|
Skywards by Darkage [web]
[nfo]
|
||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
popularity : 63% |
|||||||||||||
alltime top: #48335 |
|
|||||||||||||
added on the 2025-04-21 04:37:36 by Mod3m  |
||||||||||||||
popularity helper
comments
Nice „Monty Python“-style.
rulez added on the 2025-04-21 04:39:24 by gaspode 
at least before facet and critikill tried to hide their ai usage with fancy dithering, but after drama they just went "you know what fuck it we don't care" and smeared this lazily converted bullshit. not even that much of an ai hater, but this is just stupid and tasteless
A mashup of Amiga-themed AI generated imagery without an idea.
Flying Circus! Very fun demo.
Ignore the AI haters because the day is not far off when they too will use it.
Ignore the AI haters because the day is not far off when they too will use it.
I divide demos into three categories, one, I want to watch again, two, it doesn't thrill but has moments, and three, I want it to end as soon as possible. Unfortunately, this is the third category, eminently tiresome
funny style, cool music too
Just a bunch of scaling, rotating and translating 2D clip-art images moving around the screen, no clear theme, but the music is great!
to present this before the last one...
Monty Python style not helps.
stupid AI art, ugly converted photos.
some FX is ok, but not saving the prod.
Monty Python style not helps.
stupid AI art, ugly converted photos.
some FX is ok, but not saving the prod.
nice
Great demo, nice music and very funny!
Fuck you and your "AI" trash.
Not made by human hands.
Even when disregarding the ai slop it doesn't GO anywhere, it just keeps spinning and zooming stuff without any progression or connection to the music (which is fun for a while, before becoming tiresome).
I like a good collage demo, but this isn't it.
I suspect it'll eventually be a thumb-down due to the graphics, but I'll watch it on real hw first to see if there's anything there that'll save the piggy.
I like a good collage demo, but this isn't it.
I suspect it'll eventually be a thumb-down due to the graphics, but I'll watch it on real hw first to see if there's anything there that'll save the piggy.
fuck off ai
I don't like thumbing down Amiga demos, but please stop the slop. I especially like how the octopus has three rows of suction cups on one tentacle and another tentacle with suction cups on alternating sides. At least pretend to care?
Should have been disqualified with extreme prejudice. If you want to insult the scene, please do it elsewhere. We don’t want your slop. Fuck off and don’t come back. People like you killed the Amiga scene, and we will never forget or forgive.
Also fuck you ham.
Also fuck you ham.
@grip: I'm shocked you didn't say anything about the mustache on that alien mollusk.
@uncle-x: Thank you for your kindness. This is what I love about the scene, the kindness and camaraderie.
@uncle-x: Thank you for your kindness. This is what I love about the scene, the kindness and camaraderie.
I could forgive AI use for particular images, but the whole demo has a feel of being made by AI, as it doesn't seem to have a soul, idea or style to it. Just compare it to Smokebomb to feel the difference.
What they said. The tune by Soda7 suits the demo very nicely though.
AI trash for the trashcan. SoDa7s tune deserved better.
i hope this ai crap stops soon, it's an insult to the scene
Disgusting and disrespectful use of AI art. I feel a bit sorry for the tune which was really nice!
Slop.
N°1 The Larch
wow i really hate this ai slop. I was able to get some kind enjoyment out of the music but the shitty generative "art" just made me sad and did a disservice to the music :/ have some dignity for christs sake.
SoDa7 - very good track.
I'm not really a fan how AI was used there though.
I'm not really a fan how AI was used there though.
dunno what's worse... the bucketloads of AI artwork or the naivete (i hope?) to even make and release something like this. at least not a lot of effort went to waste here ;)
I think that it is much better than a lot of 3d so popular nowadays
Not my fav, but it is funny anyway...
Thumbs down if you are against the use of AI in prods is ok. But as far as I know this prod hasn't broken any contest rules and I think there's no need for the viciousness of some comments either.
Otherwise I find it a cheerful and friendly demo. A pity.
Otherwise I find it a cheerful and friendly demo. A pity.
i'm very sorry to thumb down a darkage demo - a group of which i have very fond memories -, and one that has an excellent soda7 soundtrack. but the AI randomness of the gfx is simply unbearable.
I feel so sorry for this prod'! Obviously lots of work was put into it, and it sweats love and sympathy for the demoscene. I enjoyed it on the big screen, a bit too long for my taste though, and it would have benefited from a story (e.g following one of the characters). At least, they took the risk to try something different, which is great.
I understand the AI frustration, and I partly share it because Facet and Critikill are so good at pushing pixels, they don't need AI. That being said, there's a huge amount of graphics, so it would have taken an insane amount of time to do everything by hand I guess.
Anyways, here's my thumb, keep on trying new stuff!
I understand the AI frustration, and I partly share it because Facet and Critikill are so good at pushing pixels, they don't need AI. That being said, there's a huge amount of graphics, so it would have taken an insane amount of time to do everything by hand I guess.
Anyways, here's my thumb, keep on trying new stuff!
Amusing demo. AI gfx does not bother me at all. I'm sure a lot of work has been put into it anyway. Keep up the good work guys. Don't get discouraged.
Here you go. Just to keep the down/up thumb balance roughly where it belongs.
Fuck AI demos !
Awful! Im really surprised that this release gets positive comments at all. :-(
And I'm truly surprised that the love for the scene shown in this cheerful release has to be responded to by creating new accounts to spew vicious messages.
Yesterday:
Today:
Long live cowardice!
It seems we are entering a Dark Age. The Anti-AI Holy Inquisition will soon light bonfires.
But not to sit around drinking beer, no.
Yesterday:
Today:
Long live cowardice!
It seems we are entering a Dark Age. The Anti-AI Holy Inquisition will soon light bonfires.
But not to sit around drinking beer, no.
This was fun too watch, presentation really impressed me on the stream, although I smelled the use of AI as usually when there so much massive work I imagine how did the artist did that hell of a work? Now I can imagine how.
Don’t get me wrong, I don’t mind a good use of AI and I don’t care about demoscene socialism, but this demo is weak. Could have good execution if at least some experienced persons in the credits line used their time to show consistent direction. It was supposed to be a bit light and funky… but maybe this is not Darklight’s DNA… a compo filler with nice tune from Soda7… yeah, but you came back last years with a bomb so you’d failed to manage expectations properly.
But we’re cool, everybody makes a mistake, no fuck off from me, ignore Berliners, they like to queer the questions
But we’re cool, everybody makes a mistake, no fuck off from me, ignore Berliners, they like to queer the questions
@Renfield's Renfield:
Please step it down a notch dude. Just quit your faux zen pose. FYI Bernardo was scening back when you were still busy eating your boogers. And Quisling was not a freedom fighter, no matter what you think. Plus, this demo is cr*p regardless of AI usage. We've all already been there, seen all that. I wish you were only trolling for attention, but I fear the truth is way more sad.
Please step it down a notch dude. Just quit your faux zen pose. FYI Bernardo was scening back when you were still busy eating your boogers. And Quisling was not a freedom fighter, no matter what you think. Plus, this demo is cr*p regardless of AI usage. We've all already been there, seen all that. I wish you were only trolling for attention, but I fear the truth is way more sad.
What Rhino said
Normally I don't comment on productions, but after reading all the nonsense being said here, I felt I had to speak up.
