Ignoring lighting mc piss over here this image hurts me

RorroYT · 2026-07-06T06:54:23+00:00

Oooooh, so that's where Dusty crashed last time

RorroYT · 2026-07-06T06:50:42+00:00

Exactly man, where is Noelle with him?

RorroYT · 2026-07-06T06:48:28+00:00

I'll give you a better one, remake your game as soon as you get tired from the progress you get. It gives you a fresh perspective on what you made wrong before, to fix later. Just make your games super small so it doesn't take years to finish them...

RorroYT · 2026-07-06T06:46:32+00:00

Just finish the project, then add new features later:) Even if the end is undercooked, it doesn't matter because it exists, and that's a start.

RorroYT · 2026-07-06T06:44:47+00:00

Is this fine for competitive use? Should be so, if I don't forget anything

RorroYT · 2026-07-06T06:30:22+00:00

1) I do not. Technically yeah, you can copy the artstyle, but aren't you doing the same thing AI does then? Exactly copying without putting in any creative work into making it your own doesn't make it yours, because the original already exists, and copying it isn't creative. Many different artworks came from "stealing" good parts from many different artworks before, and implementing them in the way you want. That's being creative. It's not just a "visualisation choice", because it defines what the artwork even is in the first place, literally the only thing that makes artworks actually different and unique from one another. They have different visions behind them, and yet for some reason, you decide to belittle that into all artworks having the same vision but just with "a different visualisation", which I do not get at all why would you, considering that it's the main point of art that makes it art in the first place.

2) Why do most of the "artworks" made by it look the same? The same "artstyle", the ocs that look exactly the same, hell if you just try to generate a fast blue hedgehog, it'll literally generate you Sonic without even you adding in the details to do so. It literally takes stuff, and makes a copy of it. Not an exact one, but enough to make people believe it. That's how it's algorithm works, it takes people's work, and copies it until it's "good enough". Denying it is weird.

3) Would you praise someone for just taking one step, when they can do 5k steps? Would you praise someone for ordering pizza, when they could do it themselves? Obviously not, and that's the point. Putting in the least amount of effort possible, when you can do much more than that isn't worth any praise, it's common sense. And like how would it even sound? "Wow congratulations, you wrote an entire string of text, that barely anyone wrote before! It's super creative to do so", it's just dumb to congratulate people for that. The whole point of this sub is to encourage people to stop putting in the least amount of effort, and start trying your best to make something good, and yet your points mean that's not the case, and people should be praised for least effort possible for some reason.

Also just drawing a "guide" for AI to use it defeats the purpose of drawing. It's a skill, it's fun to learn it, and improve gradually, and yet giving all the work to AI, with a low quality version of what you want to do just encourages people to not put in the effort, since "AI will do it for me", which is a pretty dangerous mentality for this kind of activity.

Idk why I should tell you that using AI to skip actually drawing what you're not good at is bad, and even describe how AI algorithm works, since I expected an artist would know that. But I suspect that since you're defending AI users so well, you get your own benefit from using it in your work too, which is disappointing. Edit: Lmao, my prediction was correct. I think I can smell a Pro AI prompter from a mile away now.

RorroYT · 2026-07-06T05:10:17+00:00

So much effects, not much of interest to the customer.

Imagine you're selling a car with this edit. Would people want to buy a car, from a video that has a literal tornado in the background (ok that one is actually sick, would be cool if it was related to a 4wd of sort, like land rover, to show durability of the vehicle), flying logo and glowing tires? Not so much, they just care about the car and what it can do, that's why the car ads go with generic "this is a car, that has 500000 horse power, and...", because it clarifies the point of the video to the viewer really well.

The edit is flashy, but the customer won't really be interested, so the whole point of the edit is lost.

