newsswsarmyknfe

Raetbraena

@newsswsarmyknfe

https://mastodon.social/@NewsSwsArmyKnfe
https://twitter.com/NewsSwsArmyKnfe

log in
newsswsarmyknfe
@newsswsarmyknfe
MOOMANiBE
@MOOMANiBE
MOOMANiBE
@MOOMANiBE

while it's certainly clear the company that made pal world made, separately, a very bad looking "party game" where players use GANs with jackbox style prompts (and to be clear: fuck that), I'm really not sure I believe wherever this supposed "Pal world is using AI art" rumor is coming from, for the following reasons:

  1. the entire game is 3d - genuinely I can't think of even a single 2d asset in it beyond the UI - and there are literally no "AI" generators capable of producing even the most rudimentary game-usable 3d models or animations right now

  2. If we want to assume that the designs were made by GANs, well, I'm not sure I buy that because it's actually what GANs are worst at - simple, readable and distinctive designs. Generally speaking most "convincing" GAN work relies on it being noisy and busy in a way humans are bad at detecting. That's why very heavily textured and detailed landscapes, etc, tend to be the most popular choices, and why stuff like human faces had to be trained for specifically.

TBH I'm MUCH more inclined to believe the other accusation I've seen, which is that they mishmashed/filed the serial numbers off a bunch of existing pokemon designs. THAT idea doesn't really bother me for reasons of: nintendo has a trillion bazillion dollars to spend on lawyers and I don't need to do free labour for them or defend them from imitations, legally dubious or not (reminder: they recently garnished the wages of a switch hacker for life after jailing him for years)

You must log in to comment.

in reply to @MOOMANiBE's post:

LukeC
@LukeC

this is pretty much my exact take. Worst I’ve heard is they might have used GAN when concepting, which is like one of the least objectionable uses I can think of. Let’s also keep in mind there’s some extremely imaginative pokemon too, like the one that looks like a sheep

login to reply
tayl1r
@tayl1r

i don't really follow generative AI so maybe it improved a hundred fold recently, but the last 3D "lmao artists you'd better sign up for mcdonalds" twitter post from prompt-monkeys i saw was a billion polygon, melting escher house nobody would ever place in a game.

and these characters are presumeably rigged and animated. is the tool doing that? like with that level of clean up you might as well just model the characters. or maybe there is a tool out there mashing two pokemon snap models together or something, idk.

but yeah, nintendo's lawyers will be the only real hot take that matters. and i'm not running defence for those ghouls either.

login to reply
MOOMANiBE
@MOOMANiBE

LOL you're probably not wrong about that, even if I find that deeply confusing. it's not like actual pokemon hasn't had tons of competitors for awhile now, like the fairly recent Casette Beasts, temtem, etc

what are pokemon fans so desperate for that they are not getting

login to reply
antumbral
@antumbral

(i'm friends with people who follow bleeding edge gen AI)
It is theoretically possible to generate models like palworld's with AI. But it would be such a massive pain in the ass that I can't imagine them actually doing it, so the most reasonable assumption is that they didn't. You'd have to clean them up manually to be able to render them at good framerates unless like, UE5 nanite did heroic work to help you.

I think the theory that the original 2D designs were AI generated is more plausible, since there's a tweet from their CEO floating around that shows exactly that. But it's also not like you would NEED AI to do those designs, you could pretty easily get almost any artist to cook some of those little guys up. So I'm not sure it makes sense that they would have used AI to do it since we know they needed to have artists on staff for other reasons - the original 2D designs for your monsters are not the bulk of your expenses, and if they have quality issues it makes the rest of the process hard.

I think the AI/crypto/nft stuff from their past and the CEO's communications just help paint a picture of what kind of studio they are, and the game is definitely in line with that picture. It's a game built without much value assigned to originality or creativity or perfectionism, and I guess that's fine? I'm not interested in supporting it with my money, and it's not a h*gwarts legacy situation where when I see people promoting it I think less of them. Lots of people simply don't have high standards and that's probably OK.

login to reply