Greetings Saviors!
We have made an announcement regarding ‘Celebrating the 20th anniversary of imcGAMES’.
You can check the details at our official website from the following link.
Link : https://treeofsavior.com/news/?n=2763
Thank you as always for your continued support, enthusiasm and love for Tree of Savior.
Sincerely,
IMC Staff
1 Like
That’s some awesome art ngl 
1 Like
I can’t help feeling this as a subtle stab at the community that follows the game and usually generates fanarts and content…
Well, I don’t deny that this can be useful to you, but it’s already a bit of a VERY hated technology. So in the future we will have npcs, event dialogues and things like that generated by AI? Will the game’s own art no longer be from wonderful artists but generated by AI? Just the art of this game was one of the most remarkable things it has. But hey, you may be seeing it from the most fatalistic side possible.
2 Likes
Thanks for the x2 thurible hard raid additional reward vouchers. The 27 characters on Fedimian that can actually use those will appreciate… 
It’s only hated by people who are struggling to accept reality. I genuinely feel for artists, but that’s like complaining that automation put miners out of a job*. It’s technological advancement and sooner or later everyone reskills. I personally love it. I’m a software dev and generative language models like Chat-GPT have made my job 1000x easier. I’ve also produced a fair amount of art using Midjourney.
IMO the only thing that matters in the end is quality; if IMC can produce higher-quality content at a faster rate due to the assistance of AI then there’s really nothing to complain about (beyond sour grapes / vested interests). It’s just another productivity tool. Whether the end result is good comes down to the conscientiousness of the creator. Lazy devs will be lazy regardless and so whether or not they have AI as a tool really has little bearing on the quality of what they produce.
TL;DR: I don’t care about the how as long as it works out. My condolences to any artists affected.
*I should mention that I think there will always be a need for artists. Many artists have their own unique style, and even if they don’t, high-level artists have more control over the fine details than stable diffiusion ever will; people will generally just settle for something “close enough”, whereas an artist can be more deliberate.
I can’t believe imc been 20 years yet they only have like 2 games that at least reach out glimpse of international audience
1 Like
as long as peeps dont unethically take samples for the AI to work on, i don’t have a problem. but more often than not, that isn’t the case ‘w’;;
there is a difference when a technological advancement is identified as a tool, or an exploit. and it’s easy to determine which is which, by what becomes of the individual who use them owO
1 Like
I agree to an extent, but where do you draw the line when it comes to unethical samples? Can those artists honestly say they didn’t use reference pictures to draw their own work, or in the process of “learning” how to draw? Why should it be different for AI learning?
Ultimately, everyting a human creates was copied. They may have broken it apart and reassembled it in such a way that it’s unrecognisable, but they didn’t create it from nothing. People have always been okay with this as long as it isn’t a lazy copy of the source material, so it’s arguably quite hypocritical to complain about the process of AI training; those same artists absorbed all the copyrighted work they ever glanced at and incorporated that into their memories. After AI has “learned” from tens of thousands of samples, it can’t be said to be copying any particular piece if we were to use the same standards we apply to a human.
I think (as always) it’s humans encountering a new technology and being forced to re-evaluate their preconceptions. The last big shift was “is copying and pasting stealing?”, which expanded on the concept of intellectual property rights. Now it’s “is AI sampling copyright violating intellectual property rights, even though artists do precisely that whenever they glance at a new picture and imprint it into their memory? Why should learning models not get a free pass when artists do? Should it not be fine if the end product is sufficiently different?”
Here’s a good essay on the subject that pinpoint the key differences among using references and learning through them and what the so called AI art does, which is elaborated theft.
1 Like
Thanks! I’ll take a look 
1 Like
an AI “learning” from samples while the prompter claims the product to be their own , is not the same as someone learning from a reference or artstyle ‘w’
here’s something i’d like you to think about
if both the prompter and the artist were only given the most basic tool to create something
i highly doubt the prompter is able to produce something equal to the product they are capable of with the use of AI art
as the skills they learned from prompting is very different from the actual skills needed to create such results
this is basically similar to a player who got their hack tools shut off, and doesn’t have the skills they normally display when they use such exploits
the bigger question is why play the game at all when you’re just going to cheat? this isn’t really about innovation, it’s just someone taking the fun out of things, and eventually the game will lose its purpose, needless to say, its relevance
the obvious answer is basically social acceptance. people will do anything just to be good at something on which society perceive to be of value. it is just unfortunate that digital art on a specific aesthetics has to be one of them
it’s basically someone engaging into a loveless relationship for the sake of getting into one because society dictates that it’s the norm to be in a relationship whether it fits that person or not
i also hate to break it to you, our current AI technology is still far away from functioning like a real human brain. believe it or not, the human brain is about 30x that of the current existing supercomputer
and i highly doubt these software used in AI art is even a fragment of those super computers. so i wouldn’t really consider those to be “learning”
1 Like