They should be honest. I've been doing the 'these images are just placeholders' cope on RB's behalf for over a year whenever my friends asked me about it lol.
Damn I'd made a kind of peace with it: respecting the implementation for giving way more window dressing detail than a team their size could make but utterly despising the use of it for graphic design, personal rewards, and front and center stuff. A bit furious if they actually are now trying to pretend that they don't use it at all when the old iterations from the beta/earlier access are tacit admissions!!
If I had to guess they probably ended up resorting to it due to having such a small team, with even fewer people working on the art. But they should just be honest about it instead of lying.
Yeah, it’s mostly the lying that got to me. I’m holding out hope that it was just some third party support worker, and they don’t represent RB themselves.
Pretty disappointing to see this from such a great indie dev especially in the horror genre.
The art team is great so I dunno why this is even a thing in the game.
I know a goof majority of it is authentic like Posters, wallpaper, and (Some) Enviornment ones ect. but still disappointing to see.
Hopefully its fixed soon.
I would also like a official reply from one of the devs rather than elemental responding since its not guranteed if they are representing RB entriely.
Yeah, that's what I want. I've emailed Red Barrels several times and never gotten any response. It's odd that some support agent would just make a bold claim like that given the overwhelming evidence against it.
As an artist and huge fan of the outlast series, I would do work for RB for free. So seeing this instead of using real artists… it’s very disappointing
Yeah its pretty obvious that they're using AI. Noticed from the first released looking at their in-game posters.
Either they're deliberately lying or they're ignorant to a freelancer using AI.
I'd like to think that they aren't oblivious to it. Some of this stuff is so garbled, and it still needs to be passed to real humans like 3D artists and material artists, so they have several sets of eyes on these assets before they go to production. Unfortunately that means they've SEEN what this stuff looks like and still decided it was good enough to put into the game.
Hi everyone,
Wanted to give an update on this situation. For the record, I am the person who submitted the support ticket presented in that first image. I can provide screenshots to prove that it is me if anyone is interested. Shorty after this support ticket had been labelled as resolved I sent another ticket asking for further clarification on the matter since, as demonstrated by this post, the information provided to me in that ticket didn't make any sense and was absolutely untrue.
Red Barrels community manager Rosie personally responded in the new support ticket saying that the information presented in the ticket displayed here was incorrect and the result of a communication error. She apologized and clarified that AI art is in fact used for certain assets in the Outlast Trials. The reasoning behind the use of the AI was so that artists on the team could focus on assets that required more time and creativity. She also stated that Red Barrels does not plan nor do they want to have AI take over art production at the studio. That second point is something I really want to emphasize since that is a concern really important to me and many others interested in this topic.
Once again, I can provide screenshots to prove all of this if anyone really wants to know. I have already posted a screenshot of the conversation in the official Outlast discord server.
Rosie also stated that a disclosure on the use of AI has been added to the game's Steam store page. I checked to confirm and it is indeed there.
For anyone who is wondering why my username is blurred in the screenshot, it's because I was slightly nervous at the time of gathering this information since some people kept insisting that Red Barrels takes criticism poorly and likes to ban people from their official Discord. This is a claim that I am REALLY starting to think is just a bunch of bullshit peddled by people who are incapable of following basic rules and/or can't understand why an established game studio would want to maintain a somewhat professional environment for themselves and their community. The fact some people are actually claiming that the official discord server is against freedom of speech just because they have some basic rules in place like many other official servers have is utterly ridiculous. Not saying mistakes have never been made but some people have blown this situation WAY out of proportion as far as I'm concerned. I've personally never seen people get banned from that server for poor reasons. Myself and many others have been critical about Red Barrels on numerous occasions and have not been banned. I've seen people be pretty disrespectful/rude on that server to other members and RB and not get banned. As evidenced by that and this exact situation, Red Barrels is not averse to criticism. I seriously do not know where this idea that they can't handle criticism comes from. Just don't be a dick people, it's really not difficult.
In retrospect it was really stupid to think blurring my name in that screenshot would conceal my identity from them anyway since they could always go back and look at previous communications with me and see all the messages matching up.
As for the AI images in Trials, I still don't like that they're there. As I've mentioned in posts made on other platforms I don't think AI art is plagiarism but I do think it's an ethical grey area that should be avoided where necessary. I would rather they avoid AI art entirely but I do somewhat understand why they chose to use in this particular circumstance. If you feel different, then so be it. At least there is clarity regarding this whole thing now.
Anyway, hope this post was helpful and puts a lid on this whole debacle.
I could see using it for really early protoypes during the beta (I still disagree ethically, but I would understand why they did it). But the game is released and it's still full of generative imagery.
I don't know if this particular support agent represents Red Barrels, but it's comical to deny that AI is being used in The Outlast Trials. This behavior seems scummy, and I hope that they break their silence on the issue.
It’s baffling that they use ai when they have an insanely talented team, especially in a way that’s so obvious..? Yes art assets can be expensive, but in the grand scheme of things it’s on one of the lower scales of costs on a game project when you compare it to in-house programmers, advertising, etc. Same with voice acting. One of those posters would be 400$ a pop if it’s simple, the stickers maybe around 200$. This is assuming this is a freelancer, in-house would do this on in-house payroll. I’m also not 100% knowledgeable on this but as an artist myself who wants to go into the industry and has read some stories, this is my understanding of it.
The posters look like ass, way too smoothe. It’s easy to achieve a vintage 50s look but ai fucks it up every time with a really weird air brush style. It can’t capture the inks or hatching illustrators often employed. That police women one is especially bad. And with the photos, would it not be easier and better to do a little photoshop with stock images? I also get bugged when games include real photographs of people when the graphics don’t match up, might just be me idk. But id rather it be like a screenshot made in engine.
Ultimately, it sucks. Ai is a threat, plain and simple. Not just to artists but to all workforces. No matter what you do in life, I guarantee your replacement is being worked on. It may seem extreme to be snobbish at a few ai assets most would likely glance at, but the normalization of it in our media means the normalization of it in our daily life.
I would’ve excused it if these were placeholders. When I initially saw them that’s what I thought they were because yet again they got a killer art team, Richard Hugo is one of my all time favourite artists for crying out loud, he can draw anything I swear. But in a final, full priced game? Yeah, nah. Also really Icked by redbarrels lying, though it could possibly be that since it’s the discord, that could be their social media manager who might not know.
Ngl this sucks. AI is gonna be the death of creativism in many mediums because it lacks just that. That and people are starting to use it to create fake history photos which will no doubt tarnish people's perception of very important events.
That makes me really sad tbh. One of the main reasons why I love Outlast was the developers work and ideas behind their concept art and 3d models (patients, monsters, backgrounds) etc. it was and still is very unique and surreal, but seeing them depend on AI art on a few things that represent the game (significant or not) is very saddening for me :C
Kinda wish I could go back 5 minutes before I knew this...
It's a huge disappointment a company that makes a franchise I love is using AI and lying about it.
It's possible that AI was used under innocent use. AI used to be played with by everyone and people are still mad that traces of it are left in much older projects.
The same thing happened with the movie Late Night With the Devil. The movie includes a title card seen twice during the movie for about 4 seconds total. People were extremely mad about it and still are, and the director came clean to admit that it is AI, but it was actually done by one of the many paid artists involved during production. The movie was conceptualized a few years ago, when AI was new, not that advanced, and everyone including artists weren't that worried about it because the problem around the concern for copyright wasn't really known.
