Skip to main content

Indie game storeFree gamesFun gamesHorror games
Game developmentAssetsComics
SalesBundles
Jobs
TagsGame Engines
(1 edit) (+1)

"I believe these games stand out compared to what’s already on the market (they’re free)". What I meant is that I haven’t seen a game with the same gameplay mechanics as the way I programmed it, and that’s why it stands out—because it’s unique (two games in one). The snake graphic, which is the only thing made with AI, is for the game’s start screen, and I think it’s very good and necessary to have it there.

Regarding the installation issue, that’s something that makes me doubt—otherwise Google Play wouldn’t exist (unless you’re referring strictly to itch.io users). Either way, one thing is clear to me: this is not the place for Android games. As for: ‘If it makes you feel better, your game is currently ranked #16 out of 82,’ well, that doesn’t make me feel better. I would feel better if people downloaded it and installed it on their Android devices (as I imagine Android users do with every app and game they install from Google Play, where my games are also available). And then, after playing it, they could tell me, just as I started this post: ‘I liked it’ with reasons, ‘I didn’t like it’ with reasons, ‘Remove this, it’s useless,’ and above all, explain their arguments.

About writing the description with AI—of course! If it can describe my game better than I can (actually, my games, because I see people have only talked about one of them), then why not use it? What does that text, generated from an argument I gave the AI about my game, say that isn’t understandable or logical?

You ask me: ‘How many casual games with AI graphics have you installed on your phone lately? For fun, and not to check the competition?’ Well, I’ve searched, and honestly I’ve found very few, but I’d like to see more. I keep searching daily, because I focus on the fun it can give me—I don’t care whether it uses AI or not. I always give these two examples: The new game Arc Raider uses AI in its graphics and in several parts of its code, according to its developers, and because of that—does it make the game less fun or affect the user experience in any way? (In fact, as I said, it might even be the GOTY of 2025). Another example: If you suffered from idiopathic multicentric Castleman disease, and a healthcare professional using AI found a cure or something to improve your condition, wouldn’t you use it just because it was discovered with AI? And here’s proof: A machine learning tool managed to save the life of a patient with idiopathic multicentric Castleman disease, a rare condition with low survival rates and few treatment options. https://www.agenciasinc.es/Noticias/IA-y-enfermedades-raras-un-paso-revolucionar...

In the end, in my opinion, I simply started something at a time when many people are not yet ready for it. Maybe in a few years we’ll have this conversation again, and maybe then I won’t have to explain the obvious. (This has already happened in the past with EVERYTHING THAT CALLS FOR CHANGE). Thank you for your message, I’m glad to know your opinion.


(1 edit)

Really got your cult dogma down, haven’t ya. Nobody here said a thing against AI as a tool.

EVERYTHING THAT CALLS FOR CHANGE

Technology cannot call for change. The only things I see calling for change are Big Tech, who benefit monetarily from pushing AI trash, and desperate non-skilled people for whom AI is the only way to compensate for their stupidity.

AI won’t make you a game developer, not now, nor in a few years.

(1 edit)

First: I don’t have dogma, I have a brain and I use logic. Here some have spoken against using AI (or did you skip that part of the messages?). Besides, you yourself are against AI when you say: “The only things I see calling for change are Big Tech, who benefit monetarily from pushing AI trash.” You just called it “AI trash” (by the way, the one I use doesn’t charge me anything, so they’re not making money off me, at least not directly).

Second: I’ll assume you’re referring to other people and not to me. But if that were the case, and not to miss the opportunity… let me clarify (and I apologize if you weren’t referring to me, but the message is directed at me, so…) You’d be the stupid one—it’s disrespectful and rude—that without knowing me, without knowing anything about me, you say I want to “compensate for my stupidity.” Once again, it’s you who is stupid, since you don’t think—you only have a brain to repeat like a parrot, without thinking logically or considering results.

My skills are technical; I’ve been a Computer Engineer for more than 30 years, but I’m not a Graphic Artist. AI should not turn me into something I already am: an Applications and Video Games Developer—not just now, but since 2001, when I began programming with knowledge. I speak of realities with evidence, with practical examples, not of ideas, mental blindness, or fanaticism, which I do not share.

But I won’t continue, because I’ll follow Mark Twain’s words: “Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.”

(+1)

Are you using A.I. to write your responses?

(+2)

I beg to differ. I'm working on a game and using AI art for both photographic and artistic character portraits has enabled me to make a game I otherwise wouldn't be able to. I'm making everything else myself, except ChatGPT has also been a great help in learning C# and Unity. The ideas are my own, the photos I use for backgrounds are taken by me (I must've taken hundreds by now so I have plenty to choose from), the nearly 30 000 words so far of dialogue and narration were written by me, and all the music and sound effects will all be made by humans. The idea for the game is my own, and I'm the one brainstorming the scenes, characters, and conversations. I'm the one doing research and pouring my own experiences and reflections into the game to hopefully make it feel insightful, make people think and laugh, and cover some important topics. I could go on, but you get the idea.

SPIRIT is my first real big project and if it's ever completed and takes off, no one would be happier than me if I was able to do what the The Roottrees are Dead developer did and hire a human artist to make new portraits, but right now? No chance. No artists are missing out on work because I wouldn't be able to hire them anyway, and I doubt anyone would be willing to make a large number of character portraits for free.

You're free to be as opposed to this new technology as you want, but unfounded, generalizing rants about stupidity and desperation only makes you look dogmatic and uninformed. Also funny how using AI assets is lazy, but no one bats an eye at using free assets from for example Unity, even though this arguably takes considerably less effort and creativity than making assets from scratch with AI.

(+1)

That’s right, the shots are aimed at those of us who use generative AI for small things—in my case (once again, to clarify), only to generate images (and in my game LinguaSerpens, it’s just a single one), which of course I then have to edit with Photoshop (or PhotoPea) so the result is exactly what I want. But I’ll repeat your words: “unfounded, generalizing rants about stupidity and desperation only make you look dogmatic and uninformed.”

There are no AI resources without the developer’s reasoning or ideas behind them. For me, AI is like having a team of experts to ask questions or to entrust with specialized work that, due to my background, I wouldn’t be able to do myself. Thank you for your message.

(+1)

I get their concern, though, I'm kind of in the same situation myself. I just graduated from uni with a degree in geography, and one of my main selling points is that I'll be able to do GIS (basically mapping and analysis software) work. Who knows how many years or months away we are from AI-driven GIS programs. I guess I also get the idea that there's also something inherently 'wrong' about letting AI do creative tasks that were previously reserved for humans. All the same, I'll keep using AI, within reason, of course. It's a wonderful tool when used correctly.