Skip to main content

On Sale: GamesAssetsToolsTabletopComics
Indie game storeFree gamesFun gamesHorror games
Game developmentAssetsComics
SalesBundles
Jobs
TagsGame Engines
(+4)

Bwahaha, I think this title reached its target audience! I've got plenty of response for the contents of this title, but I'm gonna save those for the end. First, let's get to my ratings!


Overall: 4 - No you didn't read that wrong, I loved this. I did not agree with the message, but this is a piece of art on its own that goes to great lengths to show its own appreciation for art. It's sooooo spiteful, and what was birthed of that spite is honestly a very strong entry. I don't know if other participants will think so highly of this game, but I am really pleased to see what you managed to put out with your own hands. Those hilarious end credits are a testament, despite their sarcasm: you did all of this yourself (except the stock images). If this is what you're capable of in a month with a time limit and what I perceive to be apprehension towards making your own assets, imagine what you're capable of when those sorts of restraints are taken off!


Gameplay: 3 - You have something really close to being good here! I actually almost gave this a 3, then went back to 2, then back to 3, but landed on 2 in the end just because of some design choices I personally feel hurt the experience. On the positive side, I think the point and click adventure stuff works really well! Man, if I had a nickel for every entry in this jam that involves using a time machine to travel through eras of anthropology and go back and forth bringing the right key items to the right place...

Anyway, the reason it's a 2 is because the combat, while seemingly deliberately bad, is bad hahaha. It's usually actually not horrible, I didn't hate the random encounters and actually think they're a good idea to add more spice to the point and click formula, but the grid based "click the square that does the most damage" system is extremely arbitrary. I died to every boss the first time, found their Perfect square, and then handily defeated them on the subsequent fight (except the final boss who I beat first try, thank god). This really hurt my playtime a lot too, while my in-game time was around 45 minutes at the end, my actual stopwatch I use for the jam had me at 57 minutes, almost exactly an hour! Thank goodness I upped that playtime cap, I feel like it's important I played this to the end.

I will say that at the very least, while the rest of the combat is, again, *quite bad*, the final boss was such a great payoff for all of it that writing this now, I think I'm going to bump that Gameplay to a 3. I really genuinely liked that part a ton, and it's gonna be a top moment for this jam.


Music: 2 - There are, like, 3 songs in the whole game. It was deliberately light on music, but nothing was so bad that it ruined my experience. A final boss theme would have been nice, but I presume that would conflict with your thematic intentions.


Story: 3 - This is tough. I mentioned earlier, I do disagree with a lot of the message of this entry. However, as a work that is an expression of an author's feelings, and as a linear narrative, I think it's perfectly effective. The antagonists are built up in a natural manner, they have seemingly clear motivations (although I imagine if you took those hoods off they would be comprised entirely of straw), and even the ending, in its deliberate shock value, is meant to send a message. I will say that the dialogue is aggressively preachy, but it is at least constructed in the form of a natural meaningful debate between the protagonists and antagonists. It's not a message I agree with, but the story works and I'm not going to dock points based on my own biases.


Comedy: 4 - This could easily be a 5, we'll need to see how the rest of the jam goes. I was laughing constantly, there were the giant blue checkmarks every time you utilized a required element, that shock ending, some of the quips about the enemies (I think the mummy description was my fav), even the credits! This was actually a super funny game, and the comedy is where it thrives.


Graphics: 4 - This is the part where I get to be spiteful! While no individual drawing in this game is especially brilliant, it's extremely coherent. The art is charmingly amateur, but even in its "lower quality" it depicts its subjects strongly. What really brings this entry's art over the edge from a 3 to a 4 is the way it utilizes famous works of art as backdrops. As I explored this area, I was reminded of all these brilliant works from the past, and the storytelling through this graphical choice was clear, that "AI art is just like all of this art that came before". You really used this hand drawn artwork to tell the story without dialogue, and it's a really strong and interesting choice. This is excellent!


Now then, let's address the elephant in the room. You're clearly disgruntled about the AI rule. I won't sit here and pick apart every argument in favour of AI that this game used. I'd even bet any argument I could use is one you have already seen and disagree with, so it'd just be a waste of our time.