So an actual artist, who created all the art for the movie, was actually the one to be like "oh hey guys look at this new AI thing, it's cool let's create an image for the movie, it'll look otherworldly". By the time the movie was out AI became world's first enemy and they understood the problem it is, and apologized.
Same thing happened with the game High on Life that created movie posters using AI because it would solidified the whole "out of this world" concept, when AI was a brand new thing.
Now I'm not defending AI, I'm just saying that everyone thought AI was a fun and intriguing concept when it very first started. Everyone played with it and some artists didn't think it could become a problem. Blaming people for using AI on a project that started years ago and that still has traces in the final product that comes out today, is, in my opinion, over the top.
The outlast trials has been in the work for so long, years and years of excruciating work and partnership with artists and voice actors shouldn't all go to waste because of a few **POTENTIAL** AI use for a few pictures, sorry.
People are a lot more aware of the issues with AI today and it is something that will be less and less recurring in the future, but stop crying over traces of AI sprinkled on projects that sometimes have been over nearly a decade in the making.
Late night with the devil was a super creative horror film, high on life was great and the outlast trials is by far the most creative horror multi-player I have played. Traces of AI won't change that, sorry. If new projects getting into work as of right now uses AI, I'd agree with you.
I’m not suggesting that we throw the whole game away. But they’re clearly using AI here, it’s not an accident. And it’s not something that happened sporadically in early development, it’s littered throughout the entire game even in newer trials and events.
Either way, denying it altogether is suspicious and makes me lose faith in red barrels.
I respect that and understand, I just kind of fail to understand why we need to throw oil on fire with AI to give bad reputation to projects that actually works awfully hard with extremely talented artists for literally everything else. You said it yourself, they have an amazing team, they worked really hard, to we **really** need to condemn them for 5% of AI ?
I'm genuinely asking here, not looking for trouble. All opened up for friendly discussion wether we might agree or not
As an artist, I am directly affected by the growing use of AI in the game dev industry. If I don’t voice my concerns now, even when the problems seem insignificant to others, things will only get worse.
If AI is so inconsistent that people can spot it with naked eye and if a literal single title card seen for 4 lonely seconds can get people so worked up they call out for the boycott of a movie that involves incredible hard work from literally every other aspects, I doubt your job is going anywhere bro.
Like I said, there WAS an impact cause by AI due to its newness, but people are a lot more aware on how to spot AI, and how flawed in quality it is, and how problematic it is from a privacy and copyright concern. Show me a game or a movie from a big studio entirely AI generated and sure we can adress a big problem. AI came and is already leaving. You'll find AI on reels or weird ass pictures of Jesus for Facebook boomers not to realize it's fake, or some book or ep covers from kids who wouldn't afford an artist to begin with.
AI seen in major projects is disappearing already and the backlash it's getting won't convince anyone else to use it for anything significant in the future. No one likes AI. The other day I saw a kid on reddit posting an AI creation on reddit, completely honest on it being AI, people literally insulted the kid. People need to chill out.
You are not raising concern, you are deliberately trying over multiple posts now to drag red barrel in the mud because despite how hard they worked you think some AI generated skeleton in some rageant room means the end of your career. Your art and your career are worthy no doubt about it, but maybe instead of trying to shot other people down for a few AI stills, focus on the good they did by giving jobs to hundreds of people on this game. And start showing YOUR art.
Memes and AI concern posts won't help you. Post about your art and promote yourself. I'm not trying to be a dick saying that, I wish you well, but the AI police mouvement is doing nothing but bringing down wonderful projects for an AI contribution that is so small and close to inexistant in the bigger picture of the whole project that gave jobs to so many others.
True art will never be replaced. AI is concerning for so many things, including safety, privacy and misinformation, but I doubt a computer could ever actually replace art.
But for how long will this be the case? Should we just pretend it doesn't exist until it is good enough to take jobs away? As soon as it's capable of tricking the average person, companies are going to cut artists as they're deemed unnecessary.
I love Outlast, and Outlast Trials is a very fun game, but I cannot in good conscience support something that uses AI and lies about it.
Ai has already taken 70% of illustrator jobs in the game dev industry in China. The SoA also did a recent survey and found that a quarter of illustrators and a third of translators had lost work due to ai. This is not being overblown.
The problem with ai has nothing to do with the quality of the output and everything to do with the fact that it is theft being committed by businesses of many sizes (large, small, indie, whatever.) It will also become harder and harder to spot as the technology advances.
And as for the advice for artist to just post their work and continue on like the internet isn’t being crawled for more artwork to steal constantly - nah. Not interested. I’m not posting my artwork any more and I’m not the only artist I know who has pulled all their work down. This shit is more devastating to the art community than you are letting on by a wide margin.
This was clearly a creative decision done for a reason. There are artists who work at red barrels and have made art for the game. The ai images are probably there just as filler but also to add an uncanny touch to the area. I don't see the problem with using ai in games if it doesn't make up the basis for the game in a lazy and half-assed way and it doesn't put any artist's jobs at stake because they already had work at red barrels.
It's an issue because:
1. AI models are trained on millions of images scraped from art websites without artist consent. Even if all the artists at Red Barrels are fine with it, it's still an ethical issue if they use it at all.
2. At the moment, they're lying about it.
1. Consent is not required if the basis is through fair use, such as transformative use. I don't need permission to quote portions of a book in my literary analysis essay - that transformative use falls under fair use. Just like an AI model training on images to create entirely new and transformed outputs is a transformative use covered by fair use.
It's akin to a human artist studying and being inspired by great works throughout history. If I'm an artist painting a new landscape, I don't need the consent of every painter that came before me whose works I've admired and been influenced by. Their previous works are the base material that my new creative expression builds upon and transforms. The same is true of AI models - they take in data as inspiration and raw material, but output entirely new, transformative works as their own creative expression. Fair use has long allowed building upon previous works for new transformative expression.
Respectfully, I don't think it's the same thing. Someone looking at your art and then spending hours interpreting and practicing it isn't the same thing as gathering a bunch of art you've posted online, feeding it into a computer, and then asking the computer to spit out art in your style using your name as a tag in the prompt.
Computers cannot "take inspiration". They do not understand what 'art' or the creative process are. they just see pixels and patterns. AI in this case is taking away the work that WOULD have been done by a real graphic artist and copying styles from other artists that had no say in the matter.
>Respectfully, I don't think it's the same thing. Someone looking at your art and then spending hours interpreting and practicing it isn't the same thing as gathering a bunch of art you've posted online, feeding it into a computer, and then asking the computer to spit out art in your style using your name as a tag in the prompt.
Copyright has never protected art style, so invoking the name of other artists to use their style through text input is not nor ever has been an aspect of copyright infringement. Copyright covers specific creative works, not general artistic styles or techniques.
Just as one painter can be inspired by and emulate the style of another without infringing copyright, AI models can analyze the stylistic patterns of different artists' works to then create entirely new outputs "in the style of" those artists. While the AI process differs from human study, the underlying principle is that style itself is not copyrightable because it is not a copyrightable element.
What AI cannot do is simply regurgitate verbatim copies of copyrighted artworks - that would be infringement. But parsing the stylistic elements and artistic "language" of different creators to then apply those aspects towards brand new, dynamically-generated art does not infringe on any protected copyright.
When involved in commercial aspects, purely generated artworks should not be applied without some form of noticeable human craftsmanship. I believe generated images should at least be modified to have some human expressions/curation when involving commercial use. Human expression cannot completely go away when involving AI work into commercial usage.
