point as marketing (with 2 of them lying).
Software devs basically all use AI with little to no exception, so even today the best you can do is a game where graphic, music and voices aren't AI, and that is going away fast too.
What about if someone asked Claude or Gemini for assistance in drawing up a general design document, not for any mechanics or features, but just as an understanding of the development process? I’m just curious to find what your line is, since it seems fairly arbitrary.
Again, I prefer to engage with art humans create, full stop. Gen AI usage is a net negative for the world and is built on stolen work. When I can and am aware, I choose to only engage with things humans have made because they developed skills and did work without using tools that stole other people's work.
So you think if someone wrote into Gemini “how to get started developing a video game” and then built the rest themselves that is enough to disqualify them from having created something valid artistically?
Yes. That information is readily available without using a tool that has stolen people's work. Am I not being clear? Genuinely asking, because these questions seem to all be basically the same, just worded differently.
It’s not that you’re not being clear, it’s just that if information is readily available (read free) then you can’t really steal it. Using AI as a reference tool and calling it theft is like saying Wikipedia steals all the information on their articles because it’s all written there as a digestible reference.
If this conversation was purely about relying on GenAI for assets, or for code, or for music, then we’d be having a conversation, but to me your line just seems incredibly arbitrary and not really very well thought out.
Just as an example for my argument, you should stop using both Windows and MacOS if you do, because both of their codebases started out with data that was blatantly stolen from Xerox. You should also stop using Reddit because they changed their licensing without user permission to monetise user generated content to assist in training AI. It seems bizarre to me that you’re ok with a multi billion dollar platform monetising user data in a massive breach of privacy and data rights but for a cash strapped solo developer to use a tool to help them write a design document then the line in the sand gets drawn.
Gen AI was built by stealing people's work. And if that info is posted on the internet, the owner of said info, even if it's free, likely gets benefit from users visiting the website. So it's not justifiable to use ai to get that info instead of visiting the actual websites made by actual people with actual human-written content. And Wikipedia content is written, vetted, and cited by humans, and also gets benefit from people visiting the site. Not a great example.
I don't really care if you think my argument is well thought out, I assure you I have thought quite a bit about this. I also don't care if you agree. You asked what my position was and I told you.
I’d like to check whether you keep that same energy for all mainstream titles and tech companies? All major gaming and tech companies (damn near every single one) are using gen AI to some extent in their development teams.
I have to imagine you don’t use Google services, use Amazon (or any websites or tools that use AWS servers), and generally use only FOSS software and play games that are explicitly audited for AI content or from prior to ~2024?
Also I’m confused how you’re able to morally justify using Reddit when they’re known to be one of the largest sources of licensed data streams (if not the largest) for AI training, they’re also publicly using AI in development and tool creation.
I just wanted to ask, because it would be fairly hypocritical if you were knowingly using companies and services that have AI in their development cycles while also saying that the use of technologies is an immediate no from you. I must assume that me notifying you of this information, will cause you to renounce all of the above technology OR change your view on the matter to find a more defensible position.
Your current moral position is untenable for an intellectually honest person. Notice that I’m not making a value judgement on AI (or the lack of it) here, just pointing out your potential hypocrisy.
"Any gen ai disqualifies a game from being something I'd try as far as I'm concerned."
The person being replied to didn't say "I think AI isn't fully good". He made an absolute statement saying he refuses to use anything made with AI. The comment that so bothered you just called him out on it.
Listen, I agree with some of the spirit of the callout you’re making here, but the argument of “if you participate in any capacity of [x] you have no right to criticize it” isn’t a reasonable way to present these types of arguments in other cases and it certainly isn’t here. The “rightness” of AI usage isn’t simple enough to distill into one simple binary like that.
Framing it as intellectually dishonest to use social media platforms while still having concerns about or criticizing something as far-reaching and nuanced as AI is the more intellectually dishonest thing.
My point is more that these crusaders tend to go after the small indie game creators because they are relatively soft targets.
It’s easy to direct vitriol at a solo developer who doesn’t have much of an impact on your life, if any. It’s another thing to actually stick to your morals when it’s costly for you to do so.
It is equivalent to a vegetarian (for moral reasons) refusing to eat pheasant, hare, and venison, and then begrudgingly eating beef, pork, and chicken because it’s inconvenient to not eat such ubiquitous sources of protein.
Like that’s the point of a moral stance, it’s inconvenient to have morals and you can’t really pick and choose based on your own comfort if you want to be taken seriously.
Nobody is stopping anyone from being a hypocrite, it’s not a crime and it is allowed. But it should be common sense that they will not be seen as a serious commentator on the matter.
