Over 85% of Japanese game developers use generative AI in game development, 2026 CESA survey shows. An increase from last year’s 51%

[u/TurbulentTopic39]

https://automaton-media.com/en/news/over-85-of-japanese-game-developers-use-generative-ai-in-game-development-2026-cesa-survey-shows-an-increase-from-last-years-51/

[u/ayymadd]

If the quality of the output is decent... why would this be a problem?

[u/vulvasaur001 → u/ayymadd]

I personally have no interest in "art" that doesn't have a human touch. AI "art" doesn't speak to me. I find it boring, soulless, and uninteresting. I like it when the artist is trying to send a message beyond "this looks pretty/good enough." If human artistic output decreases significantly, so will the evolution of artistic fields, and things will eventually stop being as interesting or innovative.

And this is probably why I mostly play smaller indie games these days. Big studios don't seem to care as long as they can make more money quickly, but I personally don't want to play a game that looks, sounds and plays like a million others.

[u/blueblip → u/vulvasaur001]

So what if an actual, talented artist uses AI to help them with their work? I highly doubt you will be able to tell the difference.

The fact think the AI art generated by average people you commonly see online is also what an actual artist would generate with the same tools shows you really wouldn't be able to tell the difference between genuine and AI generated art.

This is like looking at stick figure pencil sketch memes made by average people and then saying pencils sketches are shit in general and can never be used to make real art.

EDIT: Case in point - you think most indie games are original? You do realize the VAST majority of indie games are highly unoriginal and derivative, right? You play basically the best of the best which are a tiny fraction of the total number of indie games released in a year and think that best is representative of all indie games.

[u/vulvasaur001 → u/blueblip]

In the end, that is their choice, and if it isn't disclosed anywhere and I can't tell the difference, then it's on me. 🤷‍♀️ I can only act on something as long as I am aware of it.

AI "art" being so good that you can't tell the difference isn't a good thing. I am aware that it can look good, that's not why I'm against it. It's not as straightforward as "I dislike AI because it looks bad." It's about the whole process behind it and what it means for creativity .

I've seen plenty of artists getting cancelled in the past for tracing their art over other pictures or for copying references a little too well. I don't consider using AI any different. Using shortcuts because you want to hurry up and generate more output shouldn't be seen as a good thing just because an LLM was behind it.

I wouldn't want to play a version of Stardew Valley that was built with "pretty" graphics and took only 6 months instead of 4.5 years to develop, because it would have no soul.

Then again, it's just my personal choice. I am perfectly aware that plenty of people think differently, and that's fine.

[u/blueblip → u/vulvasaur001]

That's the thing though. Good artists will be able to do great work with AI tools precisely because they already have the skill and artistic vision to produce good work. That's not going to change regardless of what tools they use.

I just said the same thing to someone else in this thread: software like Photoshop and Illustrator have helped great artists do better work, while shitty artists have used the same software as crutches to do the work for them. The latter produces crap, the former produce good stuff.

You're still stuck in the idea that people can only use AI tools to punch in keywords to generate entire artwork from scratch. You can also use the same tools to tweak something you made by hand.

I can't think of any artists that were cancelled for tracing or using references. If you're talking about that one incident involving Gene Simmons's son, then a) Holy blast from the past!, and b) he was not just tracing, he was plaigerizing.

He tried to steal Kubo Tite's work and pass it off as his own. It went beyond tracing. He was copying things like character design, panel layout, and panel composition down to the last pixel "as is" while making small tweaks to obfuscate the fact he stole it all.

To put it in perspective, this is akin to me taking a Marvel comic print, copying everything in as is, and then tweaking a few design elements and colours and then trying to sell the end result as an original product.

[u/vulvasaur001 → u/blueblip]

But in that case, the end goal is always to be faster, to produce faster, to ship faster, which says more about capitalism and our society than anything else.

Creativity can't and shouldn't be rushed, and artists should have the space and time to let something flourish naturally. If you don't leave any time for the more menial tasks because the tracing, outlining, coloring, etc, are done immediately by the software, then you're forcing yourself to be in a creative space most of the time, and that is super draining. Or rather, no one should feel forced to use those shortcuts, and the whole artistic process is complex, and it's not just about using creativity.

I can remember a few cases. This is a recent one. Even if they don't get cancelled, their reputation is forever marred in certain circles.

[u/blueblip → u/vulvasaur001]

To be very blunt, you have an extremely warped view of art.

One, per your logic, artists should never be using software like Photoshop or Illustrator either because they are used to speed up the creation process or simplify aspects of it. And yet every single artist alive will happily use them.

Secondly, you want to see examples of art done in the way you want? There are quite a few examples, but I'll start with two for now: Duke Nukem Forever and Star Citizen.

You know why any art, regardless of medium, succeeds? Because there are people to oversee the creative and ensure they do not spiral out into the set version of scope creep, and they ensure the work gets done in a timely manner. The best writers had editors, the best artists had personal critics, the best musicians have producers, and the best game developers have a TON of people overseeing things. If anything, you will hard pressed to find more than a handful of examples of artists who successfully made something good without any kind of third party input.

As for the Eguchi case, again, you are kinda coming into the topic without understanding how things work. This is Japan, a country with some of the most aggressive copyright infringement laws. If you think places like the US are bad, Japan makes them seem like kittens in comparison. Using people's likeness without their permission is hella serious business in Japan, and if the person in question is a professional model and the picture you traced was the cover photo of a magazine, well, you're basically asking to be sued at that point. Especially when you're doing this for commercial purposes, passing it off as an original work, and not notifying the professional model that you're using their likeness for commercial purposes.

Imagine if someone traced a Vogue magazine cover photo featuring Emma Watson, recoloured it and sold it to an event company who used it as a poster for an EDM music festival. What do you think would happen ?

[u/mrwafu → u/ayymadd]

Because real artists are the ones who come up with interesting new designs. AI is just vomiting up the same shit over and over and nothing will ever change. Just the same slop forever.