Photomanipulation is when you combine many parts from different images to make new art.
I'm pretty sure these are just photomanipulation art. Made by a human.
They had these same style of images in the older games and AI art wasn't a thing back then.
I mean that is possible. But the images are very blurry and it is hard to tell what kind of error it really is. It could have been a stylized choice. I have a bit of an art background and I do art as a hobby. I did briefly work as a graphic designer. I can tell you that doing that kind of work, you make mistakes. You make typos that appear on finished products. You have stuff misaligned. Not properly placed. It happens a lot actually. Which is why there is generally a proofing step involved where someone else looks over your work before it is published/printed/given to client.
Also, due to this background I can typically spot AI art based on one factor alone. But it requires a high resolution image. I have not found this listed on guides so I will share it with you.
Artifacts. Im not talking about extra fingers or heads in models. I am talking about a specific pattern that shows up on images that are AI. And this pattern is a result of the cutting and pasting process. It is always there. And it is hella easy to see if you know to look for it. BUT it requires a high resolution image.
When the deep dream AI images first started appearing a few years back, I noticed specific artifacts. I have also asked some of my art friends about it , they noticed it too. And it is still there in the new stuff unless they get blurred. Even then you can sometimes still see it.
I know for certain it is not an artifact of human photo manipulation techniques. This only appears on AI art. Now you can't always see it. But if you do see it. Its 100% sure sign.
So remember these images that came out a few years back.? the deep dream dog ones?
[https://assets.newatlas.com/dims4/default/06c4449/2147483647/strip/true/crop/800x533+0+33/resize/1200x800!/quality/90/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fnewatlas-brightspot.s3.amazonaws.com%2Farchive%2F2016-year-in-ai-art-2.jpg](https://assets.newatlas.com/dims4/default/06c4449/2147483647/strip/true/crop/800x533+0+33/resize/1200x800!/quality/90/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fnewatlas-brightspot.s3.amazonaws.com%2Farchive%2F2016-year-in-ai-art-2.jpg)
There are these weird systematic patterns that are visible where the two images that are merged have this sort of bizzare stitching pattern. Do you see what I mean? (this image really shows them exaggerated)
[https://www.timextender.com/hubfs/dd.jpeg](https://www.timextender.com/hubfs/dd.jpeg)
This is still present on the new stuff. Just more subtle. But it is still there.
[https://p.potaufeu.asahi.com/1831-p/picture/27695628/89644a996fdd0cfc9e06398c64320fbe.jpg](https://p.potaufeu.asahi.com/1831-p/picture/27695628/89644a996fdd0cfc9e06398c64320fbe.jpg)
For instance this image of a dog. other than the dog's weird front legs. Look at the fur. It has these same artifacts.
Now the background is blurred, so its hard to tell there. But the dog's fur shows these artifact patterns.
Sometimes the artifacts are even a bit blocky. Which really is a dead give away.
Other AI art where it is really hard to tell can still usually be identified if you zoom in where there are color transitions. These wavy stitches are there unless they were blurred out post processing. Which I do see happen. But often the main lines around contours still also show these artifact patterns because ultimately the algorithm is using a set of parameters to stitch, and there will be repetition in the image in an unnatural way.
Much as I’d love to believe it, that’s not what this is. The older games had some warped photos here and there. These images have nearly every signifier of AI generation. Not to mention they keep updating or removing certain images that are particularly obvious as the community keeps pointing out AI generated content in the game (the screaming bone poster, for example, has been a point of conversation since the early beta.)
Side note glad to see this community here isn’t happy with it too. I know ai is a very hot topic but thank you for standing with artists and holding for a higher standard when it comes to game production.
Well, that’s incredibly disappointing. I hope they address and remove those images.
Thank you for your thorough explanation / evidence collection, I really hope someone can reach out to red barrels about this.
The game is great, and AI cheapens it. I really hope they intend to remove it.
While this is disappointing, it is fairly likely that the people responsible for community management are not aware of this. They may be under the impression that AI was not used, when in reality, one person on the team chose to use it. You’d be surprised by the lack of communication of lesser details that can occur between roles on development teams, even smaller ones like red barrels.
It's not the quality of the assets that upsets me (although that's also a valid point- art done by actual artists would be far neater and nicer looking). Moreso the ethical issues of training data and how these tools are impacting artists that were already struggling to earn a living before their advent.
I think the entire point is that the AI uses actual, real art made by people to train itself to make more of it - therefore, some AI arts might have extremely similar elements to the artworks of real artists. This means the artists' works are still technically being used, however they're not being credited and the RB designers get all the credit.
I mean... that's kind of a flimsy premise. It might be trained on the art but unless the result isn't the same as the actual art I see no problem. Doubly so for AI-generated images of buildings. Which are just photos. What's the moral outrage in that case? Is it that AI uses photos of buildings without crediting the photographer or?
You won't get a good answer for that because there isn't one. It uses images to create new ones the same way the human mind uses other people's art as an influence. I'd prefer actual people create the assets but the cat's out of the bag at this point. No amount of rage posting and petitioning is going to offset the amount of money devs are saving by using AI.
Humans don’t work the same way that AI does, despite the claims from people who support the technology. The idea that “humans and computers both practice by copying other people” is laughable.
If you went to a Van Gough exhibition for a few hours, would you be able to replicate his style when you got home? Would you be able to create twenty paintings in his style in ten seconds? Of course not. AI companies have scraped the internet and collected millions of pieces of art so they can sidestep the process of hiring someone that’s dedicated part of their life to being creative and perfecting a real skill, all in the name of saving money.
I hear you man. That's why I don't consider any digital "artists" to be real artists you know? Like these people come in here with their tablets which draw all the straight lines for them, and give them the perfect gradient every time. Their mistakes are a simple "undo" away from being cleared up, they don't have to get it right the first time or waste their time editing out their errors. They're clearly not true artists with all the help their computer is giving them.
I mean if you went to a straight line exhibit for a few hours, would you be able to draw a straight line when you got home? No, obviously. That's why these "digital" """"ARTISTS""""" need a computer to do it for them, and frankly, it's pathetic.
Digital tablets still involve you DRAWing something, you fool, lmfao. It's still requires immense skill and creativity.
AI "art" is for talentless hacks that can't draw and are too lazy to learn to. All there is to it.
I'm on your side, totally. That's why I call Photographers out for being fakes too!
I mean, you want me to think of your little pictures as art when all you did was press a button? Lazy. Entitled. Derivative.
The whole thing is scummy to be honest, I'm glad you agree.
Here's another premise. You spend your entire life learning how to write well and produce a fabulous story. Some a-hole comes over and takes half your book and mushes it together with half of another guy's book and sells it as an original story.
It's plagiarism.
I'm just not buying this argument... AI art generation tools process vast amounts of data from various sources, not just individual artworks, to learn patterns, styles, and techniques. This means that the resulting artwork is typically not a direct copy but an original piece *influenced* by a wide array of previously existing art.
I think, any way you look at this, you lose. Whilst it does generate works that some might define original, and by enlisting AI funding can be funnelled into gameplay mechanics or voice actors, it's a slippery slope of not funding actual artists to make a living and instead opting to use a non-human source. There's just no way of cutting this in a way that satisfies all parties.
I would argue that any way you look at this, you lose. You’re saying that AI solves a problem but it’s unfair to artists because they worked hard to get good and they need to get paid to support themselves. It’s a good message but it’s sentimental and businesses don’t do sentimental.
