The Expanse: Osiris Reborn is a third-person action RPG set in the universe of The Expanse.You’re no hero — just a mercenary caught in the wrong place at the...
Yeah, substantially higher production quality than I was expecting out of the visuals.
That said…I hope this is an early pass at the writing and voice acting for the purposes of a trailer. Rogue Trader was a lot better than this in both regards.
I should have wrote “if it’s close to the original story”, not something like I am Legend that completely ignored the reason for the story being called that in the first place.
I have a serious question. To preface: I am no fan of generative AI. I hate the environmental impact, the impact on our workforce, and the risk of further widening the wealth disparity across the world.
That said, do you believe that using generative AI in this case (for prototyping and rapid iteration/visualization of intermediate/non-final design concepts) is worse than, say, artists looking at the freely available online portfolios of other artists for inspiration, provided that they generate the final designs entirely by themselves?
I’m not saying it is or isn’t at this point, but I’m curious if you have a perspective on whether/how this isn’t at least one of the less-bad ways to use AI. It seems kind of like “you can’t stop someone from asking AI for help” levels of usage, not “we fired people to replace their output with slop”.
Yes, because usually the people using generative AI for rapid concepts like these are the higher ups with no art experience, just a vision. Then they send it to a concept artist to ‘make it work’ without understanding processes or complexity or feasibility of what they’re asking.
AI had essentially become a tool for people with no high level skill to simulate high level skill, but without any of the understanding that comes from years of real world practice. Often it costs more money because the concept artist now has no control of the workflow and has to sink more time into trying to make a shit concept work properly with the medium.
Case in point: the upcoming Zelda movie’s concepts were all done by generative AI and there’s only one concept artist (usually at least 100) trying to make the shit concepts work for film.
I would say that having artists use content from the environment destroying content amalgamating plagiarism machine is a bad use case. Those artists could look at art posted online by other humans (with a much smaller carbon footprint) and still be innovative. Especially when you have 6 seasons worth of a TV show to use for inspiration.
This is different from an artist using AI for inspiration, the studio has had job openings where they were expected to use AI for concept art. They are being told to use AI. They also say that no AI generated assets will end up in the final game, but something will slip through just like it did with Crimson Desert.
So yes, AI is worse than just doing things with the human brain. I’m happy to pay for human labor, I won’t pay for slop.
At the end of the day, if I think the final product looks generic, it will affect my opinion of it. But I’m not going to assume it looks generic just based on something I read about how they’re developing it.
However their achieve it, if characters won’t have exact likenessses from the TV show - no one’s going to care, and thus actors are the models. With show’s cast as models, there’s little artistic expression involved in copying their look as best as possible, unless game goes for derivatives like drawings or cell shading. If they go for derivative looks, then having real artists in the first place would cut down on middle bullshittery of using AI.
There are a couple of actors from that show I could pick out of a lineup having seen only a few episodes, but I wasn’t even under the impression that this game would use many of the characters from the main story at all.
AFAIK show covered, some, but not all of the books, so things like other media ought to pick up the slack. Is there ANY entity that hasn’t learned from Disney ruining SW to not do that sidequest original bullshit?
One of Star Wars’ most acclaimed video games is original side stuff (KOTOR). Especially in a game where your choices can shape the outcome, it’s generally good practice to steer clear of anything that intersects with the main story, which is what I assumed would happen here.
Sure, garbage in, garbage out and all that. The autonomously generated stuff tends toward generic as an inherent byproduct of being a closed loop system. But that doesn’t mean a real artist couldn’t look at some boring ass slop and be inspired to explore new directions.
I think one of the common themes I’m circling these days is that “human in the loop” is a common concept around ensuring outputs from AI systems are acceptable, but a better way to look at it is that generative AI should never have a direct connection to final output. As inspiration or iteration, I think there’s potential value, but ultimately, whether it’s code, art, or content, a human should create what goes out. Using AI for intermediate acceleration is a much healthier approach than the “look how many people we can replace!” angle that’s so popular in tech.
This doesn’t solve any of the many other issues with generative AI these days, but it at least feels like a more sensible approach to the creative concerns.
That said, do you believe that using generative AI in this case (for prototyping and rapid iteration/visualization of intermediate/non-final design concepts) is worse than, say, artists looking at the freely available online portfolios of other artists for inspiration, provided that they generate the final designs entirely by themselves?
That would require a nuanced answer that most of these plebes don’t have.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: [email protected]
Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.
Rules
1. Submissions have to be related to games
Video games, tabletop, or otherwise. Posts not related to games will be deleted.
This community is focused on games, of all kinds. Any news item or discussion should be related to gaming in some way.
2. No bigotry or harassment, be civil
No bigotry, hardline stance. Try not to get too heated when entering into a discussion or debate.
We are here to talk and discuss about one of our passions, not fight or be exposed to hate. Posts or responses that are hateful will be deleted to keep the atmosphere good. If repeatedly violated, not only will the comment be deleted but a ban will be handed out as well. We judge each case individually.
3. No excessive self-promotion
Try to keep it to 10% self-promotion / 90% other stuff in your post history.
This is to prevent people from posting for the sole purpose of promoting their own website or social media account.
4. Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts
This community is mostly for discussion and news. Remember to search for the thing you’re submitting before posting to see if it’s already been posted.
We want to keep the quality of posts high. Therefore, memes, funny videos, low-effort posts and reposts are not allowed. We prohibit giveaways because we cannot be sure that the person holding the giveaway will actually do what they promise.
5. Mark Spoilers and NSFW
Make sure to mark your stuff or it may be removed.
