How many games on BGA use AI "Art"?

[lefalaf]

Well yeah, a touch of hyperbole with the use of "mystery". I can guess at what it is meant to be, but...

If that one isn't obvious enough how about this:


Two drumsticks of different shapes (odd), situated vertically (odd), coming up from a pile of stones (?) and chunks of chocolate? tofu? under the sauce. And apparently it means heart/love as evidenced by the lines above. The wine pairing? Note: The fish card has lines that look like a fish, but this is the only other one with a recognizable shape that I've seen so far. But why not a drumstick in the swirl like the fish. The lines on the other cards just swirl randomly, although the coffee one sort of swirls up from the cup, so that may be a 3rd sensible one. But this is also a tell. A human would have been consistent. Heck even a human prompting and cleaning up the results should have kept prompting until they were consistent. Either they all should have shapes, and with meaning, in the swirly lines or they do not and just have random swirly lines.

It just doesn't logically work.

[lefalaf]

I also see the edge of the plate and glass have stray lines that make no sense to be there.

[nik592]

But drumsticks do tend to be different sizes IRL? I've heard people complain that artwork is unrealistic because everything is a nice, neat size. And situated vertically is not impossible, nor uncommon (as google images will tell me). Yes, the casserole thing at the bottom is a bit... iffy, but I still understand the concept. I know they're not stones, though I see why you say that. The heart swirl is a bit odd, and I'll give you the extra lines as being a bit weird too, but this could still just be art of lesser quality. I get that people are quick to call out overuse of AI, especially in creative spaces, but there have been people accused of AI in their work when it isn't too.

[Jellby]

It doesn't matter if it's AI or not. If it looks cheesy and fake and has unrealistic details (like the yellow piece of pepper in the bottom right is bent in a strange way with a very weird char line), the fact that it was created by a human (if that's the case) doesn't make it any better.

[nik592]

I don't disagree, it's not the best artwork, but it's not the first time I've seen subpar artwork on a board game either. If that puts you (or anyone else) off, so be it, the publishers need to wear that. But this thread is specifically about the apparent rise of games using AI art (which probably is true because AI is relatively new, but I'd want people to be careful about labelling art they don't like as "clearly AI").

[lefalaf]

This brings up another reason why gen-AI is bad - it places an extra burden on real artists to make sure their work doesn't accidentally look like, at least bad, AI output. I've seen this discussed in art forums.

Lots of things beyond art are now suspect too.

[fruktansvärt]

I would not think these examples are AI art. I would believe they're made by a human.
She just has a style you don't particularly care for.

Using real photos instead of illustrations? I don't think that would turn out well. It would just look like recepy cards.
Consider all the flak Terraforming Mars gets for the clip-art on their cards.

[tbhp]

That's capsicum (or bell pepper perhaps, depending on your locality). No mystery about it, that's what pieces of capsicum look like if you roast them on a grill.

That sounds like what AI would do though. It would dumbly reproduce what it looks like. But when humans create art of things, they try to make them look good. AI doesn't understand what looks good, so you get results like this that look gross and unappetizing.

Also bear in mind, if you happen to be wrong, you are talking about a person's artwork, and you're being quite harsh. I mean, you can say what you like, but not all game publishers can afford to hire top tier artists, and there is something to be said for less experienced artists to get their turn too.

The good thing is that an artist's financial value and their capacity to make good art don't have to be related. When you criticize someone's art, you aren't criticizing their social status. Anyone can make good or bad art. Artists understand that when they create work, it's going to be judged.

The real issue here is that the claims that it is AI are not sufficiently founded. Not that the art is being harshly judged.

[FrankJones]

True. I have no idea whether that is AI art or not. Someone said it isn't, and I have no reason to doubt that person.

All I know is, I am not a fan of the art. It looks as though it's trying for a simply style, maybe a bit like Tokaido. But there's just something off about it.

[Cappa]

They are lying. Or the "artist" lied to them.

A real artist wouldn't create this mystery vegetable, as just one example of nonsensical "art" on the cards:


The sausage card looks like a pile of poo, complete with stink lines.

etc

Yeah, I figured they were trying for grilled peppers, but that's a rather poor rendering of grilled peppers. A human would have made it more recognizable and not a misshapen blurry mess.

Even beyond the general gen-AI look and feel, many of the food cards have odd creations that are characteristic of gen-AI and not human art.

So its a mystery vegetable that you knew exactly what it was referring to? OK.