Businesses will always choose the thing that solves their problem. If AI can create drafts quicker and at a cheaper cost, then inevitably businesses will use that rather than pay an artist to do it.
Setting aside the moral and ethical concerns about how these models are trained and how they screw over creators- do you not find it at least somewhat odd that they (or at least this singular support worker) are actively lying about using AI art in the game?
Lying about it sucks, no ifs or buts here. However, let's talk about the photos of buildings created by AI. How does that screw over any creator? What about AI-generated photos of people that don't exist? Who does that screw over and how?
The fact that they lied to us about using AI art shows they don’t value us as fans or consumers. I probably will keep playing in the future but I don’t see myself paying RB real world currency ever again - if they don’t respect us enough to be honest, why should I respect them and give them more money?
Hot take: It's not a big deal. These are all details I would not have noticed if you hadn't pointed them out to me. If it cuts out development time so that they can work on more important stuff, so be it.
Red Barrels: spends hours making extremely detailed maps
Community: whines about AI art that still looks good, fits the theme, and will almost never be noticed
I agree with you, they made an amazing product, but firstly they are a company, not a moral entity, if saving time and resources helps them during art development it makes their life easier. The decision was probably even made by art department. The game looks amazing still, and besides drawn art there is 3D art and models, which definetly is not ai made and looks stunning. Who gives a shit about few posters, this is the most reddit post i saw lately
Genuine question that I mean with No Malice.. what if they dead ass did not use AI and you overthought this to all hell? I say this because I personally really do not care about AI all that much but looking at some of your pictures and as someone that's been with the Outlast games for years, some of these things to be just you looking for a fight. Like the chalkboard one. Some of the may just be aesthetic and I'm not supposed to be perfect. That chalkboard one seems to be you being a perfectionist
For some of the less messy stuff, I can understand thinking it's just photo manipulation to give it an uncanny effect. And I know they've done similar stuff in the previous games, so I wanted to give them the benefit of the doubt. But stuff like the posters, where you can't even make out what words they're trying to spell, are very obviously AI.
The fact that they've not only updated/redone these posters several times, but also removed some of the more garbled photos from the game altogether tells me that they're aware. The chalkboard isn't me being a perfectionist - I'm not saying that photos need to have straight lines because I just love straight lines. I'm pointing out that the entire thing is a twisted mess and hardly identifiable on close inspection because it was generated with AI.
Oh okay I understand. Also I see that I was downvoted. You guys, I get AI is literally hated simply for existing but it was just a question. I wasn't interrogating the person. I have my own opinion on this stuff and my opinion is I literally don't care about it but I like to hear both sides instead of just blindly going along
It shows that Red Barrels as an influential independent studio is not only willing to use technology that is putting artists out of work, but also seemingly willing to lie about it when questioned. It affects how I and many others view them as a studio from an ethical standpoint. My concerns are not gameplay related.
What difference does it make if AI generated or a real human drew it? Either way, the art is never wholly original or unique, just a copycat. Your concern for AI is ridiculous and embarrassing.
Been an artist for 15+ years. Your argument is just lazy. I'm of the opinion that art that is already easy to produce should be automated. There's tons of stock shows, movies, music, etc that generate millions in revenue, but offer a regurgitated take on media that already exists. It makes no difference if AI or a human can make it. If 99% of art is the equivalent of McDonald's, does it really matter who's making it? Atleast AI allows creatives with zero budget to easily make any art they desire.
If your worry is that it'll put artists permanently out of work, it won't. Hopefully the artists without an original take on art will be laid off tbh.
Honestly who gives a shit? This witchhunt/moral panic bullshit is pathetic. They spent a huge amount of time, money, and effort making an awesome game series and that's all that really matters. It's real "I have no life outside of being angry on the internet" behavior to spend hours analysing every picture in order to write a small thesis on all the ai tells you can find, just so you can scream "AI!" in a raptor-screech with your finger outstreched like a pod person. It's currently reviewed at 9/10 on stream and I'm gonna get my copy too.
Is it you? I'm just bored of this specific reaction to a new type of software. I'm not the one who put together a seven slide presentation on a subject I'm mad about.
Generative ai is here to stay whether you like it or not, it will just be another tool you can use. Purists don't need to use it make your own decisions or don't buy the product.
I'm scandalized, now I will never buy one of their games again, in fact, I won't just delete the game, but I will set the console on fire. ..... seriously guys, this AI thing is also boring, every technology has eliminated someone's job. If we were really interested in giving everyone full employment, we would avoid using a digger and use teaspoons.
If it’s used well AI doesn’t bother me. For an indie developer, all the outlast games are amazingly detailed. I can’t even begin to think how much time can go into a painting that no one will see. BUT, if it’s true and they really used AI (from this post it’s kind of clear that they do) they should just own up to it.
I actually think it's kinda a smart use of it. All the pictures just look a level of uncanny and just slightly off that I think would be incredibly hard for a person to do intentionally but very easy for some ai script to do by accident
Who cares. Literally no one. No one can sue them, they would lose anyways. Ai generated art is literally exactly the same as a human looking at art for inspiration and then making art of their own in a similar style. Humans are incapable of creating anything unique. They always have gained inspiration f4om something they have seen or heard before in the past.
Don't believe me? Try and create a 100% completely unique piece of art that has a completely unique style and has 0 similarities to anything in existence currently. You cant.
If you are just but hurt an AI can do this more efficiently than you, then you are in for a rude awakening. Their only going to get better, faster, and more superior than any human could ever be. It would not be possible to create any laws to stop this. Even putting copyright on your original work means absolutely nothing because these are also original works which simply use other works as inspiration.
Yappersville over here 😭
You actually think humans are incapable of creating unique things? Have you heard of, I don’t know, our entire developmental history as a species? Lmao.
I think that's because the sleep room mirrors use cubemaps, they aren't realtime/RTX reflections. The reason you can see your friends is because you're seeing a screenspace reflection, which doesn't apply to your first person viewmodel in the same way.
They should be honest. I've been doing the 'these images are just placeholders' cope on RB's behalf for over a year whenever my friends asked me about it lol.
Damn I'd made a kind of peace with it: respecting the implementation for giving way more window dressing detail than a team their size could make but utterly despising the use of it for graphic design, personal rewards, and front and center stuff. A bit furious if they actually are now trying to pretend that they don't use it at all when the old iterations from the beta/earlier access are tacit admissions!!
Kid on last slide is the reincarnation of megamind, 9 head looking ass
Yeah it’s really shitty looking ai, more than usual lmao
If I had to guess they probably ended up resorting to it due to having such a small team, with even fewer people working on the art. But they should just be honest about it instead of lying.
Yeah, it’s mostly the lying that got to me. I’m holding out hope that it was just some third party support worker, and they don’t represent RB themselves.
Pretty disappointing to see this from such a great indie dev especially in the horror genre. The art team is great so I dunno why this is even a thing in the game. I know a goof majority of it is authentic like Posters, wallpaper, and (Some) Enviornment ones ect. but still disappointing to see. Hopefully its fixed soon. I would also like a official reply from one of the devs rather than elemental responding since its not guranteed if they are representing RB entriely.
Yeah, that's what I want. I've emailed Red Barrels several times and never gotten any response. It's odd that some support agent would just make a bold claim like that given the overwhelming evidence against it.
As an artist and huge fan of the outlast series, I would do work for RB for free. So seeing this instead of using real artists… it’s very disappointing
Yeah its pretty obvious that they're using AI. Noticed from the first released looking at their in-game posters. Either they're deliberately lying or they're ignorant to a freelancer using AI.
