280
submitted 10 months ago by MysticKetchup@lemmy.world to c/mtg@mtgzone.com

Source: Twitter

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] ZagamTheVile@lemmy.world 82 points 10 months ago

Have they tried firing a bunch of people and not following through with promises?

[-] caseyweederman@lemmy.ca 43 points 10 months ago

Their digital art standards have made their card art look so bland and samey for several years. It may as well have been AI generated all this time.
Bring back Foglio! Bring back weird art!

[-] MirthfulAlembic@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago

Phil's cards were my favorites as a kid because they were the perfect mix of weird and good at communicating the card visually.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] CaptObvious@literature.cafe 32 points 10 months ago

They will likely soon discover, as everyone is, that the genie is out. Their only real choice is to learn how to live with it. That may be requiring AI generated material to be labeled and firing anyone who fails to do so. But simply banning it isn’t likely to work for very long.

[-] mrbubblesort@kbin.social 5 points 10 months ago

Agreed, it's already starting to climb out of the uncanny valley and it will only continue to get better. Within another 5~10 years I doubt most people will be able to distinguish it from something a real person created at all.

In this case though, I honestly wonder if anyone really cares if WotC or any other company uses it, considering any sane person avoids advertisements like the plague nowadays.

[-] FreeFacts@sopuli.xyz 9 points 10 months ago

Within another 5~10 years I doubt most people will be able to distinguish it from something a real person created at all.

Maybe, or maybe not. The issue with machine learning software is that despite what they are marketed as, there is zero intelligence in them. They basically work via trial and error, and to know they have errored they must have references. And with an increasing number of generated content flooding the internet, differentiating the real reference material from generated material will be difficult, as in not cost effective. So we will end up with generated content teaching the model to generate content, and the progress we have seen will be effectively halted.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] StorminNorman@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago

I'm already starting to have trouble with it. I've been perusing all on here cos the few communities I've found that fit my hobbies are pretty dead and I'm done with them for the day in less than 5mins. And being in all has exposed me to a shit load of ai porn. A lot is very obviously generated, but a lot of it also makes me double check what instance I'm on as it is super good at generating "real people" that look convincing. It's not quite perfect, but it's good enough to confuse me a little. Hell, there's the odd one or two that I see where I legitimately can't tell if it's real or generated.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] Worx@lemmynsfw.com 13 points 10 months ago

If anyone is interested in the ethics of using AI, this is a Philosophy Tube video that I really enjoyed.

https://youtu.be/AaU6tI2pb3M?si=JIG7JiCxfpnvdIpn

I did go into the video with the background of enjoying Philosophy Tube videos and having a degree in AI, as well as a passion for the ethics and epistemology of AI so maybe not everyone will get as much from it as I did

[-] chuckleslord@lemmy.world 10 points 10 months ago

It's a great video. Source: am potato

[-] captnanonymous@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago

Thanks for the rec! This was an informative, entertaining overview of some of the ethical issues that have emerged alongside ML/AI tech, and Abigail is great at explaining how these are tied to larger societal problems.

[-] Worx@lemmynsfw.com 1 points 10 months ago

You're welcome, glad you enjoyed it

[-] amotio@lemmy.world 10 points 10 months ago

Does anyone have link to the images in question here?

[-] Ohi@lemmy.world 10 points 10 months ago

As an indie game dev with an insanely low budget, I'm looking forward to the time in the future where people stop giving the random fuck they're currently giving about the use of AI gen content so I can safely build my game with higher quality assets without the fear of a mob of angry consumers flooding my steam page with bad reviews. It seriously boggles my mind why this is even a trend right now. People need to realize we're saving money where we can so we can improve the quality of the product elsewhere! I'll now have more enemies in my game because I no longer need to hire a concept artist for the general concept. I'm empowered to do that work myself in a few minutes of chat prompts, and I'm still hiring 3D Artists to bring that concept to life.

Please people, chill the fuck out and let the industry adjust appropriately to this amazing technology. Y'all sound like those that protested the use of cars when the horse lost it's job to it.

[-] Theharpyeagle@lemmy.world 33 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

The problem is that there's a lot of indie artists out there trying to make it as hard as you are. Indie artists whose work has been fed into the models you're using without their knowledge or consent and who don't see any compensation. In a perfect world, AI art wouldn't mean artists not getting money, but as you said yourself, you don't have to hire them now. So now artists have fed into a system that returns very little if anything to them (unless you're more likely to hire an artists who uses 65% AI in their art than someone who uses none)

[-] Croquette@sh.itjust.works 30 points 10 months ago

Artists are getting replaced by machines, just like when blacksmiths were getting replaced by machines.