However, firstly to clear the air, you were not directly responsible for this AI ruling. It was originally our intention to disqualify AI during the 2024 jam as well. However, I'd failed to add that to the rules, and ultimately we decided it would be unfair to change the rules during the dev period, so the mods all agreed that last year would be the final year we allow AI art. 

With that said, I really appreciate the way you voiced your thoughts about this here. There was no angry DMs, no blowups, instead you participated in the game jam, followed every rule even though you disagreed pretty strongly with one of them, and ultimately used that as a platform to voice your opinion on the matter. I think the last line was maybe a bit too angry compared to the overall composed approach to this game, but in the grand scheme of things I think this was a great way to send a message. 

But, I also think this jam entry defeats itself in a way. Through this unsubtle platform to voice your thoughts on AI and its detractors, the amount of sheer effort you put into this really shines through. I don't know what it is that drives you, maybe it's just spite, or perhaps there's a lot of passion in there, but what I see here is art in its purest form, and it's proof, at least to me, that you don't need some "equalizer" to make something great. I think one could easily argue that something like this could be even better if it were able to have beautiful generated artwork alongside the writing and gameplay, but I'm unsure if that's true. If you had the ability to generate all the artwork, how would you have depicted all of these famous works of art? Would you have simply used their original images? Prompted a new interpretation of them? Regardless of how you would have done it, to me it feels so much more personal and deliberate that you drew each of these works yourself.

This isn't an apology, I stand by our choice to prohibit generative AI, for reasons you touched on in this entry and for reasons you haven't, but even if I don't agree with the things you said in this game, I think this was paradoxically an excellent entry, maybe for entirely the wrong reasons. Great work, and I really hope to see you again next year!

Yay! I'm glad you enjoyed my game and thank you for being such a good sport about it. The core concept was birthed a year ago when I realized, or at least strongly believed, that my first entry in the series and to the Harold Jam as a whole, had gotten AI banned. It certainly stirred the hornet's nest. The basic idea was locked in from the beginning and the required theme and the story as it developed inspired the rest.

If memory recalls, you were fair and mature toward my last year's entry and I thank you for extending the same courtesy this time around. I had a blast making both.

| It's sooooo spiteful...

Oops. I tried my best to not attack you, personally, and go after the overall mentality behind banning AI from every game jam. I attempted to be as fair as I could within the concept of the story and the game world I've built.

| Comedy: I was laughing constantly

Excellent! The Harold's AI Odyssey games are comedy games first and foremost. I did attempt to add better gameplay in the sequel, see if my RPG / point-and-click hybrid experiment would be fun. Obviously, I also wanted to explore the central idea of what makes art art, and how technology shaped what art was throughout history since that was at the heart of its inspiration.

| Graphics: This is the part where I get to be spiteful!

Haha! This was your Kobayashi Maru. Well, the whole game was actually, not just the graphics. I was most curious to see how you, and the other two jam organizers, would take to this year's submission. Would you be fair and rate my game on it's merits or do what many others did last year and down vote it into oblivion? To be fair, it's your jam so you reserve the right to do whatever you like, but as I said earlier, I'm glad that you're being a good sport about it.

| Now then, let's address the elephant in the room.

Eh, to be honest, I'm not all that disgruntled about the AI ban. As I'm sure I made perfectly clear, I fully expected it. Heck, without it, I might not have even had an idea for this year.

My primary gripe is how purchased assets, RTP and all other tools that make developing a game easier are perfectly fine while AI generation will get you disqualified. I wouldn't expect bonus points for that which requires little effort on behalf of the dev but penalties and outright bans seem excessive, in my honest opinion.

But with that said, I feel like you picked up on the spirit of what I was going for. Truth be told, I'm not bitter or angry or spiteful. My game would have been far more annoying and low-effort had that truly been my motivation. Making games is a creative outlet for me and this was a unique moment in time where this story could be told and this game could be made. It was kind of a now or never situation, much like the first Harold's AI Odyssey.

So, thanks again and much love to the Harold Jam community. I hope there's no hard feelings from you or the others. Take care and I hope I will be able to participate next year as well.

P.S. My access to the Internet will be very limited for the next couple days. I'll be a little delayed in playing and rating the other entries.

