cross-posted from: https://beehaw.org/post/28095114

Vapor World: Over The Mind is a Soulslike Metroidvania with an evocative, painterly art style reminiscent of Lies of P and the narrative platformers of Playdead. According to Korean studio Alive Inc, the game had 100,000 wishlists just before its early access launch on August 19, mostly on the strength of a demo available since January 2025.

But what should have been a triumphant early access launch went pear shaped very quickly. At launch, few talked about the quite distinctive worldbuilding or the parry-heavy combat. Instead, all focus was trained entirely on something absent from the popular demo: very obvious AI use.

  • TheTechnician27@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    51
    ·
    edit-2
    5 hours ago

    “The truth is, we spent a long time trying to tell this game’s story with cutscenes made entirely by our own hands,” the statement goes on. “The results were devastating every time. We came to believe we could not properly deliver this game’s complex, difficult narrative that way, and that is why we turned to AI. But if that choice hurt your experience, the fault is not in the tool. It is in our own shortcomings.”

    Man, if this is true – that they agonized over the cutscenes but decided they couldn’t and that AI would be better* – then I feel legitimately bad for them.

    I went in assuming it was strictly a lazy “ah, fuck it” kind of thing, but even though this still wouldn’t be acceptable, it seems like this team really is hard-working, cared about the final product, and actually did think AI could deliver a good experience. Deluded, but that seems like part of a larger culture of delusion in SK.*

    * Notably, the article remarks on how sentiment around AI in South Korea is vastly more positive than e.g. the US.

      • TheTechnician27@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        7 minutes ago

        I’m 100% with you. Bad art with genuine effort put into it has a charm of its own. I understand the team’s mistake, but it’s still a mistake.

    • OrganicMustard@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      39
      ·
      3 hours ago

      That’s basically a statement for the press to try to minimize damage. He even said they had the cut scenes done and later replaced them with AI. Bullshit.

      Unless AI takes one more leap and reaches a point where no one can tell the difference, what I believed was still closer to an ideal than a reality.

      They are mad they got caught and it’s the AIs fault for not being good enough to hide it.

      • TheTechnician27@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        edit-2
        2 hours ago

        it’s the AIs fault for not being good enough to hide it.

        “if that choice hurt your experience, the fault is not in the tool. It is in our own shortcomings.”

        The director literally outright says it’s their fault for using the tool.

        And what do you mean “got caught”? It’s very obvious. They mistakenly thought most audiences would enjoy it, not that audiences wouldn’t notice. Which makes sense given the overwhelming difference in the perception of AI between SK and the West. He even outright says he expected people to notice: “I expected some of you would be disappointed by our use of AI. I did not expect it to become this big.”

        • cantstopthesignal@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          2 hours ago

          The very first thing you need to become an artist is a sense of taste. Everything builds from that. If in his judgment he thought that art looked good enough then what does that say about him as an artist.

        • OrganicMustard@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          2 hours ago

          What game with slop have people ever enjoyed? They are not that stupid.

          If using a “tool” is wrong, then the fault is the “tool”.

          • TheTechnician27@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            2 hours ago

            Please open this article, Ctrl+F down to “% who say the increased use of artificial intelligence in daily life makes them feel …”, and tell me which country is at the very bottom, with 16% “more concerned than excited”, 66% “equally concerned and excited”, and 22% “more excited than concerned”.

            It’s like you’re refusing to understand the concept of a cultural barrier.

    • CheesyFox@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      3 hours ago

      It’s almost as if neither “ai can do everything for me” nor the ai witch hunting are healthy approaches, but, as always, people keep polarizing themselves to hate on the opposite tribe.

      I’m so fucking tired of this bullshit…

      • Fawkes@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        3 hours ago

        Yyyyyyyyup. Even attempts at honest discussion get polarized. “If you use AI(LLMs) you’re an unethical AI-Bro!”

        Oh… I didn’t realize that my self-hosted open source small model trained on Wikipedia and Stack Exchange was unethical. Thank you for showing me the error of my ways.

        • e8d79@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          56 minutes ago

          Yes, you are acting unethical. Your self-hosted model is neither open nor was it trained with consent. Using them is just as unethical as using the models from OpenAI.

          • brucethemoose@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            12 minutes ago

            Some models do use open datasets and largely reproducible training, with the Nvidia Nemotron series being the highest profile example. You are right that many are opaque about training data, though, and this is not okay.

            Using them is just as unethical as using the models from OpenAI.

            And I vehemently disagree with this.

            OpenAI is a different order of magnitude of moral depravity. Thats like saying using Lemmy is just as bad as using Facebook or Palantir.

        • Peanut@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 hour ago

          You’re even being downvoted for an entirely sensible opinion. I feel like the type of people to downvote this opinion are the type who don’t comprehend that boardrooms were creating slop using real artists that they control through economic suppression. The bigger issue is that most consumers don’t have the media literacy to tell what is slop with a lot of money put into it verses the quality that independent artists are able to put out when they can’t afford a team of economic slaves to polish their work, and the lack of media literacy drowns them under the salience and market dominance of Disney and Warner types.