First of all, @mod3m and Darkage team, congratulations on the demo because, even if it's a bit repetitive, it has style, it's entertaining, and visually beautiful. And most importantly... you released another production — and not everyone can say that.
Second, what kind of nonsense is this about not being allowed to use generated images in a cultural, non-commercial production? The whole AI controversy comes from unclear copyright issues, but that doesn't apply to a non-commercial demo where the goal is to create art — whether it's through code, music, or images.
Third, have you seen Smokebomb and Fetish2? I recommend them. Many of you admire those demos, for which I'm grateful, but do you realize that none of the graphics in them were pixelled? They're all photos or scanned images. And no one was making this kind of fuss about it back then. Don't be hypocrites. If you don't like this demo because the images weren't pixelled or drawn by a human artist, but by software, then you shouldn’t like Smokebomb or Fetish2 either (among many other productions that use scanned images).
Fourth, the demoscene is destroyed by comments and bullies like some of you here. The demoscene dies when no one has the guts to release anything — and with some of the toxic comments you’ve written, you’re contributing to that destruction. Also... how many of you who are criticizing have actually released a production in the last decade?
To the friends at Darkage — don’t pay attention to these toxic bullies. Thanks for your contribution and for this fresh design.
First of all, @mod3m and Darkage team, congratulations on the demo because, even if it's a bit repetitive, it has style, it's entertaining, and visually beautiful. And most importantly... you released another production — and not everyone can say that.
Second, what kind of nonsense is this about not being allowed to use generated images in a cultural, non-commercial production? The whole AI controversy comes from unclear copyright issues, but that doesn't apply to a non-commercial demo where the goal is to create art — whether it's through code, music, or images.
Third, have you seen Smokebomb and Fetish2? I recommend them. Many of you admire those demos, for which I'm grateful, but do you realize that none of the graphics in them were pixelled? They're all photos or scanned images. And no one was making this kind of fuss about it back then. Don't be hypocrites. If you don't like this demo because the images weren't pixelled or drawn by a human artist, but by software, then you shouldn’t like Smokebomb or Fetish2 either (among many other productions that use scanned images).
Fourth, the demoscene is destroyed by comments and bullies like some of you here. The demoscene dies when no one has the guts to release anything — and with some of the toxic comments you’ve written, you’re contributing to that destruction. Also... how many of you who are criticizing have actually released a production in the last decade?
To the friends at Darkage — don’t pay attention to these toxic bullies. Thanks for your contribution and for this fresh design.
"The demoscene dies when no one has the guts to release anything."
No. The demoscene dies when slop drowns out handcraft. AI agents releasing slop to feed and train other AI agents is nothing.
No. The demoscene dies when slop drowns out handcraft. AI agents releasing slop to feed and train other AI agents is nothing.
fun & kickass tune!
@Toxic Mushroom: Take a deep breath and meditate before posting. Maybe you won't make a fool of yourself that way.
Just a friendly tip.
@DRAREG: Spot on! I think the only difference between this demo and Smokebomb or Fetish 2 is that your demos were more polish and this funny one was just a bit rushed.
There are graphicians here and there ranting against the use of AI even as a reference, who then have no qualms about using a frame of a character in a movie as a model for their pixelated graphics. Hypocrisy is patent.
Just a friendly tip.
@DRAREG: Spot on! I think the only difference between this demo and Smokebomb or Fetish 2 is that your demos were more polish and this funny one was just a bit rushed.
There are graphicians here and there ranting against the use of AI even as a reference, who then have no qualms about using a frame of a character in a movie as a model for their pixelated graphics. Hypocrisy is patent.
@DRAREG Also I also believe what you see/read here is some kind of revenge for uncountable times of "copies/retouches" like http://www.kameli.net/nocopy/noc4.htm and many others when these artists took credits while other artists spent a lot of time to do things completely on their own....
@faux zen meditation poser:
Mental retardation does not manifest itself in lack of "arguments" for one's cause, but in failure to comprehend what's being said/written.
Mental retardation does not manifest itself in lack of "arguments" for one's cause, but in failure to comprehend what's being said/written.
fresh look for a change
I don’t like the ai slop, music was nice though
Love the music (Inspector Gadget vibes!), and the carrying idea of collages in a Monty Phyton-esque show felt novel.
Using AI for the graphics can be ok for me - but not mentioning it, is suggesting you did it all yourself. Given the history of the discussion on this subject, I feel it’s disrespectful. Honesty is the least we can do to. Unfortunately, again you chose not to be honest. I can't respect that, sorry.
Using AI for the graphics can be ok for me - but not mentioning it, is suggesting you did it all yourself. Given the history of the discussion on this subject, I feel it’s disrespectful. Honesty is the least we can do to. Unfortunately, again you chose not to be honest. I can't respect that, sorry.
hatersg gonna hate, so here's an emotional support thumb :D i liked it in the compo, and if it was shown in the compo, then it was according to the rules, innit.
Had to login after many many years because the outrage about this nice production is so silly. Agreeing with wise words from ham, Drareg and others. As a graphician in my opinion AI is just a new tool that we can't escape even if we wanted to and I could see that it will eventually give us more and better demoscene products. The bar will be raised. And in my opinion the raising bar could already be seen in this years Revision amiga demo compo. Lots of good releases benefitting from the possibilities of AI-tools.
kinda fun to see this collage style come back, and the track fit it well, and there's a lot of content.. though stylistically this doesn't excite me at all. Not sure about the AI thing? I mean if the whole demo is a particular art style and then a significant portion of it is AI generated, then yeah there's not a lot to appreciate there. But I have to say when watching the compo it didn't even occur to me that the graphics could be AI generated; instead they felt ripped, which I thought was fitting for collage art :P
Nice demo.
@ferris I'd say it's mostly stock clipart used in collage style, which is perfectly fitting and alright for the particular aesthetic and has been used since 1910's when Picasso and guys invented it. And in the demoscene I guess at least from the 90's. This huge emotional debate about AI use is way beyond this particular demo and in my opinion it's a pity that such a nice production gets all the hate because of this silly AI war that is going on.
I want to say greetings to Darkage, Facet and Critikill keep up the good work!! 👌👏👍 But maybe next time include small disclaimer somewhere about the use of AI-tools, so the haters can't crucify you for "lying" and "cheating" 😉
I want to say greetings to Darkage, Facet and Critikill keep up the good work!! 👌👏👍 But maybe next time include small disclaimer somewhere about the use of AI-tools, so the haters can't crucify you for "lying" and "cheating" 😉
I find it funny that Blood Sugar Rises (nice demo) did not get such hate. I mean it won Revision and uses mostly copyrighted material straight off. Which is a lot “worse” that using photos or images partly made by AI assisted tooling. A hint: AI don’t make anything by itself. It needs a direction and a wish and intent from the human who access it :D
I find most of the comments here ridiculous and most of all very inconsistent to what is stated about other demos.
A great FUN demo.
Also I wonder if this demo would had gotten as much complaints if it was made by less “famous” sceners… just a reflection.
I find most of the comments here ridiculous and most of all very inconsistent to what is stated about other demos.
A great FUN demo.
Also I wonder if this demo would had gotten as much complaints if it was made by less “famous” sceners… just a reflection.
@ham
Demos with collage-style graphics are fine (Deep - The Psilocybin Mix is one of my all time favourites). Even though I don't particularly enjoy AI graphics, I've upvoted several demos containing it since they've got other qualities. So does this demo: I love the fact that it's been coded on real hardware, and I think the tune is very nice.