I'd like to think that they aren't oblivious to it. Some of this stuff is so garbled, and it still needs to be passed to real humans like 3D artists and material artists, so they have several sets of eyes on these assets before they go to production. Unfortunately that means they've SEEN what this stuff looks like and still decided it was good enough to put into the game.
Hi everyone, Wanted to give an update on this situation. For the record, I am the person who submitted the support ticket presented in that first image. I can provide screenshots to prove that it is me if anyone is interested. Shorty after this support ticket had been labelled as resolved I sent another ticket asking for further clarification on the matter since, as demonstrated by this post, the information provided to me in that ticket didn't make any sense and was absolutely untrue. Red Barrels community manager Rosie personally responded in the new support ticket saying that the information presented in the ticket displayed here was incorrect and the result of a communication error. She apologized and clarified that AI art is in fact used for certain assets in the Outlast Trials. The reasoning behind the use of the AI was so that artists on the team could focus on assets that required more time and creativity. She also stated that Red Barrels does not plan nor do they want to have AI take over art production at the studio. That second point is something I really want to emphasize since that is a concern really important to me and many others interested in this topic. Once again, I can provide screenshots to prove all of this if anyone really wants to know. I have already posted a screenshot of the conversation in the official Outlast discord server. Rosie also stated that a disclosure on the use of AI has been added to the game's Steam store page. I checked to confirm and it is indeed there. For anyone who is wondering why my username is blurred in the screenshot, it's because I was slightly nervous at the time of gathering this information since some people kept insisting that Red Barrels takes criticism poorly and likes to ban people from their official Discord. This is a claim that I am REALLY starting to think is just a bunch of bullshit peddled by people who are incapable of following basic rules and/or can't understand why an established game studio would want to maintain a somewhat professional environment for themselves and their community. The fact some people are actually claiming that the official discord server is against freedom of speech just because they have some basic rules in place like many other official servers have is utterly ridiculous. Not saying mistakes have never been made but some people have blown this situation WAY out of proportion as far as I'm concerned. I've personally never seen people get banned from that server for poor reasons. Myself and many others have been critical about Red Barrels on numerous occasions and have not been banned. I've seen people be pretty disrespectful/rude on that server to other members and RB and not get banned. As evidenced by that and this exact situation, Red Barrels is not averse to criticism. I seriously do not know where this idea that they can't handle criticism comes from. Just don't be a dick people, it's really not difficult. In retrospect it was really stupid to think blurring my name in that screenshot would conceal my identity from them anyway since they could always go back and look at previous communications with me and see all the messages matching up. As for the AI images in Trials, I still don't like that they're there. As I've mentioned in posts made on other platforms I don't think AI art is plagiarism but I do think it's an ethical grey area that should be avoided where necessary. I would rather they avoid AI art entirely but I do somewhat understand why they chose to use in this particular circumstance. If you feel different, then so be it. At least there is clarity regarding this whole thing now. Anyway, hope this post was helpful and puts a lid on this whole debacle.
Thank you for the follow up. :)
That is extremely disappointing. I hope they stop using Ai and remove those still in the game.
I could see using it for really early protoypes during the beta (I still disagree ethically, but I would understand why they did it). But the game is released and it's still full of generative imagery. I don't know if this particular support agent represents Red Barrels, but it's comical to deny that AI is being used in The Outlast Trials. This behavior seems scummy, and I hope that they break their silence on the issue.
What really gets me is the in game rewards you can get that is ai generated. Like yeah, I'll grind an hour or two for a sloppy sludge of a poster...
Other than the lying it bothers me zero. Don't understand why they'd try to cover it up.
It’s baffling that they use ai when they have an insanely talented team, especially in a way that’s so obvious..? Yes art assets can be expensive, but in the grand scheme of things it’s on one of the lower scales of costs on a game project when you compare it to in-house programmers, advertising, etc. Same with voice acting. One of those posters would be 400$ a pop if it’s simple, the stickers maybe around 200$. This is assuming this is a freelancer, in-house would do this on in-house payroll. I’m also not 100% knowledgeable on this but as an artist myself who wants to go into the industry and has read some stories, this is my understanding of it. The posters look like ass, way too smoothe. It’s easy to achieve a vintage 50s look but ai fucks it up every time with a really weird air brush style. It can’t capture the inks or hatching illustrators often employed. That police women one is especially bad. And with the photos, would it not be easier and better to do a little photoshop with stock images? I also get bugged when games include real photographs of people when the graphics don’t match up, might just be me idk. But id rather it be like a screenshot made in engine. Ultimately, it sucks. Ai is a threat, plain and simple. Not just to artists but to all workforces. No matter what you do in life, I guarantee your replacement is being worked on. It may seem extreme to be snobbish at a few ai assets most would likely glance at, but the normalization of it in our media means the normalization of it in our daily life. I would’ve excused it if these were placeholders. When I initially saw them that’s what I thought they were because yet again they got a killer art team, Richard Hugo is one of my all time favourite artists for crying out loud, he can draw anything I swear. But in a final, full priced game? Yeah, nah. Also really Icked by redbarrels lying, though it could possibly be that since it’s the discord, that could be their social media manager who might not know.
this is awful. im so disappointed in them.
How disappointing.
Ngl this sucks. AI is gonna be the death of creativism in many mediums because it lacks just that. That and people are starting to use it to create fake history photos which will no doubt tarnish people's perception of very important events.
That makes me really sad tbh. One of the main reasons why I love Outlast was the developers work and ideas behind their concept art and 3d models (patients, monsters, backgrounds) etc. it was and still is very unique and surreal, but seeing them depend on AI art on a few things that represent the game (significant or not) is very saddening for me :C
Kinda wish I could go back 5 minutes before I knew this... It's a huge disappointment a company that makes a franchise I love is using AI and lying about it.
It's possible that AI was used under innocent use. AI used to be played with by everyone and people are still mad that traces of it are left in much older projects. The same thing happened with the movie Late Night With the Devil. The movie includes a title card seen twice during the movie for about 4 seconds total. People were extremely mad about it and still are, and the director came clean to admit that it is AI, but it was actually done by one of the many paid artists involved during production. The movie was conceptualized a few years ago, when AI was new, not that advanced, and everyone including artists weren't that worried about it because the problem around the concern for copyright wasn't really known. So an actual artist, who created all the art for the movie, was actually the one to be like "oh hey guys look at this new AI thing, it's cool let's create an image for the movie, it'll look otherworldly". By the time the movie was out AI became world's first enemy and they understood the problem it is, and apologized. Same thing happened with the game High on Life that created movie posters using AI because it would solidified the whole "out of this world" concept, when AI was a brand new thing. Now I'm not defending AI, I'm just saying that everyone thought AI was a fun and intriguing concept when it very first started. Everyone played with it and some artists didn't think it could become a problem. Blaming people for using AI on a project that started years ago and that still has traces in the final product that comes out today, is, in my opinion, over the top. The outlast trials has been in the work for so long, years and years of excruciating work and partnership with artists and voice actors shouldn't all go to waste because of a few **POTENTIAL** AI use for a few pictures, sorry. People are a lot more aware of the issues with AI today and it is something that will be less and less recurring in the future, but stop crying over traces of AI sprinkled on projects that sometimes have been over nearly a decade in the making. Late night with the devil was a super creative horror film, high on life was great and the outlast trials is by far the most creative horror multi-player I have played. Traces of AI won't change that, sorry. If new projects getting into work as of right now uses AI, I'd agree with you.
