it's an (maybe the most) extreme example of something which is "gen AI" but not problematic
and as such a naive "rule" saying "no gen AI at all" is a pretty bad competition rule design
Reductio ad absurdum is a form of logic which takes an argument to its logical conclusion in order to demonstrate that it is absurd if it were to be taken on its face. Whether or not anyone applies it that way in reality is irrelevant.
That’s the point. No one cares about line smoothing algorithms but they lose their mind if it’s background textures or throwaway voice lines.
They're not equivalent...
> technically gen AI but have non of the ethical issues
No artists were previously smoothing lines for a living but they were painting textures and voice acting
Artists were previously drawing lines that didn't need to be smoothed for a living.
they ban any for of gen AI no matter the context
so as an extrema example if you artists used that line smoothing algorithm you game isn't qualified anymore
Who bans line smoothing algorithms? Do you have a link?
you are failing to get the point
it's an (maybe the most) extreme example of something which is "gen AI" but not problematic and as such a naive "rule" saying "no gen AI at all" is a pretty bad competition rule design
I get your point. I don't get who you're arguing with.
You're saying banning line smoothing algorithms for ethical reasons make no sense. I totally agree!
I'm wondering if this actually happens.
Reductio ad absurdum is a form of logic which takes an argument to its logical conclusion in order to demonstrate that it is absurd if it were to be taken on its face. Whether or not anyone applies it that way in reality is irrelevant.
I don't know! I guess we'll have to wait for next year's Indie Game awards to see which prizes they retract that time and why. This is dumb.