Concerned about the potential use of AI on loading screen artwork

TenebrisEquitem · July 29

Despite not being included in the patch notes, Patch v11.1.3 included changes to a couple of base game loading screens (which were drawn by Jeremy Fenske), namely Auridon and Hunting Grounds.

Presumably, the intention was to upscale these images, but this wasn't just a simple upscaling job since it modified several elements of the artwork and these modifications stand out.
They stand out to an extent that I think it's fair to assume that AI generation was used on these.

For both Auridon and Hunting Grounds, the entire top part of the images is completely modified.
For Auridon's artwork, it appears the bottom section of the image was extended.
For Hunting Grounds, the Bosmer's face was changed.

So the simple question is: was AI used on these images?

CoolBlast3 · July 29

Reeks of AI image generation to me. Nonsensical artifacts and "paint overs" all over the place in both loading screens

Morvan · July 29

Really sad to see that, they clearly used AI to expand the original picture, hopefully it won't make it to the live patch.

AltmerGF · July 29

Sets a concerning precedent, especially on the back of all the layoffs. There's so much great art made by real artists in this game, it'd be a shame to see it become another AI slop mill.

Aliyavana · July 29

Oh noooooooooo. Noooooooooooooo. This makes me worried as eso always had great art.

Inari Telvanni · July 29

I really am hoping that it's just a little sloppy overpainting. But if it is indeed AI, I'll be very disappointed.

Morvan · July 29

I think I just found why they updated those pictures, if you pay attention to the old versions, they used stamps to duplicate the branches on top to fill the whole image, it was lazy and they likely only did that because the old UI had black frames that would make much of that hidden.

With the new UI, we lost the black frames and it's now much obvious that they used a stamp, hence why they had to update those pictures.

If they used AI or not for the new ones is another matter though.

tomofhyrule · July 29

Really poor form, considering the recent news about Microsoft’s surprise job cuts and the reports that it’s because MS is pivoting to more AI…

Pity. If only they had planned a UI that didn’t require resizing the existing art. Like, I don’t know… the one we had in the first place?!

Vaqual · July 30

I hope it is clear to all decisions makers that this is not what people are paying for.

Kashya_Vulano · July 30

The immediate layoffs followed by even more obvious AI is a bad taste in the mouth that nobody wants. I know the answer is greed, but I can't seem to understand why they continue to shove this down the throats of online communities who are already generally positioned towards disapproval of AI content.

This isn't the first time they've been using AI in artistic material lately, and it'll undoubtedly not be the last, but it's insulting to continue this cat-and-mouse game of seeing just how much you can get away with before the consumer of your product finally leaves.

Thumbless_Bot · July 30

The artists who make, you know, actual art, will now have the job of analyzing ai generated, um, images, to remove things that look like, well, Ai generated images. They'll get paid the same, or probably less. Or they will protest.

This is like Willy Wonka where the dad loses his job only to get a new job fixing the machine that took his job.

It's nothing more than another example of the sad dystopian, Biff Tannen, alternate timeline we are living in.

MincMincMinc · July 30

A+ catch on this one, was it noted in the patch notes?

For AI and gaming, the plus side is that smaller indie dev companies will be able to accomplish much more. Like the ai asset generation tools could be huge for a small high performance dev team to spit out an mmo. AI voice acting as well. Imagine a point where dialogue with NPCs requires you to type and ask questions to find out info

SilverBride · July 30

I wouldn't have even noticed the changes if it hadn't been pointed out, and even then I had to look hard to find any differences. I don't know what indicates that AI was used to update the pictures but I don't see anything that would make me think that.

Marto · July 30

Really disappointing, and really quite unnecessary.

The original images have enough detail at the edges. They're already a painterly style, they're not supposed to be perfect.

If ZOS did this because the original images may be too low-res for modern 4K displays, I'd rather they just scale them up with a conventional image editing software.

