I got my $2.99 refund from Google Play so that’s cool. I did play the demo part though and did not notice any difference from other games. So was disappointed to have the cancellation. Plus either a coincidence or something but I had to reinstall the hosted games app because my library would no longer work after the game was auto removed. Like I said, I can’t prove the two are related but quite a coincidence.
Thank you for jumping on this so fast! It protects the integrity of those who create their own work, and in this case demonstrates how bad AI generated text can be. It was soul-less and so full of mistakes that should have been edited out I’m surprised it even got published! If it had been on Steam it would have been refunded within half an hour it was that bad.
A big thank you to the games writers who do their own work, create games from their own imaginations and do the hard work getting it into readable and playable form. AI can never replace you simply because of what you put into your creations. As players, we should never take you for granted again, and its going to give me a different perspective when I leave a rating on other websites.
18 Likes
i wonder, if people work with Ai to create an interactive work, and use the Ai as a tool.
Is this wrong ? is this can be copywright by COG (Ai dev by or mod by the writer ) ?
Basically nothing AI gen can be in a published HG work so it depends what you mean. If the AI has written anything it’s not ok. If you want to use AI for brainstorming ideas, background research, temporary WIP pics etc then that is allowed, but I don’t think this is what you’re asking about?
14 Likes
if it’s the mix of both, human and Ai 
That what i want to ask about. Ai are just tools like a note pad, if this mix is done well is impossible to see the work of an Ai. So i wonder then will it be publish by HG ?
1 Like
No.
11 Likes
Writing is writing. You put yourself and use your imagination sweat and tears.
Press a button to make a machine just puke out a random number of words extracted from the work of a myriad of humans.
THAT IS NOT WRITING.
it is like saying oh if I ride an bike with motor in a normal bike carrera It is okay if nobody sees me.
What I am really disappointed is with the big percentage of people that think is okay writers doesn’t write at all. And a machine just put a randomly assigned number of words until something not too bixarre appear.
Art is dead. Truly are and I notice today. That a big percentage of audience don’t respect art and writers to point they will choose a random button to do whatever instead.
17 Likes
Ai aren’t capable of simple things like write few words, so a book is impossible and let not get into writing games. Human thinking are more complexe than putting “random” things together.
Like the intergalactic book of hitchhiker says on the cover in big letters “Don"t panic !” that won’t happen. 
But we will see writing of Ai with “supevisor” in game.
1 Like
Regardless of ethical concerns, the use of AI to write a game or create the art assets for it is a legal issue (at least in the United States) as mentioned early on in the thread
So while you can technically write a choicescript work with the use of AI, Choice of Games, Hearts Choice and Hosted Games will not publish it.
9 Likes
The person who just pushes buttons from a machine can be many things. BUT THEY WILL NEVER BE A WRITER
The fact many people are okay with writers not writing, painters not painting music don’t do music…
It is like doing chocolate and using coffee instead of cocoa
16 Likes
Learning that this game was made using AI (to whatever extent) sort of validates how I felt playing through the demo. It was just falling a bit flat for me in places, though I suppose that could still be unrelated.
7 Likes
AI has been developed by stealing the work of creative people, whether artwork or the written word. It can NEVER be OK to use it for a book or a game or a term paper, because at best its plagiarism and at worst its theft. Apart from that, most countries are legislating against it because it has broken copyright and used the work of people who did not give permission for their work to be used and the companies that have developed it have not acknowledged the right of the authors or creators of the stolen work they used to develop it to be recognised as theirs, and have not had permission nor paid royalties. Its neither ethically nor legally desirable to allow unrestricted use of the work created by other people.
26 Likes
There’s potentially a problematic area here, so long as there’s no definition of what “created by a human” actually means.
