[vgatherps]

How is

> How do you justify using AI for your game art? I have thought about this, and couldn't justify it. I also know that I hold on to morals almost to a stubborn degree.

different from

> How do you justify using Blender for your game art? I have thought about this, and couldn't justify it. I also know that I hold on to morals almost to a stubborn degree.

Aside from a vague implication that it is immoral to use an AI tool instead of <some other tool> to generate your own game art?

[guitarlimeo]

I've thought about this, and it's true Blender allows you to take a lot of shortcuts to be creative, like displacement based on generated noise. It has made work faster, and probably cut some low paying modeling jobs, because those automated shortcuts it has do things better and faster.

The distinction is that it's a widely accepted tool, and you still need to devote time to learn to use it good enough for you to be able to make satisfying art. It's like a brush for a traditional painter, only in 3d. In another comment below I explained a bit more why I value the amount of work seen in art.

[phatskat]

I think an important distinction in good or poor quality AI art is similar to good or poor quality models made in Blender. A modeler can spend hours or days on a model; testing different cuts and resolutions and extrusions etc to get it just right. Similarly, the difference for AI generated assets will come down to how much time the prompt engineer will spend tuning their prompts, looking into different models, possibly training models for specific styles and outcomes, regenerating over and over again to get things just right.

On the other side, you have the modeler who barely sticks six rectangles together as a “human” and the AI art prompter who ships the first image they get back.

To me, neither is a moral issue. They both require using tools effectively.