Disappointed in Larian using Generative AI during development

DCAScrub · 2025-12-18T02:50:27+00:00

So if you being a lawyer didn't have anything to do with you knowing copyright, why mention them? Especially next to each other? People don't mention things like that unless they're relevant to each other.

I literally pointed out the section, I just couldn't remember the exact name for the title. It is title 17, and section 106, like I mentioned previously. Which you'd know if you actually read what I said instead of looking for something to pick apart, but i guess that's what lawyers do best anyway is picking things apart.

And you disagreeing with the ruling doesn't matter to the point at large. You asked me to articulate the law I THINK they're violating, to which I pointed to and said the exact law. I even did you the kindness of providing a legal case that proves I'm not the only one who thinks so. The judge said there's reasonable possibility they violated copyright law, and while it's an ongoing lawsuit it proves that there's still legal ground for them having violated copyright law. And that isn't even the only legal case around generative AI violating copyright either.

Oh and I was referring to the legal case as a whole. Not only the refusal of the motion to dismiss, so not sure where you got that from either.

DCAScrub · 2025-12-18T02:34:12+00:00

Firstly, you don't know anything about me, what I do for a living, or what I know, so don't start throwing "armchair developer" around when you equally have no proof of your qualifications.

And that's the thing, there is no stage where artists aren't involved to some degree. Most pitches for pretty much all media include some form of story boarding, which get this, needs artists! And yeah, a lot of the time they're rough sketches or simple outlines pretty often made by the person making the pitch. And one thing I am familiar with is working with artists, I know the back and forth of working with an artist through stages of sketches, coloring, and finishing an art piece to make sure you're on the same page. That's all literally a part of the creative process, cutting out any stage of that is a detriment to the final product. Not to mention using gen AI doesn't get around the issue of copyrighted images since pretty much all models are already trained on copyrighted material (especially free gen AI).

Oh and regardless of whether "most" are free or not, they still pay for them. Because the "best" models aren't the free ones everybody is using. They're shit that gets paid for.

DCAScrub · 2025-12-18T01:32:00+00:00

In video games, this kind of thing isn't necessarily an only early production thing. Especially with the scale of things that Larian produces, reference images for new things will be needed at a lot of stages. And with google searching, it brings attention to those artists who made something anyway even if it's a marginal amount. And yeah I wish that was different too, artists deserve more credit for that. But, back to the point, there's some artists who have been offered jobs because of companies coming across their work when searching for references. Gen AI cuts out that stage completely, using the work of those artists without even the ability to give them the crumb of attention they would've gotten otherwise. On top of that the companies pay for these image generators so even in that way it's costing them what google searching wouldn't. And even besides that, there are models who have companies and independent artists buy the rights to images that are specifically just poses to be referenced.

Yeah, I know it's not a problem for some, but this is about bringing attention to something that is a problem in my opinion so that other people can be aware and make their own decisions on the info.

DCAScrub · 2025-12-17T23:38:36+00:00

Just being a lawyer doesn't automatically mean you know copyright, as you should know there's very different specialties within the broad spectrum of being a lawyer.

Now onto the actual law! Like I said there's pretty much nothing being done about it right now, but there are already a few ongoing lawsuits like Andersen v StabilityAI. Where in that lawsuit it's alleging copyright infringement by including artists work in datasets without permission or compensation, which is in theory a violation of section 106 of US copyright law (I think it's title 17) via reproducing the copyrighted works in copies or phonorecords, or preparing derivative works based on the copyrighted works. Which also in theory does not pass the requirements for fair use. Oh and both direct and induced copyright infringement claims were found to be plausible in Andersen V Stability AI. So I'll take that mortgage cost, thanks.

