Oh damn, little kitty Akabara's got claws, hear him roar!
In all seriousness though, I cannot express how much your comment made me giggle like a madman, so thank you for posting. It really made my day.
Onto the post though, uh, you don't know what gaslighting means. Like at all. Using words you don't quite understand makes you sound kind of… I'm not even gonna try to sugarcoat it for you, just use a dictionary when you try to sound smart, please. It's the bare minimum you can do when you make a post that I have to read.
The other thing is that you clearly do not care about making a game. If you did, you'd use your own art for the placeholders. Or you'd literally just use stock assets for placeholders. I also suspect you probably used ChatGPT or some other program to write parts of this game, but I don't have any proof for that, it's just speculation, but I am more than familiar enough with the AI bros like you to confidently say that you probably have used it once or twice in the formation of your creation. (I'm also not interested in playing your game whatsoever). I imagine you'd deny this claim whether or not you actually did use GPT, so don't bother denying it, as I don't really care what you say. You already used AI art for the visuals, so it's not that much of a stretch to imagine that you probably also used AI for other aspects of the game that you've supposedly "created". (Assuming you didn't just steal the entire game outright.) This kind of thing also ties back into the use of AI at all, in that it is objectively theft. You can disagree with it all you like, but when it comes down to it, it's not an actual artificial intelligence that is "recreating" art - it's a program that is designed to mash two pre-made things together doing so. There's a difference (even if it's not one you might recognize), and you are the one using it.
On that topic, let's play a little game of pretend and imagine that you make a piece of art of something. Let's say you make a painting. The very next day, I come out with the exact same painting - and it's not just a "recreation", it is the exact. Same. Painting. One for one. Now in this hypothetical, I didn't actually copy you - I made it myself, no inspiration nor theft required. Now here's the big part you as the reader need to think about - do both paintings have value - not just artistically, but also independently of each other? I would argue yes, because they're both made by human beings, both with feelings and emotions behind them. As a matter of fact, I would argue that the human mind (or the "soul" if you want to get philosophical) is the most important part in this equation. Now imagine if my painting was actually just an AI that copied it. Then I'd argue that my painting is not of value because a human being did not create it.
"But I gave the AI the prompt, so I still had a hand in creating it," an absolute lobotomite would argue. And in response, I would say that you do not have a hand in creating it whatsoever because you didn't learn the skills necessary to actually make the art in the first place, thus, you are not the creator. The people that made the works the AI is trained on are the creators, and not those that generate the prompts. Anybody with a functioning brainstem and a couple of fingers is capable of writing a prompt, it takes an actual person with thoughts and skills to create art, not just some clown mashing some keys and getting a thing and throwing it online somewhere and saying "it's mine", because LITERALLY ANYONE can do that. (Would you say that someone like Henry Ford made all mass-manufactured products because he had a hand in popularizing the concept of the production line? You most certainly shouldn't, and that same concept applies here.)
Art is made with an intent and a deliberate goal - it's not just "oh I want this thing", because anyone can think of something cool, it's ACTUALLY MAKING THE DAMN THING which is the important part. It's a combination of intent and vision, and as I have previously shared, I have a complex network of why I value human beings that create art and not AI. (Also, this mindset applies to all types of art - movies, games, photography, paintings, etc.) But you're using AI, for the placeholders that are in your game. Thus, you're not actually interested in making art. You just want someone to make art "for free" because you'd rather it be simple and free, even though you also just contradicted yourself in the exact same post, so I'm honestly kind of confused about what you actually even believe.
Do you want to pay artists and help them financially, or would you rather get their hard work for free? Please, enlighten me on your ever-so-complicated philosophical meanderings of why stealing may-or-may-not be okay, oh wise one, I pray that you might inform me as to the wisdom of your holiness, mister genius of the ages. (Just in case you didn't get it, I was being sarcastic. (I feel the need to spell this out explicitly for you because that's how lowly I think of people like you.) (By writing this, I'm also knowingly tossing you a freebie to use in your own potential argument against me because I've used this joke to degrade the poster I'm arguing against (who in this case is you, but has been a different person in the past (and again, I'm spelling all of this out for you because I think it's funny to both explicitly and implicitly but also explicitly tell you what I think your intellect is at)) before in a previous argument, so go ahead and be sure to add that into any potential response.) To be honest, I'm almost kinda feeling bad for ripping on you so violently at this point, as it's actually now turning into a merciless bloodbath from my end, but I'll be sure to inform your next-of-kin. Also I should note for your sake that I lied, I don't feel that bad, I think it's actually pretty funny because I think you're not the brightest of the bunch. (Do I need to explain myself further, or do you get the joke at this point? I guess it's not really a joke, it's moreso wrapped back around to explicitly being just an insult. I'd put an expletive here to cap it off, but I find it funnier just making this tangent even longer than it already is. (I imagine you don't think it's funny, but the good news I've got in regards to that little tidbit is that I don't actually care about what you think whatsoever. I'm moreso just continuing this little side-tangent to spite you because that's kind of what I am doing with this entire comment, if you think about it - but I doubt you can. And there's the natural conclusion of this little tangent, as mentioned previously.))
Also, if you think all I'm doing is calling people names in these comments after reading all of that, you should probably go back to grade-school. I'm very obviously arguing and name-calling because I enjoy doing both and because I am also quite good at doing both, you just need to get better at reading comprehension. Along that topic, it's not lost on me that you felt the need to go through the comments I've made. It actually makes me think that you are on some level aware of how bad your arguments are, and feel the need to add to them a little bit, especially since I've got a habit of droning on and on like this, and that you feel inept in comparison. Maybe that's not the case, but with people like you (who is basically just a natural extension of a college frat-bro, though I imagine you haven't gone to college and would presumably not quite get the idea I'm dunking on you with, but I suppose I'll permit you to go unawares of my insult, as I do like to have some free time that isn't just for shitposting like this), I am aware of the whole "size matters" concept, so if we are doing a genital-measuring contest, I'm afraid I've got you beat both in terms of actual size of said appendage and when it comes to intelligence - and writing skill. And like, basically every other category that I care about.
Anyway, it's quite funny that you, someone who is ostensibly financially incentivized to "defend" your "product", is arguing with me, as I find myself wondering if you're just arguing because I bruised your fragile little ego, or if there's any other possible reason behind it? I'm not even trying to hint towards anything with that question, I'm just genuinely unsure about the answer. I also feel the need to ask, for the sake of anyone that might be interested in your "game", are you counting responding to me as "on-the-clock" or "off-the-clock"? I don't think you even get what I'm trying to say with that. Actually, just ignore that last question, I don't want you to get too confused, so don't worry your pretty little head about it. Onto the next post.