No, it's simply untrue. Players only object against AI art assets. And only when they're painfully obvious. No one cares about how the code is written.
This reminded me of a conversation about AI I had with an artist last year. She was furious and cursing and saying how awful it is for stealing from artists, but then admitted she uses it for writing descriptions and marketing posts to sell her art.
Everyone is in it for themselves.
The world makes waay more sense when you really internalize that. It doesn't necessarily mean people are selfish, large groups often have aligned interests, but when an individuals interest alignment changes, then their group membership almost always changes too.
I'd be she has a bunch of pirated content and anti-copyright remarks from the golden age of piracy as well.
Sinix even explicitly says that AI is an IP theft machine but it's okay to use AI to generate 360 rotation video to market your 2D works[0].
To summarize this era we live in: my AI usage is justified but all the other people are generating slop.
[0]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z8fFM6kjZUk
[1]: Disclaimer: I deeply respect Sinix as an art educator. If it weren't him I wouldn't have learnt digital painting. But it's still quite a weird take of him.
Which I would point out isn’t necessarily hypocrisy on their part.
I can rage against guns and gun manufacturers for their negative effects on our nation and hate when they are used for monstrous evil, but also believe that police should have firearms and that the second amendment is important. It’s a tool. You can hate the way it’s made and marketed, and hate many of its popular use cases, and still think there are acceptable ways to use and market it without requiring a total abolition.