Clair Obscur won multiple awards but used generative AI art as placeholders during production.

The Indie Game Awards revoked Clair Obscur’s Debut and Game of the Year after the AI disclosure.

IGAs reassigned the awards (Blue Prince, Sorry We’re Closed) and reignited debate on gen-AI use.

  • canofcam@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    6 hours ago

    Or like they submitted a game to an award that said no AI in development, said they didn’t use AI in development, when in reality they did.

    • lepinkainen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      3 hours ago

      Because they thought they didn’t and found out 3 year old in-house AI test assets ended up in the release version. And promptly replaced them with the actual art done by their own actual artists, the ones who did the AI experiment.

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

        That’s fine, but they did use AI in development, so whether or not they removed the assets they should not be included in this award category.

        • lepinkainen@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 hours ago

          You do acknowledge that “using AI during development” is a massive thing to ban games for.

          How can they check for that in the future?

          • canofcam@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            27 minutes ago

            I don’t know. It’s not really up to me to figure that out, either. Companies should self-report on their AI usage.

          • Pup Biru@aussie.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 hours ago

            it’s irrelevant whether you agree with the rule or not… the award is for games that didn’t use AI during development. the game should not have originally been in contention for the award

            i tend to agree this is the right way to use AI assets, but this isn’t the award for them… it doesn’t matter if it was accidental, if it was removed before release, or anything else

            • lepinkainen@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 hours ago

              Yes it’s their rule. It’s a stupid rule.

              But how do they intend to police said rule in the future? Since it clearly isn’t just for released art assets but THE WHOLE PROCESS.

              If it’s just self reported what’s the point?

              • Pup Biru@aussie.zone
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 hour ago

                that’s all irrelevant though… the rule is the rule and they got caught

                people should be allowed to have awards for games which only use humans, and if a game is caught cheating they should be disqualified

                if they want to compete for some awards, these aren’t the awards for them: there are others

                • lepinkainen@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 hour ago

                  Yes yes. They used AI, they lost the award. I’m over it. Next topic:

                  How do they (indie awards) enforce this in the future? Please read, understand and explain:

                  The rules say no AI can be used in ANY stage of the development for ANYTHING. How do they check it? Where do they draw the line? Is it just art assets? Voices? Code?