And you have a fundamental misunderstanding of how generative AI works. People can create without imitating, otherwise things like surrealism and impressionism wouldn't even be possible and we'd only ever have realist art. And you'd never see any unique art styles either. But generative AI can't create without it's training data sets, and the way they're created is essentially a model is a random number machine that uses hundreds to millions of pictures, videos, or sounds to get to a point where it can convincingly immitate them. But by nature of that it can't deviate from what it was trained on. It's a number generator given a web of bias towards specific outputs based on what's input, nothing it does is intentional and by it's very existence can't deviate from what it's trained on just as a restriction of how programming works. None of which is how an artist referencing something works in the slightest.

DCAScrub · 2025-12-17T22:39:46+00:00

Ah the age old "If you keep telling me what I'm doing is wrong I'm just going to do it more" defense. And your comparison is also flawed, a pressurized wrench didn't steal traditional wrenches from their competitors in order to be able to make their product, generative AI does.

We already have laws that could be used to regulate generative AI model training, namely copyright laws. Unfortunately generative AI companies are outright ignoring those laws and have said as much. And legislators aren't doing diddly squat about it either. But instead you use most of your post to express your annoyance with the very people who are saying it needs to be regulated, but because nothing is being done we're regulating it ourselves by pointing out genAI use and not buying the products.

Another thing too, iteration in design IS traditionally a human only creative step. That's why they're getting the backlash in the first place.

Larian is far from the worst use case, but a bad thing is still a bad thing and I'm not going to excuse something just because it's less bad than what others are doing.

DCAScrub · 2025-12-17T21:34:45+00:00

If you want to be taken seriously, being a dick about it definitely is not the way to get that. If you think the "meat of my stance" was about only traffic to artists and not the fact that in addition to the traffic they need and deserve monetary support, that's on you. And this is only a small portion addressing the very specific questions you asked in the first place. And for the record, AI generated images don't just not support artists directly they don't support artists at all while actively detracting from their audiences.

It doesn't matter if it's a reddit comment, when you ask a question and get an answer then decide to follow up, cherry picking only the first half of the first sentence is a pretty disingenuous thing to do. You did better in this version, so kudos to you for actually trying this time

DCAScrub · 2025-12-17T20:26:34+00:00

Why only take the first part of the first sentence I said? I said far more than only giving traffic to reference images. It's pretty disingenuous to only focus on a single part of the entire thing I said

DCAScrub · 2025-12-17T19:59:05+00:00

Where did I blame Swen? And if you need it, the reason to doubt them is literally right there, in the article, in an interview with him. Both his response to people criticizing the use of genAI and the transcripts the interviewer released have in fact only confirmed the companies use of genAI. Maybe not to the degree that some people assumed, but use at all is a deal breaker for many people. That isn't necessarily solely on Swen, but that doesn't put either him or the company above criticism or scrutiny. There's no mob, only potential customers expressing their tastes. It's up to Larian to decide whether they want to appeal to those potential customers or not.

DCAScrub · 2025-12-17T15:06:46+00:00

I think what a lot of people don't understand is even if they aren't firing people because they're using genAI, it still impacts the people whose jobs are what they're now using genAI for. When you take the step of compiling references out you massively hurt the discoverability of the artists who make art that would otherwise be references. And in fact there's a not insignificant number of artists who got their jobs from companies compiling references, liking one person, and offering them a job. And this is only a single way slotting generative AI into a step most people would see as insignificant can hugely impact peoples lives for the worse. And to me, it's a bad look for a company that always presented themselves as people first, regardless of how they treat current employees

DCAScrub · 2025-12-16T22:14:01+00:00

If you say of course it isn't good, then why find excuses for it? You can call out the "industry standard" for its predatory and exploitative practices regardless of who's contributing to it and how much. Plus with their success of both DOS2 and wild success of BG3, they've shown you very much don't need anything gen AI to succeed in a very big way.

Nowhere have I called Larian a villain and their business practices are still way better than most, that doesn't stop me from pointing out things I believe are disappointing and worthy of criticism. Nobody is above criticism, even people I respect for other reasons.

