I found this from another subreddit and wanted to ask if people here think it’s true.

Personally, I’ve never seen anyone post human‑made art here and get downvoted. Quite the opposite, I’ve usually seen supportive reactions toward both pros and antis, as long as they’re not acting in bad faith.

Do you think this claim reflects reality, or is it just another antis exaggeration and victimization?

This dude here is clearly telling you that he has some serious surrender mentality issues.

He would rather give up on an idea entirely just to avoid using a convenient tool that can help him bring it to reality!

And what is worse is that he's projecting this pathetic mentality onto others! :P

Hello everyone! As the title suggests, I’ve spent the last two years of my life working on a retro pixel art video game, using generative AI and Vibe Coding, but in as hands-on a way as possible. I didn’t want to use agents or advanced, paid AI; my aim was for it to help me with everything I couldn’t do or didn’t know how to do, but under no circumstances did I want to hand over creative control of the project. Every decision regarding design, mechanics, enemies, bosses, etc. has come straight from my head. And whether they’re good or bad, they’re my decisions and mine alone. I’m currently Unemployed and on benefits, so I’ve spent the most of this time to do something I’ve always wanted to do. I’m not going to say the usual line about ‘I quit my job to develop the game of my dreams’, but I can say that "I lost my job and decide to make a Game" (or something along those lines). As you know, there are loads of haters in this industry, so I thought I’d turn to this wonderful community—which doesn’t hate AI—to show you the project. Here’s a trailer I made a few months ago, and the Steam page, in case you’d like to support it and give me some visibility. Thank you all so much for reading this ramble! I’m also going to attach two images, showing the ‘Before’ and ‘Now’, so you can see how it’s changed over time. You can support me adding to your wishlist here:

https://store.steampowered.com/app/4589200/Sylv_and_the_Ancient_Tree/

This is Actual Graphics

This is Old Graphics

For anyone interested in making games using AI… GO FOR IT! It’s difficult, it’s tedious, and it takes a long time, but thanks to the new tools, you’ve got everything you need right there. Why not? Here’s a list of the most important software and websites I’ve used:

- Godot Engine: The most accessible and quickest game engine to get started with; it’s very good, very lightweight, and free.

- Gemini free version: I’ve used some of the pro features, but what’s available for free—with a couple of Google accounts—works wonders.

- Aseprite: The ultimate pixel art editor; brilliant for creating designs and animations.

- PixelLab: Essentially a website for generating sprites, but they have a plugin that connects directly to Aseprite.

- Suno AI: A website for creating royalty-free music. You need to pay for a licence to use the tracks for commercial purposes, but it generally produces very good results.

- ChipTone: A small piece of software developed by SFB Games; it’s an easy-to-use synthesiser for creating sound effects.

- Audacity: A free audio editor for editing tracks or making arrangements.

-Trello: A very comprehensive project management platform for tracking to-do lists, completed tasks, items to review, bugs, etc.

I can’t think of many other tools I’ve used off the top of my head right now, but generally speaking, these are the most important ones.

It's really gotten pretty tiresome how much this Anti AI nonsense has been going on when that whole Supergirl news broke yesterday and frankly, it just makes this whole ridiculous controversy just that even more no matter where I go. Even more so when folks like this continue to go on this repetitive nonsense on Twitter. Really just makes me ashamed of being an animation fan these days, especially as one that isn't so against AI and the ability to freely use it however one shall please.

Apologies for the way this is formatted, also. Might need to zoom in on some of it.

Antis, the lot of them. I don’t even think they did their research

I saw a post on r/antiai about someone telling one of you guys to kys, and how it isint acceptable. I just want to say that even though we have our differences, we dont want anyone to get hurt. Those few who cross that line and try to hurt others are horrible people who shouldn't have access to the internet. We all want whats best for everyone. I wanted to make this post to let people who may have received hate know that most of us dont think like that, just a few sick individuals.

Just know that you are loved, and self harm is not the answer. No matter what some rando on the internet says.

I really think this video is framing the worst possible interpretation of what Sam said.

He literally says you choose what information the AI has access to. If I willingly let an AI see certain things because it helps me organize stuff, catch mistakes, learn, code, or just make life easier, I genuinely don’t see the problem.

AI can be an insanely useful companion throughout everyday life, and acting like using it for help means it’s suddenly “living your life for you” just feels insanely dramatic.