Don't make unnecessary edits like this. It's disrespectful to the artistry of your devs, disrespectful to consumers who pay to support development, and it cheapens your product and brand as a whole.

Sluggy · July 30

tomofhyrule wrote: »

Really poor form, considering the recent news about Microsoft’s surprise job cuts and the reports that it’s because MS is pivoting to more AI…

Pity. If only they had planned a UI that didn’t require resizing the existing art. Like, I don’t know… the one we had in the first place?!

It's an industry-wide thing. And I'll tell you now. They don't care about your perception or opinion of it as the customer. If you, as a worker are not doing it, you as a worker will not be one for long. It doesn't even matter if it's speeding up or slowing down the results you get. Improving them or not. You'd better be doing it or else!

On a side note I mentioned a few years ago the evidence of quality going down in the loading screens. They were clearly just starting to use screenshots and applying filters to them to make them appear like paintings a little. Someone I used to play with that was a dev himself back in the 90s gave me a very useful tip: "Always look at the art. It's the first sign." Especially for details like UI and load screens. When they start cutting on that you know they are winding down production. This is exactly why I've been convinced they were going into the long tail starting at least two years ago if not even sooner. And I don't see any evidence that recent restructurings are going to change anything about that.

xencthlu · July 31

This kind of slapdash reeks of contempt. For the original art, for us as players, for the game. "Good enough. No one's going to notice or care."

We're noticing. We care. Pay a real artist to expand the image. The quality of ESO's art is one of its selling points. If you're cutting corners there, you're not "trimming the fat," you're cutting out the bloody heart.

Steffwulf · August 4

I ressurected my forum account that's been inactive for at least two years, just to comment on this.

In a world where we're having AI shoved down our throats, it's hard to give the benefit of the doubt to this situation. It reaks of yet another example of a big corporation (I'm blaming Microsoft on this one) trying to slide AI works in without saying anything... and getting caught.

I really hope there's at least some kind of response to this. These conversations need to be had.

loosej · August 4

I might be remembering this wrong, but didn't Steam add a requirement for games to disclose if and how they use gen ai? I checked the store page for eso and there's no mention of it there.

Malprave · August 4

This doesn't seem like something AI would be used for. And I feel it's more likely that the artist themselves changed the artwork after it's original inclusion in the game's data files.

It's not unusual at all for artists to modify their own work after returning to it sometime later with fresh eyes.

One example seems like the original image was cropped initially and then more of the image was included at the later date.

Even if this isn't the work of AI, AI is certainly going to be used. I don't think it's going to replace the eye of the artist though. Show me an AI that can paint like John Singer Sargent and then I'll believe it.

Lalothen · August 4

As someone who has had to transition from using PS & Blender for all work-related image, scene & video creation, to a mixture of traditional+AI and AI-only content (the company I work for is keen to demonstrate how AI makes creativity more accessible to our community), and has been working with AI for the past three years.... whoever did those edits either doesn't know how to prompt out-paints/paint-overs properly, doesn't have an eye for detail, or had to do a "one and done" because of severe time constraints.

MincMincMinc wrote: »

For AI and gaming, the plus side is that smaller indie dev companies will be able to accomplish much more. Like the ai asset generation tools could be huge for a small high performance dev team to spit out an mmo. AI voice acting as well. Imagine a point where dialogue with NPCs requires you to type and ask questions to find out info

I support a solo dev who is building a multi-faceted Discord RPG game, and he's using AI to both help him with trickier aspects of the code, and incorporating it into NPCs so they can travel autonomously around the game buying, selling, interacting, etc in different, evolving ways. Some of the things he's managed are pretty mindboggling to be honest - including a space travel system where the location of the solar system's planets & current major comets are accurately mapped in realtime via cartesian coordinates - and despite the fact that he's a damned good coder, I doubt he could've produced some of the things he has without the assistance of AI.

Malprave wrote: »

Even if this isn't the work of AI, AI is certainly going to be used. I don't think it's going to replace the eye of the artist though. Show me an AI that can paint like John Singer Sargent and then I'll believe it.