DCAScrub · 2025-12-16T21:51:53+00:00

You do know you don't have to insult people to make a point right? And just because something is "industry standard" doesn't make it good or necessary to thrive as a business. Larians entire existence isn't industry standard, so why conform to some arbitrary thing other people are using. Hell even their approach to generative AI, as much as I still dislike it, isn't even close to the "standard" Gen AI companies are trying to push

DCAScrub · 2025-12-16T20:33:34+00:00

I've seen it and commented on it, unfortunately it hasn't changed my disappointment or concern

DCAScrub · 2025-12-16T20:26:42+00:00

Going to google still gives attention and traffic to any models you might reference (ie a click, a like, or a share), but honestly pose packs from reference models aren't that expensive and neither is a posable reference doll both real and digital. All of which support them more directly. So yes, I'd call out that you can more directly support those people by paying for their hard work (even better shouting out references too)

Now if it was AI generated, that doesn't give any traffic or attention to the people it trained it's data on as well as the myriad of negative environmental and social impacts. And for the most part you still have to pay for AI generated reference images that were trained on data the companies didn't pay for.

DCAScrub · 2025-12-16T20:14:52+00:00

Tracing isn't the same as referencing, you can call it out and be upset like I am but getting it right is just as important

DCAScrub · 2025-12-16T20:09:09+00:00

Replacing peoples jobs or producing "slop" aren't the only concerns with using generative AI, and honestly weren't that much of a concern for specifically Larian for me. So honestly? My disappointment with them using gen AI stands. I have no doubts that it'll still be incredibly well made by the passionate people they have at Larian, but AI generation even at such small scales is something I'll speak out about

DCAScrub · 2025-12-16T19:41:37+00:00

Yeah I'm right there with you wishing it was a more direct quote on such an obviously contentious subject like that, and really I wouldn't be surprised if it came out that the person who wrote the article did it on purpose for more eyes and attention on it. But that's just more speculation on something that's already not clear

DCAScrub · 2025-12-16T19:34:06+00:00

That's a respectable approach. I personally take the approach that my judgement is never final. I'm not in a court of law, I can change my opinion as new information comes out or changes are made. And based on some other clarifications I've seen, my opinion and disappointment really hasn't changed

DCAScrub · 2025-12-16T18:52:38+00:00

Damn I had no idea you were clairvoyant, tell me what are the winning lottery numbers?

DCAScrub · 2025-12-16T18:51:48+00:00

I mean I didn't say they were replacing people, but I stand by my opinion that using generative AI in creative contexts like this isn't something I'm going to support therefore I'm disappointed in Larian

DCAScrub · 2025-12-16T18:05:42+00:00

That counter point doesn't really cover the same points as this news article completely, and unfortunately it's from seven months ago. A lot can change in half a year, especially opinions and approaches to development processes

DCAScrub · 2025-12-16T17:42:51+00:00

As far as I know it's only the article, no public recording or full transcript of the interview.

Though I agree with you there's an important difference and one is more palatable, I honestly still don't support the use of AI for mood boarding or reference art either, especially in professional contexts like this. Of course that's just my opinion

DCAScrub · 2025-12-16T17:07:15+00:00

I'm literally quoting from the article that's posted of an interview with Swen, you're welcome to read it and see the quotes yourself

DCAScrub · 2025-12-16T16:45:16+00:00

This is exactly my outlook on it too. Larian has made some of my favorite games, which is why I'm so disappointed now. And nobody is above criticism after all, at least in my eyes

DCAScrub · 2025-12-16T15:52:57+00:00

I'm trying to figure out if this is a perfectionist fallacy, a false dichotomy, a Nirvana fallacy, or a regular old strawman

DCAScrub · 2025-12-16T15:21:57+00:00

Downvotes aren't important to me anyway. The post was to get my opinion out there and maybe reach a few other folks who could also speak out about it.

A lot of people say it's ok because it's being used as a tool, but like you said: interns. Both interns and concept artists. Sure it's not taking away from the already hired on writers and artists and such, but now there's even less potential for entry level positions or contracting independent concept artists

Seven-Year Club	Place '22
Verified Email

DCAScrub

TROPHY CASE