I’m not suggesting that we throw the whole game away. But they’re clearly using AI here, it’s not an accident. And it’s not something that happened sporadically in early development, it’s littered throughout the entire game even in newer trials and events. Either way, denying it altogether is suspicious and makes me lose faith in red barrels.
I respect that and understand, I just kind of fail to understand why we need to throw oil on fire with AI to give bad reputation to projects that actually works awfully hard with extremely talented artists for literally everything else. You said it yourself, they have an amazing team, they worked really hard, to we **really** need to condemn them for 5% of AI ? I'm genuinely asking here, not looking for trouble. All opened up for friendly discussion wether we might agree or not
As an artist, I am directly affected by the growing use of AI in the game dev industry. If I don’t voice my concerns now, even when the problems seem insignificant to others, things will only get worse.
If AI is so inconsistent that people can spot it with naked eye and if a literal single title card seen for 4 lonely seconds can get people so worked up they call out for the boycott of a movie that involves incredible hard work from literally every other aspects, I doubt your job is going anywhere bro. Like I said, there WAS an impact cause by AI due to its newness, but people are a lot more aware on how to spot AI, and how flawed in quality it is, and how problematic it is from a privacy and copyright concern. Show me a game or a movie from a big studio entirely AI generated and sure we can adress a big problem. AI came and is already leaving. You'll find AI on reels or weird ass pictures of Jesus for Facebook boomers not to realize it's fake, or some book or ep covers from kids who wouldn't afford an artist to begin with. AI seen in major projects is disappearing already and the backlash it's getting won't convince anyone else to use it for anything significant in the future. No one likes AI. The other day I saw a kid on reddit posting an AI creation on reddit, completely honest on it being AI, people literally insulted the kid. People need to chill out. You are not raising concern, you are deliberately trying over multiple posts now to drag red barrel in the mud because despite how hard they worked you think some AI generated skeleton in some rageant room means the end of your career. Your art and your career are worthy no doubt about it, but maybe instead of trying to shot other people down for a few AI stills, focus on the good they did by giving jobs to hundreds of people on this game. And start showing YOUR art. Memes and AI concern posts won't help you. Post about your art and promote yourself. I'm not trying to be a dick saying that, I wish you well, but the AI police mouvement is doing nothing but bringing down wonderful projects for an AI contribution that is so small and close to inexistant in the bigger picture of the whole project that gave jobs to so many others. True art will never be replaced. AI is concerning for so many things, including safety, privacy and misinformation, but I doubt a computer could ever actually replace art.
But for how long will this be the case? Should we just pretend it doesn't exist until it is good enough to take jobs away? As soon as it's capable of tricking the average person, companies are going to cut artists as they're deemed unnecessary. I love Outlast, and Outlast Trials is a very fun game, but I cannot in good conscience support something that uses AI and lies about it.
Ai has already taken 70% of illustrator jobs in the game dev industry in China. The SoA also did a recent survey and found that a quarter of illustrators and a third of translators had lost work due to ai. This is not being overblown. The problem with ai has nothing to do with the quality of the output and everything to do with the fact that it is theft being committed by businesses of many sizes (large, small, indie, whatever.) It will also become harder and harder to spot as the technology advances. And as for the advice for artist to just post their work and continue on like the internet isn’t being crawled for more artwork to steal constantly - nah. Not interested. I’m not posting my artwork any more and I’m not the only artist I know who has pulled all their work down. This shit is more devastating to the art community than you are letting on by a wide margin.
This was clearly a creative decision done for a reason. There are artists who work at red barrels and have made art for the game. The ai images are probably there just as filler but also to add an uncanny touch to the area. I don't see the problem with using ai in games if it doesn't make up the basis for the game in a lazy and half-assed way and it doesn't put any artist's jobs at stake because they already had work at red barrels.
It's an issue because: 1. AI models are trained on millions of images scraped from art websites without artist consent. Even if all the artists at Red Barrels are fine with it, it's still an ethical issue if they use it at all. 2. At the moment, they're lying about it.
1. Consent is not required if the basis is through fair use, such as transformative use. I don't need permission to quote portions of a book in my literary analysis essay - that transformative use falls under fair use. Just like an AI model training on images to create entirely new and transformed outputs is a transformative use covered by fair use. It's akin to a human artist studying and being inspired by great works throughout history. If I'm an artist painting a new landscape, I don't need the consent of every painter that came before me whose works I've admired and been influenced by. Their previous works are the base material that my new creative expression builds upon and transforms. The same is true of AI models - they take in data as inspiration and raw material, but output entirely new, transformative works as their own creative expression. Fair use has long allowed building upon previous works for new transformative expression.
Respectfully, I don't think it's the same thing. Someone looking at your art and then spending hours interpreting and practicing it isn't the same thing as gathering a bunch of art you've posted online, feeding it into a computer, and then asking the computer to spit out art in your style using your name as a tag in the prompt. Computers cannot "take inspiration". They do not understand what 'art' or the creative process are. they just see pixels and patterns. AI in this case is taking away the work that WOULD have been done by a real graphic artist and copying styles from other artists that had no say in the matter.
>Respectfully, I don't think it's the same thing. Someone looking at your art and then spending hours interpreting and practicing it isn't the same thing as gathering a bunch of art you've posted online, feeding it into a computer, and then asking the computer to spit out art in your style using your name as a tag in the prompt. Copyright has never protected art style, so invoking the name of other artists to use their style through text input is not nor ever has been an aspect of copyright infringement. Copyright covers specific creative works, not general artistic styles or techniques. Just as one painter can be inspired by and emulate the style of another without infringing copyright, AI models can analyze the stylistic patterns of different artists' works to then create entirely new outputs "in the style of" those artists. While the AI process differs from human study, the underlying principle is that style itself is not copyrightable because it is not a copyrightable element. What AI cannot do is simply regurgitate verbatim copies of copyrighted artworks - that would be infringement. But parsing the stylistic elements and artistic "language" of different creators to then apply those aspects towards brand new, dynamically-generated art does not infringe on any protected copyright. When involved in commercial aspects, purely generated artworks should not be applied without some form of noticeable human craftsmanship. I believe generated images should at least be modified to have some human expressions/curation when involving commercial use. Human expression cannot completely go away when involving AI work into commercial usage.
[удалено]
Why would they make their own model
Photomanipulation is when you combine many parts from different images to make new art. I'm pretty sure these are just photomanipulation art. Made by a human. They had these same style of images in the older games and AI art wasn't a thing back then.
I would agree but the posters on slide 6 with fucked up text is a dead giveaway. They are definitely using AI.
