/tech/ - Technology

>>27866
Except 3d assets are the equivalent of stock photos. Photocollaging has been a widely used technique for as long as photoshop has been around.

AI 3d asset generation has been around as well. You could kinda say photogrammetry assets are more or less automatically produced by the computer.

>SFM slop
there's a difference between using openly available assets and doing something interesing with them, versus trying to pass off said assets as your own work. Artists are showing what they're capable of and expressing ideas with clarity within their capacity, whereas asset flippers are property-owner-brained and want to trick people into paying them to make more of something they mostly didn't.

AI's whole point is imprecision. To set dress a prompt. The prompt is the art itself, and what the AI adds gives no further definition to the ideas being expressed.

Crying about "asset flips" is the property brained thing lol. Lmao. So giving way open source art is anti property but using them is? You guys just repeat what stupid shit you see idiot gaymers complain about in youtube comments and try to pass it off as a leftist critique just shoving in some meme words.

Also all games are "asset flips" nowadays. There is no need to reinvent the wheel each time for generic shit you can find anywhere. Kinda like how in a movie, if they wanted a sci fi robot making a smoothie in a scene, they might come up with an original costume for the robot, but not the blender, because building a blender that should look like a generic blender is pointless.

>>27870
Asset flips buy packs from the unity store. No one's calling using open source assets flipping.

>>27871
>Asset flips buy packs from the unity store. No one's calling using open source assets flipping.
Lol so paying the creator is what makes it haram? You guys are retarded.

>>27871
>>27871
>open source assets
And it's like you're criminally retarded to.
>an open source bitmap
Gaymer read a book.

>>27875
FYI 3D assets sold in stores aren't NFTs.

>>27874
you guys are being retarded. the problem isn't that buying assets is inherently bad, it's that 'asset flips' are usually incredibly basic in terms of gameplay and themes, they are slapped together quick for cash

>>27877
>you guys are being retarded. the problem isn't that buying assets is inherently bad, it's that 'asset flips' are usually incredibly basic in terms of gameplay and themes, they are slapped together quick for cash
Yes an "asset flip" is specifically supposed to refer to people who made tech demos that looked like a game then used that to get a bunch of preorders or kickstarter money with no intention of releasing an actual game. Dumbass gaymers extended that to mean any game that uses bought assets, when I can show you literally every AAA game does that in the year of our lord 2024.

>>27878
wheres the proofs? most of the time when I hear the term it is being used correctly

>>27879
Because it's an irrelevant fucking term. The assets have nothing to do with the fucking gameplay. It's a shitgame with OC assets, it's a shitgame with bought assets. What does that have to do with the game? Asset flipping is only relevant to talk about little hype trailers. Once an actual game is available to play it's not really relevant to discussion other than if they used the assets well and they created a cohesive art direction.

>>27880
you're being autistic lil bro. if the assets are cohesive and used well it wouldnt usually be considered an 'asset flip'

>>27873
If you make a game with open source assetn and take credit for having made the assets, it's easy to find out you lied about that.
If you make a game with purchased assets and take credit for having made the assets, it's slightly harder to find out, so you can sometimes get away with that.
If you are selling your game on the basis that it has good graphics, and that buying the game means you'll make more of those graphics when you have not actually demonstrated the capacity to do so, you're false advertizing.

>>27881
In relation to the OP retard. AI has nothing to do with stock content. Op is a retard.

>>27883
Or "sfm" or gary's mod we called it l.

>>27883
Personally I hope clipart makes a comeback

>>27869
>there's a difference between using openly available assets and doing something interesing with them, versus trying to pass off said assets as your own work.
I was referring to the niche being severely overcrowded because it's easier to animate in SFM than in, say, Blender. And if you shove pretty-looking models into the scene without making sure it has decent lighting or that the models don't clip through each other people will still eat it up, kinda like how they eat up AI art with inconsistent clothing, bad anatomy and a bland art style.
>>27869
>The prompt is the art itself, and what the AI adds gives no further definition to the ideas being expressed.
Sure. Maybe AI can only replicate the slop aspect of SFM and stock assets.

>>27866 (me)
Tbf this video is kinda mean to CryZenX here, they're clearly using stock assets purely for testing purposes. Their newer videos are much more impressive, even if these demos are probably optimized like shit so I don't think Nintendo should indeed "hire this man" to work on the graphics, not with their inferior hardware. Although they do seem to have indeed hired "this man," judging by the new Pokemon releases.

The song is funni tho.

>>27868
it's a bit expensive atm, since all the 3D asset gen models arrived at the point where the AI space is quickly entering its "enclosure" phase, it's ironically not cost effective to asset flip with genAI assets lol