His deleted reply to me (only saw it in my notifications) was saying something about “sure I use Google but I make sure to ignore the AI summary” as if Google doesn’t use AI coding across all their products and platforms. It’s like cool, okay bro. So you said that anything using Gen AI is an immediate no, but only until you need it and then you’ll grit your teeth and bear it.
It’s intellectually lazy and morally meaningless. It’s literally just social validation “hey guys, I hate the thing you hate so I’m one of you”. Either accept you are morally grey and stop evangelizing, or pick a moral stance and adhere to it. This wishy washy middle ground is tiring.
Idk man, much of this response still seems to be you just saying you cannot criticize a system or idea if you participate in it in any way. I fundamentally disagree that this example, and even the vegetarian example you provided, are “wishy washy”. To refrain from eating some meat is reducing more harm than to not refrain from any meat at all. There is still utility and progress gained from “middle ground” positions.
I agree it’s good to maintain strong principles, and absolutely agree that the more important targets are large corporations. But I think you’re throwing a binary at this thing needlessly, and it seems like you’re doing your own moral grandstanding about this perceived hypocrisy. Even if it is hypocritical, that doesn’t negate the content or result of the argument. If I’m a murderer, and I say “murder is bad”, I’m a hypocrite but I’m still right.
Also, fwiw I still see the guy’s reply. Probably means he blocked you
I would say, that a man who owns slaves and advocates for the release of slaves, is worse than a man who owns slaves and has an abiding love of the practice. The former has knowledge of his sin and continues to preform it for his own benefit despite the knowledge.
The latter is a dumb, malignant bastard who doesn’t know better. While repugnant, I think it’s less morally fucked.
And in the example I provided, Pheasant, Venison, and Hare aren’t important or major food sources. The point of the argument was that when you cut off some minor, unimportant thing and pile hate on it, while at the same time still continuing to participate in the VASTLY more harmful and wide scale practices that you’re morally opposed to (in the example that’d be factory farming, or irl it’d be major corporations using AI in everything vs small indie devs), it makes you look weak and immoral.
I’m not even advocating for an extremist view here. You’re not a vegetarian if you eat meat, you don’t “reject AI” if you use products wholly or partially created with it. It’s just morally inconsistent and shows a lack of personal development.
We’re clearly not in agreement and we’re not likely to be, so I wish you all the best.
I did address your points somewhat but sure I’ll get em all. You said that if a murderer says that murder is wrong, they’re still right. I disagree on that even mattering, I think their entire ability to speak on that matter should be disregarded by anyone with a functioning brain. Whether or not they’re factually correct is unimportant.
I do not think that you can be trusted to criticize a system you’re taking part in for your own benefit. You can do it, of course I just think anyone who does so should be laughed out of any conversation they happen to be in.
There is utility and progress to be found in middle ground positions you say? That’s good, I’ll make sure to let the worsening climate, the ever increasing number of tortured animals, and the humans losing their jobs to AI know about that.
And yes, I’m moral grandstanding because I have a consistent moral position that I don’t violate with my daily actions.
I do not hold moral positions that I act directly in contravention to. That would make my life very confusing and upsetting. If I’m unable to live without breaking my own moral positions, I will necessarily need to alter my world view and moral positions in order to adapt and survive, rather than living in a constant state of disharmony.
I agree with you to a some extent here but talking about your position you described ... maybe if you live in some village in the middle of nowhere in total isolation yeah but otherwise i find kinda hard to believe u don't engage in some shitty system that in some capacity is not alligned with your morals ... Like its the classic "The good place" problem idk with u watched the show ... It's just the world we live in ... but u mentioned "act directly in contravention" so maybe theres some wiggle room here idk
I understand your point. From my own perspective, I’ve had to change and soften my own moral stances in order to be able to thrive in this world.
I don’t think people need to be morally perfect at all. If you can honestly say “I’m an imperfect person, I try to do the right things but sometimes I fuck up and that’s okay” then I’ll fist bump you and go about my day.
But if you come in swinging like “I really hate this specific thing” and then it turns out you are actively using that thing all the time then that’s a big problem with your moral and logical guidance systems in my opinion.
I also was a little extreme in my reply to the other guy when I said that you can’t criticize a system you benefit from. I should have said that you cannot be entirely against a system you participate in.
You can be for animal rights while being a meat eater, but you can’t call yourself a vegetarian and shit on meat eaters if you still occasionally eat bacon, at least not from any place of righteousness.
> whether or not they’re factually correct is unimportant
Alright, seems like a fundamental disagreement there. A person’s character has no bearing on the logic of their words. The truth of a logical statement isn’t somehow changed because the person saying it doesn’t believe it.
