Simple fix: show your work.
Kickstarters don't have these accusations simply because the devs are in a direct relationship with the investors. There’s no NDA. Indies want to make a game, backers support it. Indie shows work.
Now show your work.
post
Go Team Meteor! Meteor 2026!
I don't game much or know anything about game development, but that was a very interesting and timely article.
Most of my posting here is sharing wildlife photography. I work part time with animals at a rehab clinic, and every week I see them do things I never expected. One might think my experience would help me pick out AI generated or altered photos, and many times it does, but sometimes animals do really improbable stuff I would never expect to see, but that doesn't mean they can't do those things.
I made a post today about two really exciting photos I came across. I wanted to share them because I felt they were very unique, but one was flagged as AI by Meta's AI, and another was being mildly brigaded saying "these animals would never do that" but both photos looked real to me. Both seemed to be legit photographers with large portfolios of pics in consistent styles.
Lemmings here get pretty rightfully angry at AI posts, so I addressed the community saying I'm over 90 percent confident these are real, is that good enough for you guys?
I felt so bad these photographers both captured images that people should be excited to see, especially the one with really rare animal behavior, but I felt they were being punished by a not insignificant amount of people by being falsely accused. Both offered some proof, but with me not knowing much about photography, I didn't always know what is Photoshop or Lightroom style post processing vs AI manipulation. I want to share amazing pics, especially of really rare stuff, and I try to maintain a pretty respectable educational vibe to the community, so I worry about sharing fake stuff in times like this and losing credibility. If this was my job like as it is for these games devs, that would be really demotivational.
I use AI as a last resort for translations of text I really want to read, but other than that, I feel I see way more harm than good coming from generative AI. Add to that the environmental costs that seem to be growing exponentially, and it's making me an unhappy camper all around...
Meteors hit the Earth all the time.
It’s tiring. Media illiterates on both sides of the AI argument are flinging turds at the wall and don‘t even stop to see what sticks.
I’m not even gonna read the story. I just agree with the opening quote.
I hope its at least twice as big as the one that wiped out the dinosaurs.
If you cant prove your process in steps, such as layers in a 2D work file, sculpting capability in blender or such, or literal steps in a Parametric modelling program, then maybe you deserve to be dragged through the mud.
EDIT: This comment was 4 - 0 and now it's 5 - 7, looks like some bot and/or brigading techbro got real butt hurt.
From reading the article it sounds like they get constant accusations from people who don't do even the minimum effort to look into it. If you have to separately defend yourself to 1000 different people because they are all to lazy to read the info you have already published, it becomes unreasonable.
It has gotten to the point where devs are just being asked to disprove a negative, though.
"Ok, well you didn't use AI in what you showed but you used it somewhere else." Short of devs wearing body cams to try and prove literally every step in every process, people are going to have to have some faith that developers aren't using it.
Doesn't align with anything I've experienced, personally. Usually when proven wrong they'd just go quiet, but at that point they don't have credibility even if they respond.
I think it creates a much more creative and healthy environment to hunt down the fucking witches, I welcome questioning the artist's process.
all 23 comments