But when the entire point of a demo is graphics-driven, and so much of the graphics is so obviously, in-your-face AI generated, and is included without even some basic sanity checks, I have a hard time staying enthusiastic.
Demos with collage-style graphics are fine (Deep - The Psilocybin Mix is one of my all time favourites). Even though I don't particularly enjoy AI graphics, I've upvoted several demos containing it since they've got other qualities. So does this demo: I love the fact that it's been coded on real hardware, and I think the tune is very nice.
But when the entire point of a demo is graphics-driven, and so much of the graphics is so obviously, in-your-face AI generated, and is included without even some basic sanity checks, I have a hard time staying enthusiastic.
This was a lot of fun. I've been boing pilled! 😁
So great to see Mod3m and Dip back in action.
So great to see Mod3m and Dip back in action.
@grip
I understand that everyone has their own tastes and that not everyone will enjoy this demo. But I'm surprised to see so many people willing to use words like "slop" or "crap" to describe the work of the graphic artists in this demo or others using AI, which is simply a new and legitimate technique to explore in art.
Let's remember that an AI model is not an artist. The artist is the person using this tool. There's a lot of "mass hysteria" around AI these days, and I really don't understand why.
Besides, there are many ways to use AI. You can be lazy and launch four prompts and be done. Or you can install open-source models on your own PC, iterate hundreds of times, and use img2img, LoRAs, etc., and that way you get more personalized results that don't look like the typical Midjourney style. But right now I wouldn't get too picky about this because it's a new technique, and artists should explore it as they see fit.
In this particular demo, as others have pointed out in their posts, the use of these funny, circus-like images fits very well with the theme, and I don't think anyone should apologize (putting disclaimers) for using an AI to obtain "stock photography" instead of just getting it from somewhere on the internet.
Cheers!
I understand that everyone has their own tastes and that not everyone will enjoy this demo. But I'm surprised to see so many people willing to use words like "slop" or "crap" to describe the work of the graphic artists in this demo or others using AI, which is simply a new and legitimate technique to explore in art.
Let's remember that an AI model is not an artist. The artist is the person using this tool. There's a lot of "mass hysteria" around AI these days, and I really don't understand why.
Besides, there are many ways to use AI. You can be lazy and launch four prompts and be done. Or you can install open-source models on your own PC, iterate hundreds of times, and use img2img, LoRAs, etc., and that way you get more personalized results that don't look like the typical Midjourney style. But right now I wouldn't get too picky about this because it's a new technique, and artists should explore it as they see fit.
In this particular demo, as others have pointed out in their posts, the use of these funny, circus-like images fits very well with the theme, and I don't think anyone should apologize (putting disclaimers) for using an AI to obtain "stock photography" instead of just getting it from somewhere on the internet.
Cheers!
Thumbs for the sound. No comment to the rest.
Quote:
"Let's remember that an AI model is not an artist. The artist is the person using this tool."
Look, if stupid AI puts suction cups ON TOP of a tentacle, and the artist doesn't even care enough to fix that, that's not dedication, that's not the demoscene spirit, that's selling the audience short. That's slop. So much for the "artistry". All you have to do is look at the screenshot on top. Not hard at all. Although, as I discover again and again, you just can't sell some of the audience short enough. And that's perfectly OK, I just don't understand why these short guys want us all to walk on our knees pretending to be short (and blind) too.
I think I heard a mosquito flying around my ear. It was saying this in its buzzing language:
"And the giraffe? Why doesn't anyone say anything about that giraffe? How does it fold its legs to fit in there?
What an outrage to gravity! Anathema!"
"And the giraffe? Why doesn't anyone say anything about that giraffe? How does it fold its legs to fit in there?
What an outrage to gravity! Anathema!"
Nah, it's probably just your imagination.
However.
I advise you to go see a doctor if you think you can hear mosquitos talk. Seriously dude, it could be something dangerous.
However.
I advise you to go see a doctor if you think you can hear mosquitos talk. Seriously dude, it could be something dangerous.
motivational thumb because I don't think It deserves so much hate (even thought I didn't enjoy It much). I think the code is fine and does Its zooms and rotations smoothly, the gfx even if IA was used were okay-ish, but in contrast the repetitive music and the repetitive design get very tiring/annoying because the demo is extremely long for the content It offers. Collages and those scenes are hardly original/fresh and what may be ok in the first minute gets very tiring/annoying very quickly, It should have lasted two minutes top, It feels like many things were quickly "stuffed" to make It last longer without adding much value to the production at all and It became too long.
Clearly the authors didn't use AI as a substitute for drawing the graphics themselves. They used it as the appropriate tool to achieve the particular style they wanted for the demo, and as a deliberate provocation.
Even if the result isn't particularly interesting, that attitude alone deserves a thumb.
This is the Variform 2 of the AI age.
Even if the result isn't particularly interesting, that attitude alone deserves a thumb.
This is the Variform 2 of the AI age.
Quote:
and as a deliberate provocation.
Methinks this too. As I thought of TM2. Performative art. What's sad about it all is that HackAndMagnify is not a part of the conspiracy but a genuine useful hack. Just like me.
I think that you can put "anything" on a collage style production (much so when it is humorous and lightweight) even reference copyrighted stuff - for example a photograph that is commonly recognized, such as the cover of "HElp" by Beatles, and have the heads moving around. It would be the same for sampling music fragments - eg Hyperventilation sampling ABBA, if I remember correctly.
I enjoyed it a lot, didn't overstay its welcome and there was this gluing element of the amiga pills. I don't know how hard it is to do these rotozoomers but they worked great and there were plenty of them together.
I enjoyed it a lot, didn't overstay its welcome and there was this gluing element of the amiga pills. I don't know how hard it is to do these rotozoomers but they worked great and there were plenty of them together.
What sINk said.
Don't like it? Don't watch it, but have respect for other people's work.
Poor direction, total lack of coherent style, AND it's filled to the brim with prompt generated AI imagery? Rubbish.
SoDa7's bangin' track deserved so much better.
SoDa7's bangin' track deserved so much better.
no more AI please
looks like shit regardless of the technique. one might still be inclined to commend the effort even if the end result is vile and ill conceived, but obviously not in this case.
sad case of certain people who insist on using this as a hobbyhorse for campaigning on promotion of this excrement and the tools used to hallucinate it. if you like it for what it is, fair enough, whatever. but smugly provocating other artists and then shielding yourself behind "whatever happened to politeness" is rather transparent and offensive.
about the demo itself intending to be provocative, i fail to see in what meaningful way exactly. the only underlying message here as seemingly confirmed by the proponents is just about "having a good time", which is not exactly profound or something to feel provoked about. Variform 2 is about the burden of a legacy and what comes with carrying it; a cathartic burst of frustration towards an audience waiting to be spoon fed. what's important though that it doesn't purport itself as Good in the traditional sense, which is why it works in a subversive sense.
this demo on the other hand doesn't have any sort of self-awareness like that. the only divisive aspect (other than whether you even like the visual presentation to begin with) is breaking the social contract regarding tools and techniques used. there's no sort of sentiment or counter-sentiment regarding the topic that people are actually reacting negatively to, but just a slurry of vapid schlock. if you don't actually make a point about breaking that contract one way or the other then you don't qualify as satire. meaningless.
but honestly even that's just "whatever", bad demos come and go, and this wouldn't merit any sort of a second thought were it not for the inexplicable defense of the tools that some are coming to.
