I watched it. There was really nothing impressive about it. It doesn't look good, it just looks ... fake. I originally went into detail about why, but that information would only be useful to an actual artist. Is the technology of generative AI impressive for what it can do? Sure. Do I find the things it's making impressive? Absolutely not. Why would I be impressed by something no one did? Something someone didn't do? Writing what you want to have made does not equal making it yourself, it equals ordering someone else to make it. And in this case, no one made it. Because a computer program is not a person. I would've been more impressed by a fanart drawing you'd made as your first ever attempt of art than this. And I'd honestly love to see you doing something actually artistic like that. Instead, this feels insulting to the people who actually did work on The Dig, who actually did create art. And even to the fans who appreciate the art of The Dig.

Generative AI is the epitome of "the ends justify the means".

Aaargh, I have bitten my tongue so many times trying to keep quiet about this, but now my tongue is bitten clean off and there’s nothing holding me back. My question to you, Johnny, is why? You said you spent two weeks wrangling the AI to get what you wanted out of it. Don’t you have anything better to do? Seriously. What I see is you wasting hours of your life, and who knows how much of the planet’s ever-dwindling resources, to make a crappy two-minute AI video about a 30+ year old game that is just a small blip in the vast panoply of AGs, then coming here all chuffed about it like you were fishing for compliments. WTF? Really?! Go outside! Get a life!

My first thought was that you did it just to start something here, knowing how contentious a topic generative AI is, especially as it relates to intellectual property theft. Then I thought, nah, that’s ridiculous, who would go to all that effort for basically nothing? And I look at the end result of all that effort, and it already is basically nothing. So I ask again, why? What was the point of making and posting this video?

I’m sorry for being so harsh, but you kinda need a little slap upside the head. Maybe I should slap myself upside the head, too, because these are some minutes I’ll never get back, and there is no point to my post. I know I’m not going to change anybody’s mind about AI one way or the other, and AI is never going away. I just wish people would at least be more intentional about its use.

@Jen: "I know I’m not going to change anybody’s mind about AI one way or the other." That's not necessarily true. After the discussion in the main AI post, I've been trying to go through Estória and replace my backgrounds with hand painted ones. I'm not sure how long it will take or even if I can, but I'm trying. I've put off starting Part 2 until I can figure out a look that is consistent and I like.

I think the point is to have these discussions openly and honestly, and not just assume people who use it are automatically bad people or need to be beaten into submission. I came to use AI because, honestly, I just thought of it as a new feature of Photoshop that would help me. I know I should have educated myself about where it comes from and the environmental cost, and thanks to this forum I have, and now I'm trying to undo my use of it (not that I can undo the environmental damage, but still...)

This is new technology and everyone is coming at it from different places in their lives, and real discussion about these pretty serious issues, if done with kindness and patience, as has been the case with me here (and I'm so grateful for!), can actually open people's eyes about this topic. I really appreciate all the feedback I've gotten on here, and want to not only make my game better, because I believe in the message in its story, but also I just want to be a better person in general.

You, Estória, are probably the exception with the amount of thought you put into the ethics of it all. Your use case is also a lot different than the OP’s. You were completely intentional in using AI to fill in the gaps of things you can’t do yourself in order to create your work. You didn’t take from anybody else, really; the ideas behind your AI backgrounds were your own, and there is a lot more to your game that came out of your own creativity and hard work. There is no self-expression evident in OP’s video. The whole thing is somebody else’s ideas slathered in an AI-generated veneer.

---

Also, Johnny, I probably owe you an apology for thinking the worst about your motivations. So I’m sorry, and I won’t do it again, and I hope I have not discouraged you from posting about this or anything at all.

Awww, thank you, Jen! I really appreciate that. My point is just that you actually can change people’s mind’s about AI, because you and the other members of this forum definitely changed mine.

I asked questions about AI, and was given clear, well explained, detailed answers that opened my eyes. You all explained these things patiently and kindly, which was so much more refreshing than the usual internet vitriol.

I know my little game isn’t much, but I tried to include issues that I feel passionately about right now, such as speaking out against authoritarianism, brainwashing, anti-immigrant sentiments, and tariffs, so when it comes to how my game was made, I really want it to be as “pure” as possible, and I really do appreciate how you and the others here helped me along the way. :-)

Personally, while I don't like AI, and others here have already covered many of the reasons I'm not a fan of it, I feel that, like it or not, it's something we're going to have to come to terms with.

So, using AI in your demo today, while deemed in a negative, could easily be something that's accepted tomorrow. I don't know, as I don't see the future, but given history, it wouldn't surprise me one bit if we're just in the denial stage before the acceptance stage hits.

I don't doubt that this took you quite some time and effort to do, but seeing as it looks just as soulless and bland as every single other piece of AI art I've seen, and removes the charm that the original The Dig artwork had, I can't help but wonder if it wouldn't have been more rewarding and interesting for you and others to try and use your own artistic skills, no matter how good/bad they are, and giving it a twist of your own? (Especially when the main sell for a lot of AI content is how much quicker it is to create...)

As an illustrator and comic artist I just get angry and exhausted whenever AI art is brought up, so I've been actively trying to avoid the threads concerning that topic on the forums, but I thought I'd just give my two cents here anyway.

Agree with the general consensus. This isn't very good. A lot of lighting and visual errors that didn't exist in the original game, as well as a feeling of weightlessness and weird warping in the animations. Objects not casting correct shadows is a persistent error. I don't know what framerate you generated at, but it does suffer from the soap opera effect. I think a project of similar length and scope that used the game's original visuals would have been more compelling. A fan trailer made with the original game assets might have been fun, for example. Or a sprite animation. Music video? Lots of ways to take this.

I'm generally netural on AI, but still criticise it as art. I think a lot of amateur artists expect the AI to compensate for needing to understand art theory, and it can't. AI even denies you the chance of making something "charmingly bad", which is a shame. Sorry, that's a lot of big talk from me, as a bloke who also knows fuck all about art lol.

I think its a bit mean to jump at this for copyright infringement - it is fanart, and all fanart is copyright infringement. In fact, I'm directly arguing you should be even more obviously derivative lol. I can feel you have a passion for the game in here, and think it comes across as a sincere tribute, and that's about the nicest thing I have to say.