This is what creatives need to understand and embrace. There's a lot of (justifiable) fear at the moment regarding the future of peoples' artistic careers, but frankly I see it as an opportunity to reestablish the value of "created by a person". Freelance artists have been constantly undervalued for decades (the percentage of people who have expected me to spend hours of my time creating a piece for them for the equivalent of £1-2 an hour, or worse for "exposure", is ridiculous); now is the time to change that, and there's a plethora of strategies artists can use to endear potential buyers/clients to their hand-crafted work.

CalamityCat · August 4

That what I'd call some really sloppy editing. I'm guessing someone cheaper was asked to do the work and the inevitable low quality result has occurred. I'm not sure I'd fully blame AI, it looks like some bad clone tool use also happened in some areas. It also comes down to lacking the "eye" to see the obvious flaws and the skills to put them right.

The sad thing is, a real artist with skill would have done this quickly and without needing AI. There are enough solid tools in modern art software that a job like this is straightforward.

Leia98 · August 4

@ZOS_Kevin if you guys are *actually* using AI ''art'' in your game, I am not paying you a single more dollar ever, just to let you know. I hope this is a misjudgment and will be fixed immediately.

Kappachi · August 4

does it matter if it was? AI is getting better and better with each passing day. Soon much game development/assets/etc will be controlled by AI. I've been using AI daily since 2018 and if things are so minor and unnoticeable then it really doesn't matter when they can put the work in elsewhere where it matters.

Leia98 · August 4

Kappachi wrote: »

does it matter if it was? AI is getting better and better with each passing day. Soon much game development/assets/etc will be controlled by AI. I've been using AI daily since 2018 and if things are so minor and unnoticeable then it really doesn't matter when they can put the work in elsewhere where it matters.

Yes, it does, because people justifiably want to enjoy real art made by actual human beings, instead of copy-pasted AI slop.

Kappachi · August 4

Leia98 wrote: »

Kappachi wrote: »

does it matter if it was? AI is getting better and better with each passing day. Soon much game development/assets/etc will be controlled by AI. I've been using AI daily since 2018 and if things are so minor and unnoticeable then it really doesn't matter when they can put the work in elsewhere where it matters.

Yes, it does, because people justifiably want to enjoy real art made by actual human beings, instead of copy-pasted AI slop.

can't find the "justification" when AI is just as good or even better when managed/used properly than much human art. Just have to know which ones to use and put in the work to use them properly.

Leia98 · August 4

Kappachi wrote: »

Leia98 wrote: »

Kappachi wrote: »

does it matter if it was? AI is getting better and better with each passing day. Soon much game development/assets/etc will be controlled by AI. I've been using AI daily since 2018 and if things are so minor and unnoticeable then it really doesn't matter when they can put the work in elsewhere where it matters.

Yes, it does, because people justifiably want to enjoy real art made by actual human beings, instead of copy-pasted AI slop.

can't find the "justification" when AI is just as good or even better when managed/used properly than much human art. Just have to know which ones to use and put in the work to use them properly.

I'm one of the few remaining people who believe art is about human expression and can only be created by sentient beings, not non-living, non-thinking robots that merely copy actual humans' work. You do you.

I hope Zos fixes this, or at least gives us an explanation as to how and why this happened, and I hope we are mistaken and this is not AI. @ZOS_Kevin I'm sorry for pinging a second time, but I am genuinely disappointed by this, and I request an explanation.

Ratzkifal · August 4

Kappachi wrote: »

Leia98 wrote: »

Kappachi wrote: »

does it matter if it was? AI is getting better and better with each passing day. Soon much game development/assets/etc will be controlled by AI. I've been using AI daily since 2018 and if things are so minor and unnoticeable then it really doesn't matter when they can put the work in elsewhere where it matters.

Yes, it does, because people justifiably want to enjoy real art made by actual human beings, instead of copy-pasted AI slop.

can't find the "justification" when AI is just as good or even better when managed/used properly than much human art. Just have to know which ones to use and put in the work to use them properly.