sad case of certain people who insist on using this as a hobbyhorse for campaigning on promotion of this excrement and the tools used to hallucinate it. if you like it for what it is, fair enough, whatever. but smugly provocating other artists and then shielding yourself behind "whatever happened to politeness" is rather transparent and offensive.
about the demo itself intending to be provocative, i fail to see in what meaningful way exactly. the only underlying message here as seemingly confirmed by the proponents is just about "having a good time", which is not exactly profound or something to feel provoked about. Variform 2 is about the burden of a legacy and what comes with carrying it; a cathartic burst of frustration towards an audience waiting to be spoon fed. what's important though that it doesn't purport itself as Good in the traditional sense, which is why it works in a subversive sense.
this demo on the other hand doesn't have any sort of self-awareness like that. the only divisive aspect (other than whether you even like the visual presentation to begin with) is breaking the social contract regarding tools and techniques used. there's no sort of sentiment or counter-sentiment regarding the topic that people are actually reacting negatively to, but just a slurry of vapid schlock. if you don't actually make a point about breaking that contract one way or the other then you don't qualify as satire. meaningless.
but honestly even that's just "whatever", bad demos come and go, and this wouldn't merit any sort of a second thought were it not for the inexplicable defense of the tools that some are coming to.
All I can say is how much I enjoyed the demo in the comp, the first time impression. I found it fresh, fun, and coherent. Okay, some of the content appears to be AI-generated. They could have just as easily used photos. But would anyone have been upset about that?
Taking a shit on my audiovisual system, disgusting... Every compo feels like praying not to get AI slop and trying to sense if it was human made or not... Especially hurts in oldschool compos where art is so important! :(
Can't begin to imagine how this feels to people who've actually been passionate about oldschool and have seen the evolution of the demoscene throughout the years.
And you don't fucking mention it in the slides. Should be banned or make your own AI crap party.
Can't begin to imagine how this feels to people who've actually been passionate about oldschool and have seen the evolution of the demoscene throughout the years.
And you don't fucking mention it in the slides. Should be banned or make your own AI crap party.
This AI-drama here is kind of funny, because it's not about the images itself. If those were handdrawn by gfx-artists I think most people here wouldn't criticize them at all. So the main problem seems to be that the creators didn’t put the effort into making them … pixel by pixel. But if you need so many graphics like in this prod (or in TM2: Attack of the Ego Bots) I can understand the ai-approach. Its different though if you only need one image, like it was in some other prods lately.
By the way: It seems to me that gfx-art is often not treated well in prods. Great pixel-art needs days/weeks to create and then its shown for only seconds in the prod, maybe even with some kind of distortion-filter on it. Don’t like that, but that’s a different topic.
By the way: It seems to me that gfx-art is often not treated well in prods. Great pixel-art needs days/weeks to create and then its shown for only seconds in the prod, maybe even with some kind of distortion-filter on it. Don’t like that, but that’s a different topic.
@gaspode: I wonder if someone will ever advocate for banning the fill tool in paint programs. ;]
Just a reminder, not every graphic in this demo was made with a little help of AI.
Just a reminder, not every graphic in this demo was made with a little help of AI.
I love the track! As a peeve reminder, AI is the logical conclusion of "let's use any tool making life easier".
Because I risk sounding contradictory —and because context always matters— let me, for argument’s sake, assume a different ideological landscape around generative AI, where profit motives and tech-bro nonsense don’t exist, and where anyone can train their own model and run it locally on their computer. :)
In the case of Skywards, the use of AI-generated images as "material" works well. The compositions are done properly, there’s decent transition between scenes, cohesion throughout, flow, etc. The show isn’t bad. It’s certainly not the greatest thing our eyes have witnessed, but it works well for what it is. Had it been paired with a fully transparent "Look, we wanted to make this, but without AI we couldn’t have pulled it off" disclaimer, I’d be fine with it.
Honestly, I don’t see a huge difference between Skywards and, say, De Profundis — which borrows from Magritte, slaps on a random pixelated Isle of the Dead (original by Arnold Böcklin from about 150 years ago) at the end, and I’d bet half the intermediate graphics were preexisting somewhere within the internet vacuum. I could even say that, aesthetically, it looks less coherent than Skywards.
In the case of Skywards, the use of AI-generated images as "material" works well. The compositions are done properly, there’s decent transition between scenes, cohesion throughout, flow, etc. The show isn’t bad. It’s certainly not the greatest thing our eyes have witnessed, but it works well for what it is. Had it been paired with a fully transparent "Look, we wanted to make this, but without AI we couldn’t have pulled it off" disclaimer, I’d be fine with it.
Honestly, I don’t see a huge difference between Skywards and, say, De Profundis — which borrows from Magritte, slaps on a random pixelated Isle of the Dead (original by Arnold Böcklin from about 150 years ago) at the end, and I’d bet half the intermediate graphics were preexisting somewhere within the internet vacuum. I could even say that, aesthetically, it looks less coherent than Skywards.
And yeah, the track is hands and ears down the best part of the show. :)
AI should go to hell but greets to Soda7! Also, maybe too naughty words for well known graphicians, who surely have done great things without help of an AI... Piggy.
Quote:
The compositions are done properly, there’s decent transition between scenes, cohesion throughout, flow, etc. The show isn’t bad.
Excuse me for asking, but have you perhaps gone blind? Are you kidding me? This thing is going nowhere. There is 0 dramaturgy, it just drags on and on. Fly in, rotate, zoom, rotate, fly out. Repeat. This is what you call “flow” I guess. The collaged objects are poorly isolated with all kinds of jagged edges and rogue pixels all over the place. This you call “cohesion” I guess. The thing looks like something done on souped up Amiga 2000 (without video toaster) in Scala software circa 1992 by a rookie. Sorry, I’d analyze some more but my brain and eyes bleed from the idea of having to watch it through again. It’s human made slop, peppered all over with AI slop on top.
We all have to be a bit blind to cope with demoscene stuff :D
@ham, AI use or not... you probably haven't been there, but Revision this year had an AI usage field on submission form on each release. can't recall exact wording anymore, but it was something like: 1.) uses gen AI completely, 2.) uses gen AI as a helper, 3.) uses AI and human made mixure, 4.) no AI used.
usually those who had any AI were marked accordingly on the infoscreen. this one didn't had any info about AI use, therefor, knowingly trying to fool the audience and voters.
not to mention that two of the leading pixel artists on Amiga, Facet and Critikill, should have known better than to do this - looking at their pouet stats, both of them got more thumb downs for this, than in their whole previous demoscene history.
personally, won't thumb it down, as I usually don't do that. (think that I thumbed down 1 single prod in my whole pouet history)
usually those who had any AI were marked accordingly on the infoscreen. this one didn't had any info about AI use, therefor, knowingly trying to fool the audience and voters.
not to mention that two of the leading pixel artists on Amiga, Facet and Critikill, should have known better than to do this - looking at their pouet stats, both of them got more thumb downs for this, than in their whole previous demoscene history.
personally, won't thumb it down, as I usually don't do that. (think that I thumbed down 1 single prod in my whole pouet history)
SODA7 rules ... for the rest i become hemoroids when i saw this
@bonefish: I didn't know about that rule. Is it something recent, or was it already implemented last year?