E.g. if i take a drawing i’ve made and run it through a set of filters in Photoshop to give it a different look, does it mean the Photoshop created the drawing? I don’t think anyone would really claim it. But then, per analogy, if i take the same drawing and run it through AI-assisted filter to give it a different look… does it suddenly lose all copyrights because it’s “created by AI”? Or is it still recognized as original work? Here, i suspect, you’ll get quite a few different answers. It also raises a question whether this is “AI generated content” or “AI processed content”, and whether COG makes such distinction, or treats anything with AI-driven work anywhere in the pipeline as the former.
3 Likes
Has specifics in the link. The main points that stuck out to me are:
In the case of works containing AI-generated material, the Office will consider whether the AI contributions are the result of “mechanical reproduction” or instead of an author’s “own original mental conception, to which [the author] gave visible form.” 24 The answer will depend on the circumstances, particularly how the AI tool operates and how it was used to create the final work.25 This is necessarily a case-by-case inquiry.
For example, when an AI technology receives solely a prompt 27 from a human and produces complex written, visual, or musical works in response, the “traditional elements of authorship” are determined and executed by the technology—not the human user.
Based on the Office’s understanding of the generative AI technologies currently available, users do not exercise ultimate creative control over how such systems interpret prompts and generate material. Instead, these prompts function more like instructions to a commissioned artist—they identify what the prompter wishes to have depicted, but the machine determines how those instructions are implemented in its output.
In other cases, however, a work containing AI-generated material will also contain sufficient human authorship to support a copyright claim. For example, a human may select or arrange AI-generated material in a sufficiently creative way that “the resulting work as a whole constitutes an original work of authorship.” Or an artist may modify material originally generated by AI technology to such a degree that the modifications meet the standard for copyright protection.
This falls into speculation to CoG’s motives/thought process but, since it very much is a case-by-case basis at this point, its probably easier to not publish anything AI produced than fall into legal grey area.
Its possible everything could turn out fine legally, its also possible that the work could be determined to be AI produced. As a smaller company, its probably preferable for them to not take that risk, especially given issues in the past with third party websites stealing published games.
11 Likes
A lot of filters are not AI. If you created the base drawing and used a filter over the top, then you have an “enhanced” drawing where all the potential influences, permissions and copyright requirements are known. (But it should be noted some photographic comps in particular expressly forbid this kind of manipulation so YMMV.)
What is this filter and how was it trained. If you look at how the images created with them can be used and copyrighted it may give you some idea. For example some AI assisted filters do nothing but help deblur images. Others will make an entire professional looking image loosely based off a 3year old’s scribble and have likely been trained like the text to image AI generators. And everything in between.
If an AI assisted generator significantly shifts the appearance of your image into something different, IMO it’s crossed the line from “assisting” to “creator”.
20 Likes
Thank you for having conviction against AI generated …things… I would never knowingly want to support anyone that used AI engines to butcher and Frankenstein together some drivel instead of taking their time seeing what They could create by their own minds, inspirations, and hands through hard work. What you make on your own is an achievement. I support artists, writers, Creators, Not Lazy, Mooching, Shameless Thieves.
14 Likes
It’s a shame to hear it; I was looking forward to playing the game. Hopefully, no other authors attempt this seeing the result.
I wonder how one would go about filtering for code generated by AI, however. The process for catching AI art and text seems more obvious to me, but trying to check for AI code would be a lot like trying to prove someone used AI for their assigned mathematics equations, or am I missing something?
2 Likes
Hard to explain but theres a way written english flows and all the english in this story flows strangely
ESL can have a similar thing but it’s not as noticeable
1 Like
I’m pretty good at spotting ESL, actually, but then I have more practice with that.
And English wasn’t this author’s first language and I went in knowing that, so maybe that’s why it never occurred to me that something was wrong: the English was flowing strangely, but I attributed that to the author being not quite fluent.
9 Likes
THAT is the issue I was trying to get at with my earlier comment. Entire books, including cover art, ripped off by AI and sold as original works. It’s happening primarily in a few, easily ignored (for now) categories, but it is going to spread, and keep spreading if nothing is done to prevent it.
4 Likes