It isn't though. Ai art has never been better than human art. Of course not all human art is good but so long as there is an attempt, it's already better than Ai, which is just glorified plagiarism unless you trained your Ai exclusively on your own works (which is self-plagiarism).

You act as if cutting costs in the art department will somehow make the game better, but these things don't relate to each other. ESO doesn't need upscaled versions of old loading screens, so if you are making the argument that money is being wasted on human art, you can also reframe this as wasting resources and work hours on having Ai recreate images that were perfectly fine the way they were. Your argument has no legs to stand on.

Ratzkifal · August 4

@ZOS_Kevin You should probably look into this and then relay this to whoever is responsible.

I'm already not a fan of the Ui changes and preferred the way the old loading screens looked, so if you are feeling the need to "upscale" all the old artwork, then how about you don't use Ai and hire actual humans to create new loading screen art to match the new Ui - or you just don't mess with it in the first place.
Need I remind you of your policy that old art assets are not to be touched? We've had a whole drama about the Redguard armor style getting changed, to the point where the oldest crafting motifs in this game look very outdated now and Ancestral styles were added to resolve the issue without removing the old assets. Why does this not extend to loading screen artwork? Either someone clearly doesn't know how that "upscaling tool" works, which would be bad, or someone is trying to deceive customers by passing off Ai art as human art, which would also be bad.
Also consider that the EU has just passed another Ai act that requires transparency when it comes to Ai.

Source
So unless you want to be held liable in the EU in the future, you better get your act together now and put in some effort, or at least be honest whenever you are taking shortcuts and we (the customers) will be the judge of it.

Thanks for relaying this.

tsaescishoeshiner · August 4

Ratzkifal wrote: »

Need I remind you of your policy that old art assets are not to be touched? We've had a whole drama about the Redguard armor style getting changed, to the point where the oldest crafting motifs in this game look very outdated now and Ancestral styles were added to resolve the issue without removing the old assets. Why does this not extend to loading screen artwork?

The huge difference is because changing outfit pieces or furnishings would change people's characters. Updating a loading screen is far from the same thing lol (whether they've changed it for better of for worse). Compare it to the older zone refreshes, where they improved the assets in some basegame zones. There's no reason for a ban on changing any old asset, but changes to character models and housing builds can be upsetting to a look that people customized and might have even invested in.

Ratzkifal · August 5

tsaescishoeshiner wrote: »

Ratzkifal wrote: »

Need I remind you of your policy that old art assets are not to be touched? We've had a whole drama about the Redguard armor style getting changed, to the point where the oldest crafting motifs in this game look very outdated now and Ancestral styles were added to resolve the issue without removing the old assets. Why does this not extend to loading screen artwork?

The huge difference is because changing outfit pieces or furnishings would change people's characters. Updating a loading screen is far from the same thing lol (whether they've changed it for better of for worse). Compare it to the older zone refreshes, where they improved the assets in some basegame zones. There's no reason for a ban on changing any old asset, but changes to character models and housing builds can be upsetting to a look that people customized and might have even invested in.

It's more about the sentiment behind it. Sure, the updating of the base game zones or whenever a new player house is added to a zone could be argued is also a changing of assets if we want to be pedantic about it. Personally I don't mind them updating old art assets provided the newer assets are of higher quality. But then we quickly get into issues of personal taste and at that point changing older assets becomes a problem again. The loading screen artworks are being used as wallpapers and while the older version probably won't be deleted from the website to download (or maybe they will), I feel like there is a fundamental change of the work present if something human-made is turned into something that's (partially) made by Ai. Then it becomes a matter of taste again. ZOS can make as many Ai generated loading screens as they want - for new loading screens. And I'm sure we will be complaining about that as well. But I think a line is crossed when older artwork is being replaced by Ai slop. So that makes it comparable in my opinion, and that's why I brought up their policy.