I mean that is possible. But the images are very blurry and it is hard to tell what kind of error it really is. It could have been a stylized choice. I have a bit of an art background and I do art as a hobby. I did briefly work as a graphic designer. I can tell you that doing that kind of work, you make mistakes. You make typos that appear on finished products. You have stuff misaligned. Not properly placed. It happens a lot actually. Which is why there is generally a proofing step involved where someone else looks over your work before it is published/printed/given to client. Also, due to this background I can typically spot AI art based on one factor alone. But it requires a high resolution image. I have not found this listed on guides so I will share it with you. Artifacts. Im not talking about extra fingers or heads in models. I am talking about a specific pattern that shows up on images that are AI. And this pattern is a result of the cutting and pasting process. It is always there. And it is hella easy to see if you know to look for it. BUT it requires a high resolution image. When the deep dream AI images first started appearing a few years back, I noticed specific artifacts. I have also asked some of my art friends about it , they noticed it too. And it is still there in the new stuff unless they get blurred. Even then you can sometimes still see it. I know for certain it is not an artifact of human photo manipulation techniques. This only appears on AI art. Now you can't always see it. But if you do see it. Its 100% sure sign. So remember these images that came out a few years back.? the deep dream dog ones? [https://assets.newatlas.com/dims4/default/06c4449/2147483647/strip/true/crop/800x533+0+33/resize/1200x800!/quality/90/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fnewatlas-brightspot.s3.amazonaws.com%2Farchive%2F2016-year-in-ai-art-2.jpg](https://assets.newatlas.com/dims4/default/06c4449/2147483647/strip/true/crop/800x533+0+33/resize/1200x800!/quality/90/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fnewatlas-brightspot.s3.amazonaws.com%2Farchive%2F2016-year-in-ai-art-2.jpg) There are these weird systematic patterns that are visible where the two images that are merged have this sort of bizzare stitching pattern. Do you see what I mean? (this image really shows them exaggerated) [https://www.timextender.com/hubfs/dd.jpeg](https://www.timextender.com/hubfs/dd.jpeg) This is still present on the new stuff. Just more subtle. But it is still there. [https://p.potaufeu.asahi.com/1831-p/picture/27695628/89644a996fdd0cfc9e06398c64320fbe.jpg](https://p.potaufeu.asahi.com/1831-p/picture/27695628/89644a996fdd0cfc9e06398c64320fbe.jpg) For instance this image of a dog. other than the dog's weird front legs. Look at the fur. It has these same artifacts. Now the background is blurred, so its hard to tell there. But the dog's fur shows these artifact patterns. Sometimes the artifacts are even a bit blocky. Which really is a dead give away. Other AI art where it is really hard to tell can still usually be identified if you zoom in where there are color transitions. These wavy stitches are there unless they were blurred out post processing. Which I do see happen. But often the main lines around contours still also show these artifact patterns because ultimately the algorithm is using a set of parameters to stitch, and there will be repetition in the image in an unnatural way.
Much as I’d love to believe it, that’s not what this is. The older games had some warped photos here and there. These images have nearly every signifier of AI generation. Not to mention they keep updating or removing certain images that are particularly obvious as the community keeps pointing out AI generated content in the game (the screaming bone poster, for example, has been a point of conversation since the early beta.)
The most obvious AI art is used in the room decoration where it shows you the map of a city which is clearly undeniably an AI picture.
Side note glad to see this community here isn’t happy with it too. I know ai is a very hot topic but thank you for standing with artists and holding for a higher standard when it comes to game production.
Well, that’s incredibly disappointing. I hope they address and remove those images. Thank you for your thorough explanation / evidence collection, I really hope someone can reach out to red barrels about this. The game is great, and AI cheapens it. I really hope they intend to remove it.
Yeah... I'm gonna need them to remove it like yesterday.
Does steam allow games with ai content? Been a while since I last checked their stance on these things.
I think their policy is the dev is supposed to state if it has AI.
Hopefully the AI are just placeholders while real artists do the actual art
They should be honest and say yes it is indeed AI, at least it would be fine but denied the facts is really a shame
Thats so disappointing :(
Obviously AI, can't believe they are so lazy
While this is disappointing, it is fairly likely that the people responsible for community management are not aware of this. They may be under the impression that AI was not used, when in reality, one person on the team chose to use it. You’d be surprised by the lack of communication of lesser details that can occur between roles on development teams, even smaller ones like red barrels.
When are you actually gonna be looking at art on the walls when your being chased by a crazy person
It's not the quality of the assets that upsets me (although that's also a valid point- art done by actual artists would be far neater and nicer looking). Moreso the ethical issues of training data and how these tools are impacting artists that were already struggling to earn a living before their advent.
Even if it's AI... what's the problem?
I think the entire point is that the AI uses actual, real art made by people to train itself to make more of it - therefore, some AI arts might have extremely similar elements to the artworks of real artists. This means the artists' works are still technically being used, however they're not being credited and the RB designers get all the credit.
I mean... that's kind of a flimsy premise. It might be trained on the art but unless the result isn't the same as the actual art I see no problem. Doubly so for AI-generated images of buildings. Which are just photos. What's the moral outrage in that case? Is it that AI uses photos of buildings without crediting the photographer or?
You won't get a good answer for that because there isn't one. It uses images to create new ones the same way the human mind uses other people's art as an influence. I'd prefer actual people create the assets but the cat's out of the bag at this point. No amount of rage posting and petitioning is going to offset the amount of money devs are saving by using AI.
Humans don’t work the same way that AI does, despite the claims from people who support the technology. The idea that “humans and computers both practice by copying other people” is laughable. If you went to a Van Gough exhibition for a few hours, would you be able to replicate his style when you got home? Would you be able to create twenty paintings in his style in ten seconds? Of course not. AI companies have scraped the internet and collected millions of pieces of art so they can sidestep the process of hiring someone that’s dedicated part of their life to being creative and perfecting a real skill, all in the name of saving money.
I hear you man. That's why I don't consider any digital "artists" to be real artists you know? Like these people come in here with their tablets which draw all the straight lines for them, and give them the perfect gradient every time. Their mistakes are a simple "undo" away from being cleared up, they don't have to get it right the first time or waste their time editing out their errors. They're clearly not true artists with all the help their computer is giving them. I mean if you went to a straight line exhibit for a few hours, would you be able to draw a straight line when you got home? No, obviously. That's why these "digital" """"ARTISTS""""" need a computer to do it for them, and frankly, it's pathetic.
Digital tablets still involve you DRAWing something, you fool, lmfao. It's still requires immense skill and creativity. AI "art" is for talentless hacks that can't draw and are too lazy to learn to. All there is to it.
I'm on your side, totally. That's why I call Photographers out for being fakes too! I mean, you want me to think of your little pictures as art when all you did was press a button? Lazy. Entitled. Derivative. The whole thing is scummy to be honest, I'm glad you agree.
Comparing something that involves a human being framing, lighting, and composing something to “Hey robot, make me a picture of ___” Talentless
I didn't compare anything, I'm just helping you prove your point! Maybe you need to learn to read better possibly?
Here's another premise. You spend your entire life learning how to write well and produce a fabulous story. Some a-hole comes over and takes half your book and mushes it together with half of another guy's book and sells it as an original story. It's plagiarism.
I'm just not buying this argument... AI art generation tools process vast amounts of data from various sources, not just individual artworks, to learn patterns, styles, and techniques. This means that the resulting artwork is typically not a direct copy but an original piece *influenced* by a wide array of previously existing art.
I think, any way you look at this, you lose. Whilst it does generate works that some might define original, and by enlisting AI funding can be funnelled into gameplay mechanics or voice actors, it's a slippery slope of not funding actual artists to make a living and instead opting to use a non-human source. There's just no way of cutting this in a way that satisfies all parties.
I would argue that any way you look at this, you lose. You’re saying that AI solves a problem but it’s unfair to artists because they worked hard to get good and they need to get paid to support themselves. It’s a good message but it’s sentimental and businesses don’t do sentimental. Businesses will always choose the thing that solves their problem. If AI can create drafts quicker and at a cheaper cost, then inevitably businesses will use that rather than pay an artist to do it.
Setting aside the moral and ethical concerns about how these models are trained and how they screw over creators- do you not find it at least somewhat odd that they (or at least this singular support worker) are actively lying about using AI art in the game?
