Recently, GOG, the game storefront and distribution platform, took some heat over the inclusion of AI-generated art in promotional imagery for a New Year sale.

First of all, regarding the quality of the asset: This banner was a work-in-progress asset that we mistakenly allowed to be displayed on the storefront. This shouldn't have happened. We failed on at least two levels: Quality-control of the asset that landed on the front page, and then reacting quickly enough when we noticed the error.

Second, I want to confirm that this WIP asset was indeed made with the help of Al tools. We hear your disappointment with the use of this technology, and see that it's a sensitive topic for many of you.

I also want to be honest about how we chose to explore technology: We don't have the infinite resources of the industry giants. We're a dedicated, but small team, working our asses off every day for game preservation. To keep that mission alive, bring more games back to life, and make more games DRM-free, we experiment with tools that can allow us to do more with the limited hands we have.

We've been testing different technologies since our beginnings. Some experiments are successful, and some (like this banner) are not. Exploring various tech gives us the reach of a much larger team, so we never have to settle for doing less.

I'm not sure how much you should really be relying on GOG to be anti-AI. They haven't been caught using AI images since, but "We failed on at least two levels: Quality-control of the asset that landed on the front page" implies that they're fine with AI so long as you can't really tell.

Why is Valve on the slop side?