We have a strong disagreement in our team in regards to the current state of the system.
On the surface, its goal seem to be to filter blatantly AI-generated assets which is reasonable and understandable. But in reality and based on leafo's answers, projects should be marked as AI-generated even if we used something like Chat GPT / Copilot for writing portions of the code. Our game is built by experienced and professional programmer but some scripts (small percent) were generated to save time on a game jam.
With desire to be honest we marked the game as having AI-generated parts in its code, but it leads to our game being in one big pile with more blatantly AI-generated projects. Currently it is not possible to opt-out without "lying" about use of AI in project page settings.
It does not seem fair that games with small part of AI code in technical side are put in one category with less crafted projects. It especially hurts feelings of our artists because the game is hand-drawn and a lot of effort was put into visuals. "AI Generated" tag is too broad.
It seems that games should either be give options to opt-out (which is not possible once tag is selected) or being forced to opt out (after all games are much more complex project that art assets) or categorization should be improved. It seems like "No AI" tag is made so people could filter low quality projects or assets with questionable legal status, not nice games with some chat-gpt-generated generic code under the hood.
I honestly do not see how marking code in games as being partially AI generated helps anyone. I understand that it is more reasonable in regards to assets, especially paid ones though. But my post is about games. Perhaps there should be different tagging for games or it should be disabled for now until better way is figured out?
Please advise.
(our game is Headquarters, first game in AI-generated tag currently...)