Anyway, that rule seems a bit preposterous to me because it's possible that some assets in the demo could be completely generated the easy way (a text prompt and that's it) or completely generated but iterating on prompts or using non-text prompts (images, which in turn could be created with another text prompt or "by hand, tablet, or mouse," or with a mix of techniques, or subsequently retouched in Krita or by varying the noise level of the model's diffusion), or in many other ways that wouldn't fit into a one-dimensional category with four scale levels. In short, that rule seems superfluous to me, and what we should have is more trust in the good faith of the participants and in the fact that they will explain how they made the demo when asked, and that the public will assume that we are no longer in the era of the mouse and tablet and that there is no going back because no one wants to spend a month working on a graphic pixel by pixel when now they can do something much better in less time.
In less time! But not with less effort! This is what so many people don't understand: The fact that you can make an image with Deluxe Paint in less time than it took a 2nd-century artist to make a Greco-Roman mosaic by joining colored stones doesn't detract from your technique or imply that you are worse than the (now forgotten) Roman artist who composed those mosaics and who probably would have been a better artist if they had been able to iterate faster with the mouse, fill, and brush. The same thing is happening with the new techniques that are emerging and that we still don't know how to use properly (just as no one knew how to use photography or could dream of cinema when the first cameras were invented).
Furthermore, a self-respecting artist won't just present the first piece of crap the generative model spits out, but will iterate and use a combined series of techniques until the result is good. And that's art, by the way. Because the art isn't in the tool, but in the artist and the communication they establish with the viewer.
This is why I think that banning techniques from competitions just because a bunch of people think it's still 2015 will only hinder progress in the scene and frustrate artists who want to grow and improve their skills. Not to mention new people who might want to enter the demoscene and lack those anti-AI biases (I firmly believe that AI-hatred is a passing fad and won't last for many years).
I know my opinion may not coincide with that of the majority (the current majority, not the majority of the near future). And that's why I stand by it even more strongly.
That said, I find it very hard to believe that the good people at Darkage wanted to "trick" anyone. Especially when it's obvious they used AI given the (probably very deliberate) style of the images shown in the demo.
Anyway, that rule seems a bit preposterous to me because it's possible that some assets in the demo could be completely generated the easy way (a text prompt and that's it) or completely generated but iterating on prompts or using non-text prompts (images, which in turn could be created with another text prompt or "by hand, tablet, or mouse," or with a mix of techniques, or subsequently retouched in Krita or by varying the noise level of the model's diffusion), or in many other ways that wouldn't fit into a one-dimensional category with four scale levels. In short, that rule seems superfluous to me, and what we should have is more trust in the good faith of the participants and in the fact that they will explain how they made the demo when asked, and that the public will assume that we are no longer in the era of the mouse and tablet and that there is no going back because no one wants to spend a month working on a graphic pixel by pixel when now they can do something much better in less time.
In less time! But not with less effort! This is what so many people don't understand: The fact that you can make an image with Deluxe Paint in less time than it took a 2nd-century artist to make a Greco-Roman mosaic by joining colored stones doesn't detract from your technique or imply that you are worse than the (now forgotten) Roman artist who composed those mosaics and who probably would have been a better artist if they had been able to iterate faster with the mouse, fill, and brush. The same thing is happening with the new techniques that are emerging and that we still don't know how to use properly (just as no one knew how to use photography or could dream of cinema when the first cameras were invented).
Furthermore, a self-respecting artist won't just present the first piece of crap the generative model spits out, but will iterate and use a combined series of techniques until the result is good. And that's art, by the way. Because the art isn't in the tool, but in the artist and the communication they establish with the viewer.
This is why I think that banning techniques from competitions just because a bunch of people think it's still 2015 will only hinder progress in the scene and frustrate artists who want to grow and improve their skills. Not to mention new people who might want to enter the demoscene and lack those anti-AI biases (I firmly believe that AI-hatred is a passing fad and won't last for many years).
I know my opinion may not coincide with that of the majority (the current majority, not the majority of the near future). And that's why I stand by it even more strongly.
That said, I find it very hard to believe that the good people at Darkage wanted to "trick" anyone. Especially when it's obvious they used AI given the (probably very deliberate) style of the images shown in the demo.
Demo was ok, didn’t catch me neither in a good nor bad way.
The AI discussion reminds me on the 90s „NoCopy“ discussions regarding pixeled vs scanned graphics. But on roids. A bit too aggressive comments for my taste.
Scanners in 90s. AI in 2025. It won’t work without skills anyways.
But yeah - using it should be confirmed - especially when there is a dedicated text field to enter that info.
The AI discussion reminds me on the 90s „NoCopy“ discussions regarding pixeled vs scanned graphics. But on roids. A bit too aggressive comments for my taste.
Scanners in 90s. AI in 2025. It won’t work without skills anyways.
But yeah - using it should be confirmed - especially when there is a dedicated text field to enter that info.
Person A: “This prod doesn’t comply to the rules stated on submission form.”
Person B: “I didn’t know that. But… [~place wall of quasi intellectual text that goes in circles here~]”
Remember what I wrote about mental retardation before? All similarities to real persons coincidental.
Person B: “I didn’t know that. But… [~place wall of quasi intellectual text that goes in circles here~]”
Remember what I wrote about mental retardation before? All similarities to real persons coincidental.
@4gentE: Yes. Rest assured everybody here remember what you said and the way you said it. Sleep well.
Put a mustache on, and everything works. :D
It looks like a potpourri of stock art, but music and code seem to get a bit underrated in the discussion.
It looks like a potpourri of stock art, but music and code seem to get a bit underrated in the discussion.
Demo was nice but I just cannot stand AI.. and getting tired of too much AI being used in projects.
so.. sadly.. no! code looked fine. but clearly AI. and I cannot just accept it. sorry
so.. sadly.. no! code looked fine. but clearly AI. and I cannot just accept it. sorry
Cool and stylish, love direction with music!
Using genAI is using like a commercial Engine, it's not work you can be credited for, and it cannot be valued at all in the. So i can only judge the idea, which is nice, and i can judge the soundtrack, which was ok.
I find it sad that you don't state anything about AI into the NFO.
And that's the reason for my thumb down.
I find it sad that you don't state anything about AI into the NFO.
And that's the reason for my thumb down.
My thumb is up because although I am not generally in favor of the use of AI, I understand that the demo has certain values: it is fun and contains unquestionable creative and programming work. I understand the thumbs down, but there are comments that exceed what is justifiable. And I think that if you want to avoid controversy it would be best to separate neatly between allowed and not allowed use of AI in two categories.
@ham: The time when “nobody wants to spend a month working on a graphic pixel by pixel ” is far from near, or rather I don't see it as a matter of time. The point is that a graphic artist is attracted to the pixel process (and the artist in general to his art). Normally he is interested in achieving a result with tools that leave all the creative aspect to his pure ability or as much as possible, or at least reasonable (something different is that he may also be interested in using AI as experimentation in another way). That's how one feels more author of what he does. And obviously, pixel art is a concrete technique. It has little to do with a prompt “make me a graphic of such and such a thing with such and such a style”, no matter how many iterations you add later. For the most part I still don't use AI because what I would get that way I wouldn't understand as my own in the same way. Art has an aspect of personal achievement and progressive improvement and learning in a certain way.
What can happen is that you may feel lazy because of the effort if you know that in 5 minutes you can obtain something similar. And this ties in with what you say later: “In less time, but not with less effort! “What do you mean, not with less effort? It seems clear and obvious to me that yes, unless you are referring to the case where the AI does not find what you are looking for and you take days, weeks and even the same month of reference to get it. In any case, this “art of orientation” is a completely different one.
