I’m not going to fault someone for driving to work in a car, but I certainly wouldn’t call them the winner of a marathon even if they only drove for a few minutes of that marathon.
There’s a difference between something that runs the race for you (LLM AI) and something that simply helps you do what you are already doing (I suppose photoshop is the equivalent of drinking gatorade).
I don’t think that’s a relevant comparison - marathon is a race meant specifically to test what the human body is capable of. Using a car there is obviously against the goal of the competition.
When I’m writing code, I’ll happily offload the boring parts to AI. There’s only so many times you can solve the same problem without it being boring. And I’ve been doing this long enough that actually new problems I haven’t solved yet are pretty rare.
I’m not going to fault you for that - but do you think you should receive an award for the work you didn’t do? Even if you only use the car on the “easy” parts of the race that nobody cares about?
In the case of this particular game, perhaps the bulk of the creative work was done by humans. But if the GOTY committee isn’t confident with drawing a line between what work is OK to offload onto an AI and what work isn’t, then I think it’s fair for then to say this year that any generative AI use is a disqualifier.
You and I can say with ease that an implementation of a basic swap function (c=a, a=b, b=c) doesn’t require any creative work and has been done to death, so there’s no shame in copypasteing something from stackoverflow or chatgpt into your own code to save time.
But it’s harder to gauge that for more complex things. Especially with art - where would you draw the line? Reference material? Concept art? Background textures or 3d models of basic props (random objects in the scene like chairs, trees, etc)?
I don’t think there’s a clear answer for that. You might have an answer you think is correct, and I might have one as well, but I think it will be difficult and time consuming to achieve consensus in the game development community.
So, the most efficient answer for now is to have any generative AI be a disqualifier.
I’m not going to fault someone for driving to work in a car, but I certainly wouldn’t call them the winner of a marathon even if they only drove for a few minutes of that marathon.
There’s a difference between something that runs the race for you (LLM AI) and something that simply helps you do what you are already doing (I suppose photoshop is the equivalent of drinking gatorade).
I don’t think that’s a relevant comparison - marathon is a race meant specifically to test what the human body is capable of. Using a car there is obviously against the goal of the competition.
When I’m writing code, I’ll happily offload the boring parts to AI. There’s only so many times you can solve the same problem without it being boring. And I’ve been doing this long enough that actually new problems I haven’t solved yet are pretty rare.
I’m not going to fault you for that - but do you think you should receive an award for the work you didn’t do? Even if you only use the car on the “easy” parts of the race that nobody cares about?
In the case of this particular game, perhaps the bulk of the creative work was done by humans. But if the GOTY committee isn’t confident with drawing a line between what work is OK to offload onto an AI and what work isn’t, then I think it’s fair for then to say this year that any generative AI use is a disqualifier.
You and I can say with ease that an implementation of a basic swap function (c=a, a=b, b=c) doesn’t require any creative work and has been done to death, so there’s no shame in copypasteing something from stackoverflow or chatgpt into your own code to save time.
But it’s harder to gauge that for more complex things. Especially with art - where would you draw the line? Reference material? Concept art? Background textures or 3d models of basic props (random objects in the scene like chairs, trees, etc)?
I don’t think there’s a clear answer for that. You might have an answer you think is correct, and I might have one as well, but I think it will be difficult and time consuming to achieve consensus in the game development community.
So, the most efficient answer for now is to have any generative AI be a disqualifier.