A Valve artist has defended AI disclosures on storefronts like Steam, saying they only scare those with “low effort” products.
A Valve artist has defended AI disclosures on storefronts like Steam, saying they only scare those with “low effort” products.
Problem is there are legitimately good games that do this, usually ones that focus exclusively on writing but still. At that point it’s better to let the reviews handle it.
Like what?
Early access version of ATOM RPG was pretty damned close. I’m talking way back when it was the first world map or so when going to death tunnel would crash my game if I entered and exited it enough because of an infinitely respawning rat.
Mind you that was pretty early in it’s development but it very well could’ve stayed in polished form of that and still been good.
I said “low quality project”, that means games with “focus exclusively on writing” are not belongs to this category.
Huge chunk of RPG Maker games are using generic reusable assets provided by RPG Maker yet still cool af, as they focus on writings.
Sure but the problem is that distinguishing between a shitty asset flip and a proper game that is just using generic assets is moreso a matter of effort. There is basically no way to distinguish the two short of actually playing it, which is different from tracking say AI which is pretty objective in it’s separation. The only tag that could work is a “strong usage of generic asset” but that doesn’t really distinguish between say a shitty asset flip and a game that is a generic asset flip in everything but it’s writing.