@ham: The time when “nobody wants to spend a month working on a graphic pixel by pixel ” is far from near, or rather I don't see it as a matter of time. The point is that a graphic artist is attracted to the pixel process (and the artist in general to his art). Normally he is interested in achieving a result with tools that leave all the creative aspect to his pure ability or as much as possible, or at least reasonable (something different is that he may also be interested in using AI as experimentation in another way). That's how one feels more author of what he does. And obviously, pixel art is a concrete technique. It has little to do with a prompt “make me a graphic of such and such a thing with such and such a style”, no matter how many iterations you add later. For the most part I still don't use AI because what I would get that way I wouldn't understand as my own in the same way. Art has an aspect of personal achievement and progressive improvement and learning in a certain way.
What can happen is that you may feel lazy because of the effort if you know that in 5 minutes you can obtain something similar. And this ties in with what you say later: “In less time, but not with less effort! “What do you mean, not with less effort? It seems clear and obvious to me that yes, unless you are referring to the case where the AI does not find what you are looking for and you take days, weeks and even the same month of reference to get it. In any case, this “art of orientation” is a completely different one.
Using AI for graphics is like using a compiler for the code.
Found it more creepy than funny, actually.
@MAC/Batman Group: Everyone has their own reasons for making art and enjoys one part of the process or another. If you want to spend a month pixelating by hand, you'll do it even if AI helps you with something else.
When I say an artist will do something in less time but not with less effort, I mean they'll dedicate 100% of their time to the things AI can't help you with (or can, but not very well). I'm talking about things related to the artwork itself; don't even think I'm talking about aspects of a larger production like a demo.
People whose artistic interest is focused on static images (typical graphics like those for competitions) will probably spend a month making an image with AI (and they'll use most of that time retouching defects and thinking about how to control prompts, which, remember, some of them will be done with the mouse instead of the keyboard because they're visual prompts). With AI, you have many more opportunities to improve your art in the same amount of time you normally spend on it. I'm not saying we should be lazy, but on the contrary, I'm saying that AI will allow us to work even harder, spend our time better, and learn even more.
Of course, to see why this is so, you have to stop imagining what a lazy person would do. I don't give a damn, just like you, what a lazy person does in 5 minutes with this technology because what I want to see is what someone who has spent several years mastering it does.
We can talk about this privately on Telegram if you want, or perhaps when we meet at the Posadas Party. Let's leave this thread for people to post about this great demo or rant about the end of the world. ;]
When I say an artist will do something in less time but not with less effort, I mean they'll dedicate 100% of their time to the things AI can't help you with (or can, but not very well). I'm talking about things related to the artwork itself; don't even think I'm talking about aspects of a larger production like a demo.
People whose artistic interest is focused on static images (typical graphics like those for competitions) will probably spend a month making an image with AI (and they'll use most of that time retouching defects and thinking about how to control prompts, which, remember, some of them will be done with the mouse instead of the keyboard because they're visual prompts). With AI, you have many more opportunities to improve your art in the same amount of time you normally spend on it. I'm not saying we should be lazy, but on the contrary, I'm saying that AI will allow us to work even harder, spend our time better, and learn even more.
Of course, to see why this is so, you have to stop imagining what a lazy person would do. I don't give a damn, just like you, what a lazy person does in 5 minutes with this technology because what I want to see is what someone who has spent several years mastering it does.
We can talk about this privately on Telegram if you want, or perhaps when we meet at the Posadas Party. Let's leave this thread for people to post about this great demo or rant about the end of the world. ;]
Not to mention the SHITLOAD of resources AIs are devouring to produces all these petty pictures.
@hitchhikr: You can generate pretty pictures locally in a Raspberry Pi using Stable Diffusion. Or in your laptop, in less time but "wasting" a bit more or energy.
In short, we can use a lot of open source models now locally. We don't need to train a model from scratch anymore.
In short, we can use a lot of open source models now locally. We don't need to train a model from scratch anymore.
Quote:
@hitchhikr: You can generate pretty pictures locally in a Raspberry Pi using Stable Diffusion. Or in your laptop, in less time but "wasting" a bit more or energy.
In short, we can use a lot of open source models now locally. We don't need to train a model from scratch anymore.
I didn't even know that. But i was more referring to the increasing amount of and power hungry data centers.
Also "petty" not "pretty".
Quote:
Using AI for graphics is like using a compiler for the code.
@Debvgger: Well, this is not the place for debate, but to comment on the demo, but I can't agree with that. The AI is involved “on its own” in the creative process and graphical decisions at levels of 80% or more. Compiling code is something else, it is a “translation” process without introducing any ingenuity, inventiveness or talent specific to the art of coding.
Nice track and sync!
I don't really care where the pixels came from; years ago they were scanned or downloaded, now they are generated.
Samples were probably sampled, too...
I don't really care where the pixels came from; years ago they were scanned or downloaded, now they are generated.
Samples were probably sampled, too...
Quote:
You can generate pretty pictures locally in a Raspberry Pi using Stable Diffusion. Or in your laptop, in less time but "wasting" a bit more or energy.
I suppose that means you train the model locally on that same Rasp Pi and with data resources you locally have. Is that it?
@ham:
For me, that exact process you want to cut short (of pixeling for example) is what this hobby is all about. The process. Eye-mind-hand. Not verbal commands. You know, skill. Like in other folk-art type activities. Streamlining the time consumption in a way that leaves the hobbyist less knowledgable about his/her trade is detremental to the hobby community in question in any long(er) run. We don’t want this hobby to die with us. Now, You did once say that after attacking you I proceed to write things nobody understands, but I’m hoping you can understand this. Not agree with me, merely understand.
Quote:
Samples were probably sampled, too...
Most of the samples were actually generated by me. I didn't rip any copyrighted work, nor used gen-AI to make these.
This work was a sort of mix of modern production work, translating in the second part as a nod to 90s tracking style.
Quote:
Compiling code is something else, it is a “translation” process without introducing any ingenuity, inventiveness or talent specific to the art of coding.
As a compiler engineer, I beg to differ. ;)
Quote:
As a compiler engineer, I beg to differ. ;)
Haha yes. Also if wonder if they would revisit their statement when AI/ML more enters the field of compilation (unless it’s already have - you probably know more about it)
Also to make say C++ code compile in a performant way often it need the code to be presented in a certain way to get the INTENDED result. And it’s still the same with AI. At least if one want control. Prompting and other tools as control net etc require a certain time and skillset to output what is wanted.
So to say that AI handles most of the creative part is not true. Of course if one writes “make cool sci fi picture” that might be true.
Still for an intended output usually the creator has a picture already in their head that they want to happen and it means they need to communicate with the AI in such way to get that. Which is not trivial.
I think one big problem is many who bash AI is not artists. They just write something and get a “cool and detailed realistic” image as result and is super happy with that. End.
That is of course not what an artist does. Its iterations after iterations and curations. To the end result
Quote:
Compiling code is something else, it is a “translation” process without introducing any ingenuity, inventiveness or talent specific to the art of coding.
Haha, it just occured to me that prompting is also a “translation” process in which one translates original artists’ talent and hard work plus countless slavelabour hours alignment work into techbro profit and personal fame. Not to mention the translation of original authors’ very livelihoods and all the natural resources into users feeling like artists. In fact translating future children’s lives into feeling talented. Ok, stop.
the soundtrack alone deserves a thumbs up! Great track SoDa7!!!