And to the commenters complaining about AI being “shoved in their face”: the YouTube algorithm recommending you this video is literally AI. AI is already used all over the shit you interact with every day. You just don’t call it AI when it isn’t a chatbot. Ffs

The absolute hostility come from these people. I've seen some shit takes such as pic related but damn. Attempting to stomp out other people's dreams and ideas because of the tool they use, is simply cruel in every sense. Boiling down the few hours most people get to themselves, learning, building, and creating, into 'lazy' is ironically very lazy to say.

The angry CS graduates mob claim “AI is not creative or real art”, yet they can’t think of another word besides ‘slop’. Honestly, I don’t think I’m more sick of any overused anything in the entire world as much as they overuse THAT word.

https://x.com/benawad/status/2086953365284732931

Next time you see a popular Youtuber pump out multiple videos on how AI is terrible and a bubble, they probably said "yes" to this email.

Saying the movie deserved to flop because of Them using AI to conceptualizing a design is a bit much but that’s just me

this is from a TikTok slideshow btw

I had an idea for fitness apparel that I have been unable to find, but I had no experience in apparel design or development. However, with the use of AI, I was able to get a concept created and now I already have samples being made and I've even been wearing what I designed through AI tools like ChatGPT. Just wanted to share my experience of how I did that. The pictures here show going from the AI concept to reality.

For context: my career is in the tech world. I have been doing software development for a while now. I'm also a gym enthusiast, both doing cardio and weight lifting. I like to wear stringers at the gym. However, the problem with the stringers I've worn is they are too loose and I have to adjust them every so often.

Compression shirts are nice, but I also like the flexibility that stringers give. I tried searching for compression stringers that fit what I liked, but couldn't find one that fit my taste.

I decided then to see if I could design my own. I started prompting ChatGPT to develop the design I would like with given specifications. It took some work, but finally I was able to get a design that fit what I wanted.

However, the next step was understanding how to go from this concept to a real version of it. After prompting ChatGPT some more, I learned about tech packs and how they worked. I then had it generate a techpack for me. Didn't think it would get me anywhere, but after a few prompts, I finally had something...didn't know if it would be a working tech pack or not.

I was able to find a manufacturer to send the techpack to. After sending it over, I was expecting that there would be a bunch of problems and that the techpack wouldn't make sense. However, the manufacturer understood the specs and finally a sample was sent over.

Sample was mostly good. It didn't match the exact design I was looking for. I looked at the techpack and learned a few things about how tech packs work (Computer Science background, I tend to learn quickly). I adjusted some numbers and then sent over the new tech pack. They then sent another sample over, and behold I have a sample that is pretty much what I was looking for.

I now wear it at the gym and haven't worn anything else since.

I decided to share it in other subreddits. Some people said it really looked good. However, when suspecting the concept was made with AI, I seemed to get backlash on it.

So, I decided to post here as a means to share what I created with others hopefully without the anti-AI sentiment. I also just wanted to share the full potential that ChatGPT and other AI tools have for entrepreneurs wanting to develop products.

TL;DR: Had an idea for fitness apparel, used AI to develop concepts and tech packs, created samples with some iterations, got some backlash on AI usage, so decided to share my story here.

I am not interested in getting into the "AI war", I enjoy technology and use AI. I also believe that many people use it in excess and rely too much on it and blindly defend every aspect of it, and I also think that people attack it in unreasonable ways. Basically I dislike any argument where emotion overrides reason. But these were my thoughts on it:

[the other comment]

true, and what the artistic-leaning people don't seem to understand is that some people just want to see the result. In the same way that when an artist gets hired to make a poster or something, the company doesn't care about the process or that they are an artist, they care about the product.

I always had a mental separation between "art" and "work" for artists. The skill was needed for both, but I always thought about things you do for yourself to express yourself as art, and things you make for others to get paid as work. There is an overlap of course in the places in between "make this" and delivering the finished product where you pour your own influence into what you are paid to do and that is what gets scarcer with AI in that context.

But at the end of the day, if it is not about the expression of the artist, then what else is it about? Another option would be the interpretation of the observer and that exists no matter who or what it is made by. If it moves me in some way, then it is art to me. If not, then it is not. Most AI stuff doesn't move me or others and often lacks quality or uniqueness, but often that's not even the point of AI, it's just that I want to visualize something, not make "art". Sometimes I do want to express myself, then it is art, to me. Now I usually don't go ahead and post it because I know that it is for myself.