          But if an indie dev uses a local AI to accomplish the same polish that is currently only available to big corpos, they could actually make their real artwork look more competitive with corpo slop,

          But people don’t have the literacy on ‘why’ AI bad, the same way people don’t seem to have literacy around opportunistic oligarchs buying the whole political landscape giving you a choice between mask off corpo leaches promising things antithetical to their actions, and mask on corpo leaches pretending to combat it. The solution weirdly isn’t “burn the technology.” much like the phones in our pockets, there is zero reason for them to be useless bricks outside of the proprietary data collection and gambling pipeline that has been deemed the “only safe option” as if a Linux equivalent is more dangerous than the corpo data collection and limiting of our own autonomy over our own devices.

          Similarly the cloud, which is literally just “let us organize all of your local data for you on our computers. Keeping your data with us is just easier or something.” rather than just enabling people in their own local networks.

          So the landscape being built for us is the problem, but we can’t get there when most people can’t spend more time absorbing a topic before taking the strong socialized beliefs that are given high emotional salience, because they socially feel that it is bad, not because of the decades of encroaching systemic oppressing that we have to crawl out of.

          It’s not the indie artist using a tool that’s the problem, and that tool is stealing nothing from anyone, rather than using systemic exploitation as righteous artistic accomplishment like pretty much anyone with actual money for “labour.”

      • wedge@multiverse.soulism.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        3 hours ago

        I would much rather have content made with vision by a small AI augmented team than no content because of a lack of funding or ability. I’m great at programming, but I’m no fucking artist. AI makes it possible for people on either side to deliver a unified end-to-end vision. This hate of anything AI is misdirected. Hate the shitty companies, not the technology. Idiots sound like the anti-calculator folks.

        • username@piefed.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 hours ago

          The problem is that there is no way of knowing (at first sight) if there was an earnest attempt. AI has a certain look to it, and that look has been associated with slop and shortcuts because of unbridled use of an imperfect technology. It makes sense that it would illicit a sense of revulsion. Also, people who lack the skills or time necessary to create a certain type of art are more likely to lack the ability or patience to properly judge the quality of that art. “Good enough” is rarely good enough.

          • brucethemoose@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            2 hours ago

            AI has a certain look to it

            I think this is a dangerous misconception.

            I could feed locally run Minimax H3 a set of reference art, like the painted stills from this game, and it would exactly match the style. I could use start/end frames, motion masks, pose control, character sheets, voice and music samples, reference videos; I can get it to do whatever I want with extreme precision, and as long as I checked the output it would be indistinguishable from CGI.


            The point I’m making is that a lot of people percieve diffusion as mashing a Stable Diffusion keyword prompt into a text box, and getting a sloppy result. Maybe thats still how shit corporate services like ChatGPT work.

            But a LOT has changed over two years.

            Theres no way people can definitively detect generative output anymore. We can IF its done lazily, but its quite possibly indistinguishable now, too.

            • TheRealKuni@piefed.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 hour ago

              Even two years ago, I remember someone telling me they saw a YouTube video that said you could always tell an AI generated image because their noise map would be the same in R, G, and B. And I tried to explain to this person that that depends entirely on how the image was generated, on what platform, by what model and method, what post-processing was done, etc.

              And I was told I was ignoring their evidence. 🙄

              • brucethemoose@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                edit-2
                1 hour ago

                Also… you could just add grain via post processing?

                Its actually a reasonable technique, as it softens diffusion blocking artifacts the same way it softens video codec blocking artifacts.


                The YouTuber sorta kinda has a point, depending on the context. Spammers tend to use the absolute laziest lowest common denomenator, so its quite possible theyre largely using the same model, with the same artifacts, and not bothering to edit output. So maybe they did have a common noise pattern? Though the way thats presented still sounds fishy to me.

                • TheRealKuni@piefed.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  1 hour ago

                  I think the idea was that within an image the noise in red would match the noise in green and the noise in blue, because whatever system they were looking at picked a single noise map per image? Something like that. And yeah, it was reasonable because it was absolutely true of the laziest stuff out there (which is most AI stuff, which is why we use the word “slop”). But my counter-argument wasn’t that the method couldn’t work, it was that it couldn’t always work. Because image generation is done in thousands of different ways and post-processing exists.

                  The thing that I wish was better understood is that “slop” = “low effort.” Artists can make some pretty amazing stuff when AI is merely a part of their toolset and they still put effort into their work. But that means that not all AI is slop, and thus if you really want to detect AI, you can’t rely on it always being slop.

                  • brucethemoose@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    60 minutes ago

                    That is called luma noise, yes. Heh. Its nothing new.

                    The thing that I wish was better understood is that “slop” = “low effort.” …that means that not all AI is slop, and thus if you really want to detect AI, you can’t rely on it always being slop.

                    Yes! I would wear this on my forehead on Lemmy, if I could.

        • brucethemoose@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          2 hours ago

          Unfortunately it may be politicized beyond recovery, at least in the US with the trajectory of things.

          Its going to be associated with the corporations doing awful things with it, and thats going to blot out the sun.