People are losing their livelihood, so the backlash is normal and to be expected.

I think that in your case, considering the context around AI, you should use it and be transparent about it. Some people will be mad, but what can you do?

[-] iegod@lemm.ee 1 points 10 months ago

Transparent about what? I'm not going around listing all the tools used to create my game, use of an LLM for image generation should be no different. If I get asked, sure I'll talk about it, but I'm not going out to announce it.

[-] Croquette@sh.itjust.works 6 points 10 months ago

The use of LLM is different because it is a new disruptive technology that has not been properly accepted by society and does not have the proper laws yet. People are losing their livelihood over it, so it is not like using free assets on unity marketplace.

Considering all the debates and lawsuits around LLM using copyrighted work to train their data on, you could put in your listing that assets were generated with LLM. You are transparent from the get go, the people that will be mad will get mad, but at least it will be upfront.

If you don't announce that you used LLM and people figure out that you used LLM assets, the backlash risk being greater than announcing upfront that you generated assets with a LLM.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] twoleggedmammal@lemmy.world 27 points 10 months ago

Hi, I’m a hobbyist game dev who has dabbled in using Stable Diffusion to create game assets. While AI is fundamentally just a tool, and there’s nothing inherently wrong about using it, it does matter if you’re using a model trained on copyrighted work. In that case you may be stealing an artists work and using it in a commercial game without credit or payment, or even really knowing it was their art that was a basis for your asset.

I suspect there are/will be models trained entirely on open source assets or from artists who have been paid for this express purpose and whose licensing allows for commercial usage from the output. In that case, it should be safe to use and you can credit the model used in your game credits.

For now, because I don’t know of any useful models like that, and Steam is not allowing games with AI assets of any kind, I’m steering clear of AI assets.

[-] zazo@lemmy.world 10 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

The whole fuss around the Magic/Wizard of the Coast shenanigans is about an artist using the Photoshop AI fill tool that's trained on images 100% licensed by Adobe. Ie the mob does not care about the facts only about being outraged..

[-] MysticKetchup@lemmy.world 15 points 10 months ago

The fuss is that WotC said they were going with human art over AI art, used AI art for marketing, and then denied it when it was blatantly obvious. It's pretty understandable that a company that built its brand on gorgeous, original art would get blowback when it tried to use algorithmically generated content.

[-] zazo@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago

Which is fair, I agree that they should have been honest from the start, but I can't envision a world where that also wouldn't have caused a riot. Shame it's impossible to know now.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Worx@lemmynsfw.com 21 points 10 months ago

The problem, as you have rightly pointed out, is money. I'm going to assume from what you said that you are not a multi-billion dollar company. If you are, please disregard the rest of this comment..

When WotC and others like them use AI assets instead of hiring artists, it means that they have to give less money to working-class people to create their product, but they will still charge the same for it. This leads to even more money being siphoned from you and me into the pockets of giant corporations and their disgustingly rich owners.

(This is in part what the actors / writers were on strike about recently - not wanting AI generated content taking them out of a job and not giving credit)

As it stands in America (WotC's home) right now, people need money to be alive. It's a ridiculous way to run the world that you need to buy food and shelter, but that's not changing any time soon. This is why AI and other automation is such a problem.

When you use AI to help build your game, it is a regular person (you) who is benefitting, not a giant corporation. And as you said, without AI then your game is less likely to progress and no-one gets to experience the work and passion you put in.

Bonus thoughts: I'm all for taking away people's jobs and replacing them with a universal basic income, or doing away with money all together. Why should people need to spend 40+ hours working when a machine could do it better? Let people be free to pursue their passions and goals without needed to worry about where their next meal is from. All of these wonderful technologies that humans have created should be freeing us up. What we need is for our political and societal structure to catch up with our technology!

[-] Croquette@sh.itjust.works 8 points 10 months ago

I agree with you, but then the question is : what is the threshold when it becomes not okay to use AI?

I agree that OP's use case is definitely a time where AI is beneficial. But if someone has, let'd say 10k in bank, is it acceptable then? 50k, 100k?

[-] Worx@lemmynsfw.com 11 points 10 months ago

The real answer is it's not up to me to decide. But since we're talking hypothetical and it doesn't matter anyway...

My first thing would be that money is a concept that should no longer exist. It served humanity well as we progressed, but we have reached a point now where there are enough resources to go around if they were utilised and shared correctly, and money and the greed it causes is now holding us back. So I would prefer to just have your question be meaningless. There are plenty of people who would love to be artists but can't afford to stop working. There are plenty of people who would love to create products to use that art, but can't justify the financial risk. And there are also a lot of people who want to use generative AI in their project. There's enough room in the world for all of us.