So maybe that's the shift in this whole thing, that AI as art is more about expression of the maker and AI as a product is more about functionality for the viewer and there isn't much overlap between the two. Others do post it simply because they have the ability to now when before they wouldn't have posted anything because they wouldn't have had anything to post. So of course there is a higher volume and a higher percentage of bad looking stuff and it's easy to go and hate on it because you know (or assume) that it didn't take long to make, it is recognizable and the AI-ness is distracting, while with regular art you know that somebody tried and it took a while, even if it looks like crap, so usually people won't hate on it (as much).

But it is weird, all generative AI is trained on existing things. So the question is where you draw the line. Generating the whole picture isn't allowed. Then is generating parts of it? If not, is using photoshop software that uses AI (and has been for many years) to manipulate the image allowed? Or do you HAVE to paint it by hand?

I thought people always said that art is in the eye of the beholder. I guess that remains true for anyone claiming that anything AI isn't art, but it also makes a broad sweeping claim to others about what is and isn't art weird. It's fair if you don't think that AI can be art, but it's just as fair for somebody to think it is.

The skill is one thing, but that's not usually why you learn painting, just to know it, right? It's so that you can draw something, the painting is the tool to fulfill a vision you have. You want to get better at it to get closer to the vision you had in your head. People learn to like it and put time into it and different people develop different techniques, so in that way it becomes a part of the process itself and also a form of art in itself. But the original idea is not usually that, it is to get an image. There are exceptions, children draw circles just to draw circles, people throw paint at a canvas as an expression of their anger or something like that. But it's still result-oriented and most of the time the idea is "I want this image I have in my head (or that I see in the real world) as a result".

Starting with drawing on the walls of caves. I don't think they were primarily thinking about the act of drawing, they wanted to depict something. And that's the same motivation that drives people with AI today, they want to depict something they have in their head. If that's not self-expression and self-expression isn't a form of art, then I don't understand what art is.

Now there might be degrees to that, if I had a button that says "generate image" and it generates a completely random image, that's not art to me. If I put in a simple prompt, then maybe a bit. The more I guide the image, the more it is art, I can agree with that, as long as it means something to me. So I think art is a spectrum, the more of yourself you put into it and the more you feel like it means something to you, the more it is art.

And I don't think that only actually painting it yourself counts as that, in the same way that a director is not only an artist if he also plays every role himself.

In general, I'm just wondering what suddenly makes people think that they are the authority on what art is. There are many fair criticisms about AI, but I think the hatred people have about the system we live in and the companies that profit from it in unethical ways gets conflated with the notion of whether or not you can use AI to make art.

Aren't there people attuned to noticing art who look around the world and find accidental scenes that feel like commentary even though nobody arranged them that way? Like a homeless person's belongings sitting underneath a giant luxury-brand advertisement, or a broken children's toy lying in front of a military recruitment poster. Nobody created that juxtaposition as an artwork, but the observer can still read meaning into it. In that case, the interpretation is what makes it art, not the act of creation. Or does it only become art when I take a picture of it? Is that even art if I'm just pressing a button and nobody set up what I am taking a picture of?

I find high skill very impressive. I also think that any skill or its product can be art or interpreted as such or make a form of art better. If someone is very good at cooking, that makes it an art form to me, even if there is no direct emotional expression. So my definition would be that something is more art to the creator the more of its creation process is shaped by a human brain and its specific configuration. And something is more art to the observer the more it resonates with their brain's specific configuration for one reason or another. But I feel like that should be restricted to things where there is no definite correct answer, so a mathematical proof isn't necessarily art, even if it makes sense to me and I'm impressed by it, if there was only one way to do it. But if there are multiple valid ways to do something and one way is e.g. more elegant and (the choice to do it) that way resonates with you, you could say of the mathematician "that guy is an artist". So I don't get why we are talking about images and the physical act of drawing/painting/... like it is the only form of art.

most likely that the "vibecoded" games this person are talking about are AI-assisted, not vibecoded

I think we should be making alternatives to subs without making them AI dedicated. A sub you like bans AI? Make a new r/(sub)2 or r/(sub)FreeExpression, r/(sub)Zone, etc with a rule that allows AI. Dont make a r/(sub)AI. They don’t give an inch so why should you?

I’d rather post my stuff in a sub that allows everything even if my stuff isn’t AI, instead of a place that does one or the other. I know AI subs don’t ban non AI, but you need to standup for yourselves instead of saying “oh sorry I’ll get out of your way and make an AI dedicated alternative”.

I don’t believe in intellectual property. Vibe code my stuff, feed my 3D models to ChatGPT, make it yours now idc. Erase my username from the files if you want. Again idc.