Quote:
I think one big problem is many who bash AI is not artists.
In my experience with this subject, and I do have some, it’s EXACTLY the artists that mostly bash AI. Coders mostly defend AI usage.
True I was unclear. It’s a lot artist that bash AI art that see it as the enemy.
And then there is artist who embrace it
And then there is those who really normally don’t do so much that most of all bash AI art.
I would say it’s most novice and aspiring artists who bash AI art. While the more commercially experienced the artist is the more they already have embraced AI art into their work pipeline.
Same regarding coders
And then there is artist who embrace it
And then there is those who really normally don’t do so much that most of all bash AI art.
I would say it’s most novice and aspiring artists who bash AI art. While the more commercially experienced the artist is the more they already have embraced AI art into their work pipeline.
Same regarding coders
@Iridon:
And then there are those who suddenly found out they were in fact talented artists in the past year or two. ;-)
Again, I disagree. Quote contrary in my experience. But maybe we’ve been swimming in different echochambers.
For example, have you seen the C64 artists initiative regarding AI and openness of artistic processess? Very few novice artists signed that paper.
Also, it’s not thoroughly clear what do we mean by “bashing”.
And then there are those who suddenly found out they were in fact talented artists in the past year or two. ;-)
Quote:
…its most novice and aspiring artists who bash AI art…
Again, I disagree. Quote contrary in my experience. But maybe we’ve been swimming in different echochambers.
For example, have you seen the C64 artists initiative regarding AI and openness of artistic processess? Very few novice artists signed that paper.
Also, it’s not thoroughly clear what do we mean by “bashing”.
Quote:
Using genAI is using like a commercial Engine, it's not work you can be credited for, and it cannot be valued at all in the. So i can only judge the idea, which is nice
Unpopular opinion: start saying that about Notch, which like it or not, is now a commercial product.
When I saw it on the stream, I didn’t even stop to think whether it was AI or not. I just thought it looked kinda sloppy and clunky, like the creators didn’t really put much effort into it.
Quote:
Quote:As a compiler engineer, I beg to differ. ;)
Haha yes. Also if wonder if they would revisit their statement when AI/ML more enters the field of compilation (unless it’s already have - you probably know more about it)
Also to make say C++ code compile in a performant way often it need the code to be presented in a certain way to get the INTENDED result. And it’s still the same with AI. At least if one want control. Prompting and other tools as control net etc require a certain time and skillset to output what is wanted.
So to say that AI handles most of the creative part is not true. Of course if one writes “make cool sci fi picture” that might be true.
Still for an intended output usually the creator has a picture already in their head that they want to happen and it means they need to communicate with the AI in such way to get that. Which is not trivial.
I think one big problem is many who bash AI is not artists. They just write something and get a “cool and detailed realistic” image as result and is super happy with that. End.
That is of course not what an artist does. Its iterations after iterations and curations. To the end result
Perhaps what I meant was misunderstood. One thing is that ingenuity, talent and inventiveness are required to develop compilers, and quite another that the use of the compiler is interfering in the ingenuity, talent and inventiveness needed to create the code that would later be compiled. All programming ideas remain intact in their authorship within the art of programming in this or that language, although the result is enhanced and conditioned by the compiler, where the author no longer enters. In contrast, writing in a prompt has nothing to do with graphic art. As I said before, it is a particular art, that of guiding the AI by means of iterations. But it is not graphic art.
A closer simile to that of the compiler, saving the distances, would be that of the video game graphic artist who sees his graphics with a filter of arcade game aspect. He pixelated with his pure skill, but he is not 100% responsible for the final result.
Quote:
start saying that about Notch, which like it or not, is now a commercial product.
Notch was always a commercial product. Since its release.
Quote:
Quote:start saying that about Notch, which like it or not, is now a commercial product.
Notch was always a commercial product. Since its release.
Yet I found over the years it had an exceptional amount of slack given. Especially compared to Unreal and Unity. I found it had nowhere near the amount of vitriol given towards it unlike those two. Maybe because of the developers, who knows?
Quote:
Again, I disagree. Quote contrary in my experience. But maybe we’ve been swimming in different echochambers.
I refer to people who has worked professionally for say 10+ years in the field of games, architecture, previz, movies, books and magazines.
Quote:
I would say it’s most novice and aspiring artists who bash AI art. While the more commercially experienced the artist is the more they already have embraced AI art into their work pipeline.
It's not my experience either. I see a lot of AI advocacy from:
-Technology enthusiasts in general.
-People with little talent or beginners, who finally see possible what was not within their reach before.
-More conceptual artists, not so involved in the craft process.
-People who simply want to experiment, regardless of their trajectory and artistic endorsement.
In principle, it is more in line with social phenomena in general that the new generations embrace the transformations of their time to a greater extent, and on the contrary, fears and resistance to drastic changes are formed among those who already have a learned professional background.
I'm so old, I remember when Photoshop was a subject of the same flamewars, claiming it would kill pixel graphics.
I remember when MP3 was bashed, because it kills tracker music.
Then I remember when 3D accelerated code was despised because it will kill traditional software rendering.
And guess what? They were all correct.
I'm giving it an OK because it's truly a nice demo, made with heart and soul. But I must punish you for the AI slop - out of principle.
I remember when MP3 was bashed, because it kills tracker music.
Then I remember when 3D accelerated code was despised because it will kill traditional software rendering.
And guess what? They were all correct.
I'm giving it an OK because it's truly a nice demo, made with heart and soul. But I must punish you for the AI slop - out of principle.
I've been working professionally with graphic design since 1994. Yes that long!
From my experience it's not us who have worked this long that embraces AI, I think there is a level of professionalism that makes us not use it. It would feel like betraying the customer who pays me for MY style and skills. Also the client wants changes all the time, and good luck with changing AI generated art if you can't even lift a pen and paint.
AI art is a plague wanted by the instant gratification people that wants it all immediately. We have to relearn and understand that quality takes time and education to achieve.
Comparing AI generated art with anything that exists on the market does not work. AI art is not a tool in the old sense like 3D modelling, photo etc. It's more like outsourcing your ideas to another person, but artificial this time with a very limited mindset. And then it's not you who does the artwork anymore. The bigger or detailed creative decisions are made by an algorithm instead of you.
This release should really have been tagged with AI in both the slide at the party and followed the rules, as other releases did. The Info file should also have it clearly stated.
A couple of years ago I was looking forward to do pixel artwork until I could not physically do it anymore but today Im not sure anymore. It hurts knowing your hobby have a high risk turning into soulless mass-produced AI generated productions. So totally uninteresting and sad if it happens. Seeing dishonest AI art again and again is so provoking towards us who gives a lot of ourselves trying to entertain.
I'm constantly thrown between keep going or give up, for real.
From my experience it's not us who have worked this long that embraces AI, I think there is a level of professionalism that makes us not use it. It would feel like betraying the customer who pays me for MY style and skills. Also the client wants changes all the time, and good luck with changing AI generated art if you can't even lift a pen and paint.
AI art is a plague wanted by the instant gratification people that wants it all immediately. We have to relearn and understand that quality takes time and education to achieve.
Comparing AI generated art with anything that exists on the market does not work. AI art is not a tool in the old sense like 3D modelling, photo etc. It's more like outsourcing your ideas to another person, but artificial this time with a very limited mindset. And then it's not you who does the artwork anymore. The bigger or detailed creative decisions are made by an algorithm instead of you.