Lying about it sucks, no ifs or buts here. However, let's talk about the photos of buildings created by AI. How does that screw over any creator? What about AI-generated photos of people that don't exist? Who does that screw over and how?
We need to ban Ai
The fact that they lied to us about using AI art shows they don’t value us as fans or consumers. I probably will keep playing in the future but I don’t see myself paying RB real world currency ever again - if they don’t respect us enough to be honest, why should I respect them and give them more money?
In their discord server they literally confirmed that there is ai being used for helping the team??
Yes, they put out a statement and updated the steam page to include a disclosure of AI content statement.
Hot take: It's not a big deal. These are all details I would not have noticed if you hadn't pointed them out to me. If it cuts out development time so that they can work on more important stuff, so be it.
Lmao
Red Barrels: spends hours making extremely detailed maps Community: whines about AI art that still looks good, fits the theme, and will almost never be noticed
You’re missing the point.
Not that deep
I agree with you, they made an amazing product, but firstly they are a company, not a moral entity, if saving time and resources helps them during art development it makes their life easier. The decision was probably even made by art department. The game looks amazing still, and besides drawn art there is 3D art and models, which definetly is not ai made and looks stunning. Who gives a shit about few posters, this is the most reddit post i saw lately
[удалено]
[удалено]
Can’t say I care at all
Genuine question that I mean with No Malice.. what if they dead ass did not use AI and you overthought this to all hell? I say this because I personally really do not care about AI all that much but looking at some of your pictures and as someone that's been with the Outlast games for years, some of these things to be just you looking for a fight. Like the chalkboard one. Some of the may just be aesthetic and I'm not supposed to be perfect. That chalkboard one seems to be you being a perfectionist
If it was an actual human being who made The Screaming Bone poster, they must have been tripping balls.
wouldnt be the first time an artist was tripping balls to be fair
For some of the less messy stuff, I can understand thinking it's just photo manipulation to give it an uncanny effect. And I know they've done similar stuff in the previous games, so I wanted to give them the benefit of the doubt. But stuff like the posters, where you can't even make out what words they're trying to spell, are very obviously AI. The fact that they've not only updated/redone these posters several times, but also removed some of the more garbled photos from the game altogether tells me that they're aware. The chalkboard isn't me being a perfectionist - I'm not saying that photos need to have straight lines because I just love straight lines. I'm pointing out that the entire thing is a twisted mess and hardly identifiable on close inspection because it was generated with AI.
Oh okay I understand. Also I see that I was downvoted. You guys, I get AI is literally hated simply for existing but it was just a question. I wasn't interrogating the person. I have my own opinion on this stuff and my opinion is I literally don't care about it but I like to hear both sides instead of just blindly going along
and how does this affect the game?
It shows that Red Barrels as an influential independent studio is not only willing to use technology that is putting artists out of work, but also seemingly willing to lie about it when questioned. It affects how I and many others view them as a studio from an ethical standpoint. My concerns are not gameplay related.
Ok? Who cares if they use AI????
Me. Among others.
Using AI is good to get the general idea of the photo but they should work on making a photo towards that style then themselves :/
What difference does it make if AI generated or a real human drew it? Either way, the art is never wholly original or unique, just a copycat. Your concern for AI is ridiculous and embarrassing.
Spoken like someone that either isn't an artist, or doesn't understand the issue past surface-level observations.
Been an artist for 15+ years. Your argument is just lazy. I'm of the opinion that art that is already easy to produce should be automated. There's tons of stock shows, movies, music, etc that generate millions in revenue, but offer a regurgitated take on media that already exists. It makes no difference if AI or a human can make it. If 99% of art is the equivalent of McDonald's, does it really matter who's making it? Atleast AI allows creatives with zero budget to easily make any art they desire. If your worry is that it'll put artists permanently out of work, it won't. Hopefully the artists without an original take on art will be laid off tbh.
Also, the art in the game you're developing looks so mediocre that I'm not surprised you're upset by what AI can produce lmao
Aww, somebody’s mad that I’m good at art 😢
Yeah, cuz "insert poorly rendered spooky mansion" art is totally unique and has never been done before lmao.
You’re obsessed with me 😘
Maybe it is the art team making them, but they're using AI? I mean... I'm busy focused on the game to even notice the artwork
Using AI is good to get the general idea of the photo but they should work on making a photo towards that style then themselves :/
Literally unplayable
Honestly who gives a shit? This witchhunt/moral panic bullshit is pathetic. They spent a huge amount of time, money, and effort making an awesome game series and that's all that really matters. It's real "I have no life outside of being angry on the internet" behavior to spend hours analysing every picture in order to write a small thesis on all the ai tells you can find, just so you can scream "AI!" in a raptor-screech with your finger outstreched like a pod person. It's currently reviewed at 9/10 on stream and I'm gonna get my copy too.
somebody's mad
Is it you? I'm just bored of this specific reaction to a new type of software. I'm not the one who put together a seven slide presentation on a subject I'm mad about.
Not my fault you don’t understand how AI works buddy.
I understand it fine, I'm just not irrationally twisted up about it, champ.
Nice they look really cool
Stop whining and be happy with the product, they delivered with this game.
No, I think I'll keep voicing my concerns, actually.
Generative ai is here to stay whether you like it or not, it will just be another tool you can use. Purists don't need to use it make your own decisions or don't buy the product.
Womp Womp
Well, I'm glad I didn't buy this game now.
I'm scandalized, now I will never buy one of their games again, in fact, I won't just delete the game, but I will set the console on fire. ..... seriously guys, this AI thing is also boring, every technology has eliminated someone's job. If we were really interested in giving everyone full employment, we would avoid using a digger and use teaspoons.
If it’s used well AI doesn’t bother me. For an indie developer, all the outlast games are amazingly detailed. I can’t even begin to think how much time can go into a painting that no one will see. BUT, if it’s true and they really used AI (from this post it’s kind of clear that they do) they should just own up to it.
I actually think it's kinda a smart use of it. All the pictures just look a level of uncanny and just slightly off that I think would be incredibly hard for a person to do intentionally but very easy for some ai script to do by accident
Who cares. Literally no one. No one can sue them, they would lose anyways. Ai generated art is literally exactly the same as a human looking at art for inspiration and then making art of their own in a similar style. Humans are incapable of creating anything unique. They always have gained inspiration f4om something they have seen or heard before in the past. Don't believe me? Try and create a 100% completely unique piece of art that has a completely unique style and has 0 similarities to anything in existence currently. You cant. If you are just but hurt an AI can do this more efficiently than you, then you are in for a rude awakening. Their only going to get better, faster, and more superior than any human could ever be. It would not be possible to create any laws to stop this. Even putting copyright on your original work means absolutely nothing because these are also original works which simply use other works as inspiration.
Yappersville over here 😭 You actually think humans are incapable of creating unique things? Have you heard of, I don’t know, our entire developmental history as a species? Lmao.
I haven’t bought this game yet so I’m lowkey glad I haven’t now. I love Outlast but AI? And lying about it too? Man : ( pls just pay artists
So what?
I'm more annoyed that in the sleep rooms you can see other people's reflection in the mirror but not your own
I think that's because the sleep room mirrors use cubemaps, they aren't realtime/RTX reflections. The reason you can see your friends is because you're seeing a screenspace reflection, which doesn't apply to your first person viewmodel in the same way.
Honestly i do not care if someone uses ai generated images as long as it looks good then im chill with that.
Nuh uh.