Palworld has been a game I've been passively interested in for some time. I remember hearing the 'Pokemon with guns' claim a few years ago and thinking it was no more than a marketing gimmick or a headline to grip people on the concept but never realised how close and, paradoxically, far from that it would really be.
It launched, I downloaded it on Xbox Game Pass, then I did something no one should do - I checked Twitter.
As is seemingly always the case with Twitter, there's plenty of good information in there and some informative reads, covered in mudflinging, insults, and wojack images insisting that no, you are in fact the guy on the right who is ugly and I am the one on the left that is handsome and also right. That is to say, I didn't particularly want to tweet about it because I don't necessarily believe in my ability to have a constructive and, more importantly, coherent take on the whole thing. That is what this video is for.
Let's start with the more sketchy information. PocketPair, the developer of Palworld's CEO has praised AI generative art multiple times and even used it in a game when you have to guess who the AI art impostor is. He also used AI to generate fake Pokemon in 2021. It is technically possible that the team could have used an AI generation tool to create fakemon mockups, which they would then flesh out and turn into real designs. However, we don't have proof of their use in Palworld specifically and the wider claim that AI is being used to generate character models is much grander than a simple mockup and far more complex than AI was capable of at the time of that first trailer.
The unfortunate problem with trying to prove that AI wasn't used is that it is fundamentally unfalsifiable. You can't, by its nature, prove a negative. You can't disprove the use of AI just like you can't disprove the contributions of aliens or mythical creatures to the game. There are ways to detect AI but the CEO themself talked about AI ability to work outside of established copyrights, implying that we may find them untraceable in the future. Just because it can't be proved isn't to say it isn't relevant. You should absolutely be aware of the CEO's use of AI and this could paint a broader picture if corroborating evidence comes out that can link the two. Fundamentally, a lot of the allegations made here, other than perhaps arguing AI was used as a base to work off with some of the pals in a conceptual level, is made by a fundamental misunderstanding of how advanced AI is.
This links to a wider fear and one I'd like to touch upon briefly. I mentioned that the potential of AI can be a red flag on a project and, in order for me to justify that statement, I also have to justify why I believe the use of generative AI in art to be bad. I could do a whole other video on this but I'll put it forward as simply as I can. As AI poisoning tools like Nightshade prove, generative AI isn't very popular among artists. This is because their work is scrubbed to base these deeper models off, that generate art. Many big artists will even be able to mimic specifically their own style, from shading to stroke type and dimensions, just by typing in their name.
When it comes to its use in art and products, this can potentially steal the hard work and years of practice for many, cheaping their work and stealing it from underneath them. When artists are no longer incentivized to hone their craft and develop their skills, we lose our ability to grow and deepen art. When creating art is usurped by 'AI Artists' looking to make a quick buck, it sweeps the leg out from under artists and disincentivizes the medium from getting any better. It is a hit of dopamine for a century of decay. Okay, I'm getting dramatic but you see the point. I will come back to its detractors but let's make a quick stop off to Palworld's defenders.
Let's talk about plagiarism. Where the game isn't being accused of using AI, it is being accused of plagiarism. The side defending this tends to fall into a few camps. First, and perhaps the least thoughtful is 'so what, it's only x number of Pokemon out of all Pals". This, frankly makes no sense. If you are against plagiarism broadly, then just one or two should be enough to say 'This is worth caring about'. This does not mean you immediately have to call for the game to be boycotted or discarded of course, but that it could be deserving of criticism. If, however, you don't care about plagiarism, then hiding behind 'well only x do it' feels asinine. If the number doesn't matter, why state it?
My Twitter: / jamesmbentley
Thank you, Abi for your contributions to editing, script editing, and thumbnail curation.
Abigail's Twitter: / abigaileshannon
Names haven't been blurred so as not to remove credit for people's work, thoughts, and posts. Please do not harass anyone referenced
Sources pastebin.com/GezHwTqQ
Негізгі бет Ойындар Are We Wrong About Palworld? (Palworld plagiarism, AI, Twitter discourse, and Asmongold)
Пікірлер: 1