This release should really have been tagged with AI in both the slide at the party and followed the rules, as other releases did. The Info file should also have it clearly stated.
A couple of years ago I was looking forward to do pixel artwork until I could not physically do it anymore but today Im not sure anymore. It hurts knowing your hobby have a high risk turning into soulless mass-produced AI generated productions. So totally uninteresting and sad if it happens. Seeing dishonest AI art again and again is so provoking towards us who gives a lot of ourselves trying to entertain.
I'm constantly thrown between keep going or give up, for real.
With regards to the AI art: If the two men, one of them licking the capsule, is AI, then it's not too bad at approximating cartoon art, but that roll call of rotating clown faces is really CREEPY, and if there's one thing that AI can do, it's doing CREEPY.
Quote:
I refer to people who has worked professionally for say 10+ years in the field of games, architecture, previz, movies, books and magazines.
So, you’re refering to me. Make that 30 years. One less than The_Sarge up there. I won’t say that I don’t have a few old friends and colleagues that voluntarily sold their soul to the devil, I’ll say they are a thin minority. What bothers me immensely is when I see people in my line of work whom I know to actually despise this tech and who see all its downsides and shortcomings being forced to work with it because it’s the latest business buzzword.
playing hide and seek thumbs. That is why some compos start to suck.
Skywards is a pure fun demo that stood out from the rest of the compo with its unique look that reminds me of monty python's flying circus, a show that hardwired to my brain when it was repeated in my childhood. As mentioned somewhere above, the collage style would have required the usage of photos, but whether it was done in AI or with stock images doesn't really matter to me here - it's very well done and serves its purpose.
The picture with the guy about to swallow the amiga pill is hilarious and was not the only part that made my group mates and myself laugh our asses off. I was really surprised by the fact it only made 6th.
The production runs smoothly, looks good, sounds really great - so nothing to complain about from the technical and artistic side. What is a real problem is the communication. After last year's discussions, one should know that any usage of AI can trigger strong feelings in some people, even more so if it is undeclared.
In art, I think if you do anything that confuses people, deliver some context. Write openly down what you did and why. I talked to one of the coders and he was doing so many stupid jokes in such a short time that I immediately felt a direct connection between the makers and the demo the moment it was shown. The demo made sense to me. And so it became art to me.
The picture with the guy about to swallow the amiga pill is hilarious and was not the only part that made my group mates and myself laugh our asses off. I was really surprised by the fact it only made 6th.
The production runs smoothly, looks good, sounds really great - so nothing to complain about from the technical and artistic side. What is a real problem is the communication. After last year's discussions, one should know that any usage of AI can trigger strong feelings in some people, even more so if it is undeclared.
In art, I think if you do anything that confuses people, deliver some context. Write openly down what you did and why. I talked to one of the coders and he was doing so many stupid jokes in such a short time that I immediately felt a direct connection between the makers and the demo the moment it was shown. The demo made sense to me. And so it became art to me.
Wait, are those conservative dog whistles I see?!
I think the context is being lost. Professionally, the use of AI will be determined by market criteria, such as public/customer acceptance or cost reduction, but the demoscene has its own criteria, such as prestige.
A retro platform graphician in demoscene gains prestige as he demonstrates his skills in hand-drawing and pixel mastery. The use of AI simply does not help to build prestige as an artist here.
That doesn't mean that AI should be banned, punished with public scorn or that it turns everything it touches into rubbish. Everyone is free to use whatever tools they see fit, and one can only demand honesty in stating how the work was done in order to get fair ratings in competitions.
I can think of many plausible reasons why someone would want to use AI in their demo, for example, a lone coder who can't find an artist who can develop a specific idea. Or an artist involved in a prod that requires so much graphics that it would not be feasible without AI, to give just 2 examples.
I don't know the reasons why Facet and Critikill have decided to use AI massively in this prod, and surely this is not the prod with which they gain more prestige as demoscene artists, but I think they don't need it either because they have already more than proved their skills.
In my opinion, the most objectionable thing here would be if it is true that there has been an intention to hide the use of AI by breaking the rules of the contest. But that would be a question of dishonesty, not about AI usage.
On the other hand, I understand that some people are very burned by the AI issue because there are a lot of feelings involved, with people losing their jobs, etc... but I think we should abstract from that here and try to maintain respect and manners.
A retro platform graphician in demoscene gains prestige as he demonstrates his skills in hand-drawing and pixel mastery. The use of AI simply does not help to build prestige as an artist here.
That doesn't mean that AI should be banned, punished with public scorn or that it turns everything it touches into rubbish. Everyone is free to use whatever tools they see fit, and one can only demand honesty in stating how the work was done in order to get fair ratings in competitions.
I can think of many plausible reasons why someone would want to use AI in their demo, for example, a lone coder who can't find an artist who can develop a specific idea. Or an artist involved in a prod that requires so much graphics that it would not be feasible without AI, to give just 2 examples.
I don't know the reasons why Facet and Critikill have decided to use AI massively in this prod, and surely this is not the prod with which they gain more prestige as demoscene artists, but I think they don't need it either because they have already more than proved their skills.
In my opinion, the most objectionable thing here would be if it is true that there has been an intention to hide the use of AI by breaking the rules of the contest. But that would be a question of dishonesty, not about AI usage.
On the other hand, I understand that some people are very burned by the AI issue because there are a lot of feelings involved, with people losing their jobs, etc... but I think we should abstract from that here and try to maintain respect and manners.
Quote:
So, you’re refering to me. Make that 30 years
Yes it seems we have different experiences here. I myself has been working now for a bit over 30 years and main reason I have not dwelled more into AI usage so far is simply because the tools and the results have been taking me longer than without it. But for sure when it gets better or I get more knowledge I will rely on it case based.
And to be clear. When I say many artist embrace AI art I does not mean they write a prompt and sell that. It means that they use it for ideation inspiration, brainstorming, concept ideas or to get some texture to be used in Photoshop as brush pattern or to use as reference etc.
Basically same as the do and have been doing all the time. On computer and before computers.
And I don’t see any soul selling into this. As little as it would be soul selling to use stock images for reference or in photo bashing etc etc.
in most cases AI art is more a stock image generator. And few artist use it directly mainly again because it’s not fitting in style or being good enough or the toolset itself is so clunky that to generate something more full piece with control take longer than do it oneself or with more classic forms of reference or computer aided assistance.
Regardless our different opinions and experiences AI generative visuals are here and going to evolve and be used more and more and the tools is going to be better allowing more and more control. Basically as common as Photoshop filters.
Not saying that stuff made with Photoshop filter is good. But I find it hard to believe that most artist or designers have never used those filter in a creative way with good results due to wanting to speed up their work process bold text
It was very fun at the party and us there had a great time with that show all drunk and jolly! Should have stated it was with use of AI if that was mandatory to do... problem solved and move on. Get a grip and have a fun life with great energy and love...
Usual suspects doing minimal effort to hide their reliance on AI.
The demo itself feels like an old flash animutation and the tune is a banger, but overall - it doesn't really show any nuance to it.
The demo itself feels like an old flash animutation and the tune is a banger, but overall - it doesn't really show any nuance to it.
submit changes
if this prod is a fake, some info is false or the download link is broken,
do not post about it in the comments, it will get lost.
instead, click here !