(+7)

"My primary gripe is how purchased assets, RTP and all other tools that make developing a game easier are perfectly fine while AI generation will get you disqualified."

even discarding the idea of humanity and personal creativity, since apparently rogue ai has a soul lol, people made those and either donated them to the community or received money for their creation. ai slop is stolen and unoriginal in ANY regard.

so, i use a lot of ayato sound create music in my games. i don't think i've actually released anyhting using it yet despite working over a year on Ratfishing, but it was both odd and fun to hear ayato's music in gensun's jam entry. yes, it's public, anyone with $12 or w/e can use it, and it can sting a little to be like awwww I wanted to be """the first"""". i felt the same about my colleague ephiam who makes cool retro games -- he used really cool retro music and graphics packs I would also like to mess around with. (you can buy his original AI-less game here: https://store.steampowered.com/app/2769210/Scarmonde/ ) but like, oh well! it's great that we can use these public items to produce our hobby without stepping on anyone's toes, while supporting cool artists, and not burning down the planet.

being a shill for this stuff eats away at one's soul i fear. you're defending theft and needless energy consumption in order to be able to produce something less than the sum of its parts while, like sawyer explained, you can create something more fun and immediately enjoyable just by scribbling in ms paint or w/e. if you keep up with wanting to generate your games' assets I wouldn't be surprised if that creative spark eventually died. maybe this sounds hyperbolic, but we're already seeing AI use lower people's capabilities or drive them insane in the news.

sorry if i've turned to be super harsh but like, this stuff needs to go. it's sad to see someone who is clearly creative fall into its trap. not to mention that there's many people way worse than you in terms of honesty and integrity who are trying to shill and force the slop machine. do you really want to be part of that crowd?

Hey, I respect your opinion and honestly do try my best to understand and integrate all arguments and ideas into consideration. However, you misunderstand. Rogue AI is a fictional character in a fictional story that takes place in a fictional world. While there is obviously overlap, there is a marked distinction between my own personal opinions and beliefs and that of the characters within the story. Good storytelling, in my opinion at least, requires this. For instance, I personally don't believe that artificial intelligence has a soul but from a storytelling perspective, in a world where there are multiple universes such as AI Land, RPG Maker Land and the Outside (the real world), making a character like Rogue AI at least believe they have a soul and are "a real person" is simply much more interesting than her just being a computer algorithm. I mean, even the talking Monolith is a character which, ironically, acts more like a computer than Rogue AI.

In actuality, we are making arguments on this subject under two different mindsets. The anti-AI crowd appears to be making a moral argument while the pro-AI crowd is making a practical argument based mostly on inevitability. The technology is here. The genie is out of the bottle. Even if the moral argument is correct, it's a moot point. You might be able to gatekeep the game jam community and make it a safe space for artists and writers to do their thing without having to worry about the intrusion of AI, and that's fine. Niche safe spaces like this will always exist.

But I've seen the march of technology over the course of my lifetime. When I was a small child, no one had a personal computer in their home. When they became affordable enough for the masses, most people wrote them off as a fad or nothing more than glorified game console. Almost nobody realized that virtually every job in the near future would require you to know how to operate one. The same thing happened when the Internet became affordable for everyone. Ignore my warning at your own peril because I foresee learning how to effectively utilize AI as the next must have skill going forward. Love it or hate, you're going to have to know how to use it.

And I think that's why I'm a bit disappointed that the community is so against the adoption of AI in the creation of video games. To me, it feels like staying in the past like a Cobol or Fortran developer refusing to adapt to a changing landscape. I'm not saying that you can't make something good or great without AI. The entire concept of this game was predicated on attempting to do exactly that. As a personal choice, making games as a hobby, that's fine. From a professional sense, if you want try to make it as an indie game dev, It's going to be tough competing with those that do utilize it. I doubt customers are going to care all that much if you use AI or not. They're mostly going to care about the final product that they're purchasing.

Yes, there will be a lot of slop that comes from this just like with any emerging technology. It was no different for the printing press, the camera, the home computer, the Internet, YouTube, Netflix, Spotify, and yes, even RPG Maker. We're used to filtering out slop without a second thought by now. Pretty sure it's a skill everyone has developed as, I don't know how you could get through modern life without it.

But whatever happens, happens. As for this game, I knew that if things played out the way I was expecting, I had the perfect idea for what I wanted to make. It did, I made it, and this was the result. I hope I have the same or similar level of inspiration for next year's Harold Jam. I hope to see you again then.

(+1)

couldn’t have said it better myself