“We might deal in derivative IP, but it’s our derivative IP!”
Derivative over generative any day if you ask me.
To be fair Nintendo was heavily inspired by other artists work when designing Pokemon.
Nintendo wasn’t “inspired” by shit. They made an ice cream cone a Pokémon. Keys on a ring? Pokémon. 8 varieties of elemental flavored dog? Check. Oh hey cool look a 2d image on a computer oh wait it’s actually a Pokémon. Dog? Cat? Snake? Bird? Horse? All Pokémon. IMO nothing in Pokémon is actually “inspired”, only ripped off.
Im casually suggesting they were “inspired” by other artists work. Many of the Red/Blue era were rip offs.
What a silly thing to say.
Is Mickey Mouse uncreative because it’s just a mouse? Is Yogi Bear uncreative because it’s just a bear?
Is Sherlock Holmes uncreative because it’s just a British guy? Especially if giving things magical abilities doesn’t count, then vampires, zombies, magicians, pretty much the entirety of fantasy is just “ripping off” humans. You think Tolkien was a good writer? You fool- the Ents are just trees, how boring! Gandald is just an old human, frodo is just a short dude!
So what does that leave that is original? Should all of our ficitiln need entirely new ideas? Do our writers need to invent new qwarks and new rules for how they interact, so that fictional universes can have different elements where we can imagine life forms without carbon that interact? Would it still be derivative to you if we keep the strong nuclear force the same in this fictional universe?
Inspiration is taking your peanut butter and putting it in my chocolate. You can’t just take the chocolate slap some eyes on it, and call it chocomon. Make it do cool shit like turn into a giant angel or trex or some shit like a properly inspired pocket monster. Or make a funny little blue slime guy and give him apocalypse level magic spells or something. Yeah That sounds good.
They made Goth Mommy GF into a pokemon with “Gothita”
How many sentient clouds are also pokemon? Or that one that’s literally just a balloon?
I swear pokemon ran out of creativity by gen 3 - and I’m not even a pokemon fan.
you forgot rock.
There’s Rock, Rock With Arms, and Big Rock Snake
Derivative IP is so fucking different from gen AI. It’s stupid IP laws that force what could have been a commercial fangame to instead be legally distinct.
We don’t believe in AI, says the developer of AI Art Impostor
But… The developers of Palworld made a game featuring AI generated images.
Companies can change their mind about stuff like this.
Yes. Except they’re still selling that game.
Yeah because they spent money making it. If you spend millions of dollars making a video game, you can’t just shut it down and refund every order of it without putting your studio in serious jeopardy financially. That’s not an option for them, so the best they can do is just not rely on AI anymore. Clearly they tried it and learned that it actually sucks ass.
It’s a small game. They have Palworld to rake in the big bucks, so if their stance on AI use has changed, they can just remove that game.
They’re currently being sued by Nintendo and palworld did not make anywhere near the kind of money that would let them survive a lawsuit AND a game cancellation.
You’re making assumptions about their financials that are only ever true for enormous studios like epic games, which pocketpair is not. The gaming industry does not operate as simply as you think it does and companies don’t have the freedom to throw money away on something as simple as virtue signaling.
It doesn’t matter if a company used AI back in 2022 when it was new and less understood; it matters what companies choose now. If you’re going to throw blind skepticism at them for not making arbitrary financial risks just to appease you, then you’re not worth appeasing anyway because you’re too cynical to be a potential customer.
I’m not making assumptions about their financial situation. I’m critical of their hypocrisy. I don’t care about the excuses.
Your expectations are too high and your cynicism is clouding your judgment.
Obligatory @Angry_Autist@lemmy.autism.place
The difference between “generative AI” and “procedural generation” cannot be meaningfully nailed down.
I think it can - procedural generation consist of procedures, that is elements designed by humans, which are just connected into a bigger structure. Every single template, rule and atomic object (e.g. a single room in a generated house) is hand-designed, and as such no matter what comes out the elements and connections were considered by a real human. On the other hand, generative AI is almost always some sort of machine learning, that is an approximation of what a good structure of something should be, but it is only a very poor, randomised approximation. You have absolutely no guarantees nor constraints on what might pop out of the model - that is my main concern with genAI, though the whole outputted thing looks reasonable, upon closer inspection it has a lot of inconsistenties.
I think you are reading in the “designed by humans” part. Even when that is nominally true, the whole point of procedural generation is to create a level of complexity and emergence that the outputs are surprising and novel. Things no one expected are desirable. I think the distinction being drawn is not meaningful; in both cases, it is entirely possible and likely that no human being understands how a given output was arrived at.
Nonsense. Procedural generation is a rule-based deterministic system while generative AI is probabilistic and data driven. It’s fundamentally different.
Markov chains are both probabilistic and data-driven. For example. LLMs are not that far removed from markov chains. Should game developers be allowed to use latent spaces or is that too sloppy AI?
Okay, but (ignoring that procedural generation can also be probabilistic) what is the functional difference? The point I’m getting at is that you cannot banish the one without necessarily limiting the other.
Procedural generation is theoretically deterministic, but it’s a fairly minor distinction.
Where are all these prompt based image generators that identify themselves as procedural generation?
🤣🤣🤣👌👍
Yeah the company that ripped off Nintendo (I couldn’t give two shits, don’t screech) totally hates AI 🤣👌👍.
Hello AI!