No one wants to be spoiled. Therefore, always mark spoilers. Similarly mark NSFW, in case anyone is browsing in a public space or at work.
6. No linking to piracy
Don’t share it here, there are other places to find it. Discussion of piracy is fine.
We don’t want us moderators or the admins of lemmy.world to get in trouble for linking to piracy. Therefore, any link to piracy will be removed. Discussion of it is of course allowed.
Xbox exclusive?
Damn, owlbear stepping up thier graphics and camera game. Definitely keeping an eye on this.
Yeah, substantially higher production quality than I was expecting out of the visuals.
That said…I hope this is an early pass at the writing and voice acting for the purposes of a trailer. Rogue Trader was a lot better than this in both regards.
I have a feeling this will be to Owlcat was BG3 was to Larian.
That would be awesome for them and us
Me too if it’s based on the books/show
What else could it be based on?
I should have wrote “if it’s close to the original story”, not something like I am Legend that completely ignored the reason for the story being called that in the first place.
Its supposedly cannon taking place around the first 2 books.
I have a feeling the folks at Owlcat were Mass Effect fans.
It look much more interesting than I remember from the announcement trailers and hopefully it has a good narrative.
gameplay kind of reminds me of the Division/Division 2, which could be promising - curious to how the space flight works out.
Cautiously optimistic.
I’ve not seen the films, but in the books it sounds fairly real physics based. That could be interesting in combat.
oh yeah, give me a good flip and burn baby, PDCs at 20%.
I need some juice.
I read all the books and the comics (+ shows), its one of my favorite works of fiction, which is where my caution comes from.
Too bad they’re using AI
https://www.eurogamer.net/owlcat-gen-ai-expanse-osiris-reborn
I have a serious question. To preface: I am no fan of generative AI. I hate the environmental impact, the impact on our workforce, and the risk of further widening the wealth disparity across the world.
That said, do you believe that using generative AI in this case (for prototyping and rapid iteration/visualization of intermediate/non-final design concepts) is worse than, say, artists looking at the freely available online portfolios of other artists for inspiration, provided that they generate the final designs entirely by themselves?
I’m not saying it is or isn’t at this point, but I’m curious if you have a perspective on whether/how this isn’t at least one of the less-bad ways to use AI. It seems kind of like “you can’t stop someone from asking AI for help” levels of usage, not “we fired people to replace their output with slop”.
Yes, because usually the people using generative AI for rapid concepts like these are the higher ups with no art experience, just a vision. Then they send it to a concept artist to ‘make it work’ without understanding processes or complexity or feasibility of what they’re asking.
AI had essentially become a tool for people with no high level skill to simulate high level skill, but without any of the understanding that comes from years of real world practice. Often it costs more money because the concept artist now has no control of the workflow and has to sink more time into trying to make a shit concept work properly with the medium.
Case in point: the upcoming Zelda movie’s concepts were all done by generative AI and there’s only one concept artist (usually at least 100) trying to make the shit concepts work for film.
Seems reasonable to say that “concept artist” its a job at threat here. Thanks for your thoughts!
Also, hadn’t heard that about the Zelda movie. Wasn’t going to see it anyway because Nintendo sucks these days, but it’s still news.
I would say that having artists use content from the environment destroying content amalgamating plagiarism machine is a bad use case. Those artists could look at art posted online by other humans (with a much smaller carbon footprint) and still be innovative. Especially when you have 6 seasons worth of a TV show to use for inspiration.
This is different from an artist using AI for inspiration, the studio has had job openings where they were expected to use AI for concept art. They are being told to use AI. They also say that no AI generated assets will end up in the final game, but something will slip through just like it did with Crimson Desert.
So yes, AI is worse than just doing things with the human brain. I’m happy to pay for human labor, I won’t pay for slop.
Paper: Autonomous language-image generation loops converge to generic visual motifs
At the end of the day, if I think the final product looks generic, it will affect my opinion of it. But I’m not going to assume it looks generic just based on something I read about how they’re developing it.
However their achieve it, if characters won’t have exact likenessses from the TV show - no one’s going to care, and thus actors are the models. With show’s cast as models, there’s little artistic expression involved in copying their look as best as possible, unless game goes for derivatives like drawings or cell shading. If they go for derivative looks, then having real artists in the first place would cut down on middle bullshittery of using AI.
There are a couple of actors from that show I could pick out of a lineup having seen only a few episodes, but I wasn’t even under the impression that this game would use many of the characters from the main story at all.
AFAIK show covered, some, but not all of the books, so things like other media ought to pick up the slack. Is there ANY entity that hasn’t learned from Disney ruining SW to not do that sidequest original bullshit?
One of Star Wars’ most acclaimed video games is original side stuff (KOTOR). Especially in a game where your choices can shape the outcome, it’s generally good practice to steer clear of anything that intersects with the main story, which is what I assumed would happen here.
Sure, garbage in, garbage out and all that. The autonomously generated stuff tends toward generic as an inherent byproduct of being a closed loop system. But that doesn’t mean a real artist couldn’t look at some boring ass slop and be inspired to explore new directions.
I think one of the common themes I’m circling these days is that “human in the loop” is a common concept around ensuring outputs from AI systems are acceptable, but a better way to look at it is that generative AI should never have a direct connection to final output. As inspiration or iteration, I think there’s potential value, but ultimately, whether it’s code, art, or content, a human should create what goes out. Using AI for intermediate acceleration is a much healthier approach than the “look how many people we can replace!” angle that’s so popular in tech.
This doesn’t solve any of the many other issues with generative AI these days, but it at least feels like a more sensible approach to the creative concerns.
That would require a nuanced answer that most of these plebes don’t have.