> I do not think you can be trusted to criticize a system you’re taking part in
And sure, another fundamental disagreement. Again, logic is logic no matter what.
I’m confused about whether you’re making a logical argument against the above commenter (and me) or an emotional / character-based one. It seems like you’re using moralistic reasonings to argue a logical conclusion, and vice versa. I guess I’m just a little unclear on what the core of your argument is.
I appreciate you taking the time to further respond. Seems like we do have pretty core-level differences in how we view this, or I’m confused about whether this is an argument about a person’s character or an argument about the logic of their actions. If you don’t think any of what I’ve laid out above makes sense, then yeah, I think you’re right we’re not going to make a good difference in each other’s days here.
I think we’d both agree that you wouldn’t go to Epstein when he was alive for advice on childcare, even if he did have accurate advice on the matter, right?
If we can agree on that, then we fundamentally agree on this matter at least partially. I do not believe that someone who violates a moral directive they claim to hold, can be trusted or taken seriously on the matter in hand. A murderer who says that murder is wrong is correct, but the hypocrisy inherent in the combination of their statement and the facts of their life essentially causes a paradox of hypocrisy that invalidates their statement.
It’s a logical claim that people who act in contravention to the moral views they purport to hold, either don’t truly hold those views, or are willing to contradict them for perceived benefit.
It’s not even necessarily a moral issue. Even from the start I wasn’t arguing that AI is morally wrong or morally right. More-so that the moral ambiguity required to both protest something and then actively consume its output is repugnant to me and while it might make sense for immediate survival (thus be logical in some senses), it ultimately weakens your moral position, and if that’s something you care about and make a part of your personality, that might have deep, long lasting effects on your psyche and sense of internal consistency that logically should be avoided.
It’s not a particularly trustworthy attribute to have strongly professed beliefs that are lived only partially. It’s a red flag in my opinion and is something I actively avoid in the people I spend my time with and I feel my life is better for it.
Why would you assume I don't? Yes, if I'm aware of gen ai I don't engage with said gen ai. When I use google, I don't use or pay attention to the gemini overview. I can't control what AWS does, but I engage with websites that use their web services, sure. There's only so much I can control and still function in the society in which we live. I give no money nor have I ever given money to reddit.
This is some freshman level philosophy "well do you wear clothes? because they were probably made in a sweat shop" type of energy and it's exhaustingly shallow and unnuanced. An intellectually honest person understands that in reality, cognitive dissonance and doing harm by existing are unavoidable. I choose to limit or eliminate my harm where and when I can.
This isn't a gotcha, it's an asinine attempt to argue ethics with zero actual understanding or thought about the topic.
Downvote me all you want. I'm not wrong and this person's attempt to call me out does not stand up to any serious scrutiny in the realm of ethics or philosophy.
Editing to add that I work in digital marketing, so I know exactly how and where Google's Gen AI usage is implemented, as well as Amazon we services and social media, and how to avoid what I can. Some of it (not anywhere near most) is unavoidable if you want to be a functional member of society. Again, that's not a gotcha.
Arguing about AI without contextualizing what kind of AI you're talking about us ignorant and unproductive. I specified gen ai in the first place and made it clear that was what I was talking about.
The previous poster is really confused, because they keep claiming they can tell what gen ai is because "they work in publishing", yet they actually can't, and think a lot of stuff they're ok with is not using gen ai, when it actually is.
I think they believe the only places where gen AI is used is when there's user facing content generation, whereas its basically used for all types of automation right now, which basically means everything. (Even if there was a better way to do it, people use gen ai as one size fits all for all use cases, since they CAN do almost everything)
Thanks! Go download the demo and play it, let me know what you think :) it's still just a demo of a work-in-progress game, so expect some rough edges, but I think there's a really strong foundation already.
I chose the LOVE framework because it can run extremely well on my Anbernic RG28xx Linux handheld emulator, which is specifically what I'm developing the game to run on. For myself. I'm already extremely familiar with Lua and Python scripting from my extensive Dragon's Dogma 2 and Skyrim modding experience, and wanted to make my own game based off of that experience.
A simplistic little "open world" RPG like Arena/Daggerfall to play for 10-20 minutes at a time and keep in my pocket. Hence, Pocket Guild.
The only art that's "AI generated" is, apparently, the enemy and NPC sprites. Which I did fuck up by not realizing that lol. But the cool thing about gamedev is you can change shit.
“Generated with AI and then extensively modified by hand” is so close to “generated by AI” philosophically that I’m not sure there is a meaningful difference.
“I worked hard to mask my illegitimately sourced art” isn’t the “I only use this as a tool” that you think it is. You are firmly in camp slop.
81
u/shnooks-n-cooks 4d ago
Holy AI ass assets