And now to answer your real question: £10million. That's my threshold for "rich person" in general. It's enough money to be set for life and any more than that is greedy and other people or charities could use your money better than you.

[-] Croquette@sh.itjust.works 3 points 10 months ago

I appreciate the thought and I agree with you. My question was open ended and not directed at you.

It would be nice indeed to go into the post scarcity society you describe where everyone can be whatever they want.

I guess my point was that it's a limit that society will eventually put in place, but it will be tumultuous before that.

[-] UndercoverUlrikHD@programming.dev 1 points 10 months ago

It's the artists that WotC hire that choose to use ML generated content in their art, WotC themselves already had a "no ML art" policy long before this controversy.

[-] Worx@lemmynsfw.com 4 points 10 months ago

WotC was more a jumping-off point for this discussion, since I was replying to someone who was talking about his own use of AI.

(But realistically, we've all seen how WotC behaves recently. Chances are this is a test to see if there's pushback before they go for it for real)

[-] alex@lemm.ee 17 points 10 months ago

I understand what you're saying, but in regards to your anecdote, and in my opinion, cars were a mistake lol

They're definitely useful but we shouldn't have gone as full in on them as we did. And it's not the loss of the horse I care about, it's the street car trolley that every city seemed to have but then removed at the behest of automakers.

Sorry to go off topic lmao, just wanted to throw my two useless cents in

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Passerby6497@lemmy.world 12 points 10 months ago

I think there's a massive difference in expectations between a small dev and a massive conglomerate like WotC. For someone like you, I doubt many would care about you using AI for the same reasons you stated. But WotC absolutely deserves to be taken behind the woodshed for doing it because they can absolutely afford to hire people to do it.

[-] half_built_pyramids@lemmy.world 7 points 10 months ago

Please just let small indies asset flip with an abstract layer of stealing. For fuck sake, just let them! Fuck!

[-] blazeknave@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago

Horses can't talk, idiot! /s

[-] lorty@lemmygrad.ml 2 points 10 months ago

If your assets end up looking good, people will be none the wiser. If they look obviously AI made, you'll be in for a bad time.

[-] gapbetweenus@feddit.de 2 points 10 months ago

It seriously boggles my mind why this is even a trend right now.

because I no longer need to hire a concept artist for the general concept.

Why are people concerned about AI? /s

AI is obvious the future of applied arts but it will take it's time for people and industries to adjust. Not long ago CGI were not considered art at all.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] MysticKetchup@lemmy.world 9 points 10 months ago

The linked post on their website has a few more sentences, but no hard promises yet...

Thanks to our diligent community who pointed out a series of recent marketing images may have included elements of generative AI, we are rethinking our process of how we work with vendors for our marketing creative.

We already made clear that we require artists, writers, and creatives contributing to the Magic TCG to refrain from using AI generative tools to create final Magic products. What’s now apparent is that we need to update the way we work with vendors on creative beyond our products—like marketing images we use on social media—to make sure that we’re supporting the amazing human ingenuity that is so important to Magic. Along with so many others, we also want to get better at understanding whether and how AI is used in the creative process. We believe everyone benefits from more transparency and better disclosure. We can’t promise to be perfect in such a fast-evolving space, especially with generative AI becoming standard in tools such as Photoshop, but our aim is to always come down on the side of human made art and artists.

[-] half_built_pyramids@lemmy.world 37 points 10 months ago

always come down on the side of human

Less than a month ago

D&D and MTG designers, artists and producers lose jobs among over 1,000 Hasbro layoffs, former devs confirm

Lol

[-] gila@lemm.ee 28 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

I had a look at the marketing image they used, it appears to be a fully generated image (with the card faces inserted afterwards). It isn't really anything to do with the plugins in Photoshop. That's a deliberate conflation of things like style transfer or inpainting with full generation via diffusion from random noise. The former starts with an image input which is presumably not made by AI

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] RizzRustbolt@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago
[-] WallsToTheBalls@lemmynsfw.com 1 points 10 months ago
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 08 Jan 2024
280 points (95.8% liked)

MTG

1921 readers
2 users here now

Magic: the Gathering discussion

General discussion, questions, and media related to Magic: the Gathering that doesn't fit within a more specific community. Our equivalent of /r/magicTCG!

Type [[Card name]] in your posts and comments and CardBot will reply with a link to the card! More info here.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS