Post by Amarinthe in Day 1, Part 1 Rewrite Release comments

Day 1, Part 1 Rewrite Release » Comments

Viewing post in Day 1, Part 1 Rewrite Release comments

“she’s not doing it to fill the air—she’s doing it to find the overlap, to locate the points where your map and hers share a line.”

“—and he listens with the sort of attention that makes you aware of what you’re saying, his focus a quiet pressure you feel more than see”

This was very clearly written or aided by generative AI, It’s in almost every single paragraph. The constant over explanation that doesn’t fit or feels extremely flowery is a huge indicator of AI. Even more so when it’s so prevalent that ive seen it more than 10+ times and I’m right at the start.

⋆° 🀦 𝑅𝑜𝒷𝒾𝓃 🀦 °⋆10 days ago (1 edit)

I hate to say it but I have noticed this too, it’s as if every single action / comment has to have some deep meaning attached to it and it’s something I’ve noticed with BOT accounts on social media that use AI.

You can’t just say “thank you” it has to be “You said thank you, as though this single act encompasses all you felt, and that means something.”

Like the opening scene with Haoyu for instance, you don't just pass him a glass it’s “You passed him a glass, and it was a sign, a sign to say you’re welcome, you’re seen and honestly, that was enough”

This isn’t a case of an author being expressive in their work, it’s a pattern that AI follows where they must always be descriptive and provide meaning behind even the simplest of acts.

ChantelleH10 days ago

The Haoyu line you’re quoting doesn’t exist in the game. The actual line is: “just a small practical gesture that means you’ve been seen, you’re welcome here, here’s a drink.”

Nine words of interior shorthand. Not “it was a sign, a sign to say you’re welcome, you’re seen and honestly, that was enough.” You wrote that. That’s your version, and it does sound like AI, but it’s not what I wrote.

This is the problem with pattern-matching from memory rather than from the actual text. You’ve remembered a feeling you had while reading, reconstructed a sentence that matches the feeling, and then pointed at the sentence you invented as proof. I understand why it happens, if you’re reading quickly and you’ve seen a lot of AI output, the pattern-recognition kicks in before the actual reading does, but it means you’re not responding to my writing. You’re responding to what you assumed my writing was, and those are different things.

I’ve acknowledged that chapter one runs too analytical in places, particularly during the introductions. That’s a craft issue and it’s fair feedback. But “this has a flaw I can identify” is not the same as “this was generated,” and I’d appreciate that distinction being made, especially on a page where it affects whether people are willing to try the game.

ChantelleH10 days ago

I didn’t use AI. I’ve addressed this multiple times on my Tumblr, including with details of my editing process, and I’m not going to relitigate the whole thing here, but I’ll give you the short version.

The two lines you’ve quoted are describing two characters, who behave in opposite ways, and the writing is doing what it’s supposed to do there: showing you who these people are through how they occupy a conversation. Izzie talks over you because she’s looking for common ground. Theo doesn’t talk much, but he pays attention. That’s characterisation, not filler.

I’ve had feedback that the prose in chapter one runs too analytical, particularly during the introductions where you’re meeting nine people in quick succession and the MC is reading all of them at the same level of depth. That’s fair, I overcorrected from an earlier draft that was too sparse, and I’m editing to address it. But “this is dense” and “this is AI” are not the same observation, and I’d appreciate them not being treated as interchangeable.

If you want to see process, my Tumblr is @summeroflove-if, there are details of the actual editing, the cutting and reworking, going back months. The game is 439k words of prose I’ve done myself and I’ve been working on it for years. I’m not going to keep proving that every time someone reads a metaphor they don’t like, but the proof is there if you want it.

itch.io

Viewing post in Day 1, Part 1 Rewrite Release comments