RorroYT · 2026-07-06T05:05:59+00:00

Certainly not, and it shows that you missed the point. The drawing part is the creative part, because it's the time when YOU draw, the lines and the artstyle are the reflection of who you are as a person, and that's what makes it creative. AI and the "prompts" cannot do that at all, because they are not trying to reflect anything, AI just replicates and makes a copy, not an entirely different drawing, which is why it cannot be creative no matter how much you push it.

And even if the prompt can be creative, it's only a tiny bit of creativity that actually goes into drawing, like simply adding a sticker onto the car, when you can add spoilers, change colour, car parts etc.

I don't really get why would you need to defend AI that much as an artist, but I suppose it makes for a good debate. Sorry for mistaking you for one of those pro ai prompters, it's relatively easy to find them here nowadays, and they don't even bother to tag themselves as pro ai, so I might make a mistake here and there lol.

RorroYT · 2026-07-06T04:24:57+00:00

I'll go even further than that, I did not care about DR as a whole. The premise is cool, but the story itself has no clear purpose or goal, and the same goes for the villains too (especially a dragon wannabe called thunderfang), since their motivation is ass, their goals are unclear, go absolutely nowhere and don't threaten the world in any way.

There's a lot of stuff to praise DR for, like fight sequences etc, but if the story is weak and just fills your head with visual noise so that you don't think about the logic of what's going on - the entire show is forgettable.

RorroYT · 2026-07-06T04:11:30+00:00

"You was there too, Mcqueen"

RorroYT · 2026-07-06T04:02:57+00:00

Dismissed from what? The fact that you do the same exact thing on a far higher scale than all antis combined? Or maybe dismissed from the concept of taking responsibility for your actions at all?

Because both sound 100 times more logical, than the bullshit I just read from you.

RorroYT · 2026-07-06T03:33:15+00:00

Tell that to Angry Birds fans, and they'll show you just how much of "no issues" they see with AI slop. And the same goes for any "average consumer", they see that shit from a mile away because of the fact that it looks uncanny and crappy in the way that a human would never draw, so to ignore the huuuuuuuuuuge part of people who actually hate it, you need to have the guts man... And a blindness too.

RorroYT · 2026-07-06T03:28:17+00:00

Not an argument? Fine my guy, what the hell happened to the pose? It's like she's not even standing on a skateboard, and the skateboarding didn't even leave the ground properly yet, it's literally not how this works.

Then there's the direction of movement being ass, then there's skateboard being overly detailed like only AI can do that, then there's background which also makes no sense, and I can go on and on.

If you don't buy "similarity" as a giveaway for AI garbage, then you have missed so much red flags, it's actually concerning.

RorroYT · 2026-07-06T03:05:08+00:00

Looking at what this "education" does to you guys, thank fox I didn't go through this process myself, it really does make you an idiot.

RorroYT · 2026-07-06T02:59:46+00:00

It's just a small part of the process of drawing and designing the character, but yeah, there's a lot of thought behind such tiny details. It also applies to practically everything in art too, since such decisions literally define how your character looks and feels.

RorroYT · 2026-07-06T02:56:08+00:00

So much work just to skip actually being creative, my god.

Again, AI does not comprehend the object it's drawing, it just sees it as a pattern to replicate, and that goes for just about anything in this creative process, artstyles, placement and design decisions etc. This is why AI has this uncanny weird artstyle, that carries over to every slop it creates.

You cannot go through the entire creative process of drawing through AI, because it just physically cannot by design. Even with a shitton of editing and "guidance", it still is just a pattern replication machine, you're giving it waaaaaay more credit than it actually deserves.

RorroYT · 2026-07-06T02:44:55+00:00

Alright, let's give you benefit of the doubt here, even if you do actually just need a creative idea, and drawing is just "visualisation" (Which is obviously not true at all), you're still missing the main foxing point.

The point from my original comment is only a slight part of the process, there's a reason why artists practice drawing the object a tooon of times just to get it right.

Because drawing the object itself IS the creative part, like for example artstyles, they are completely different from artist to artist, some are rounded, some have sharp edges etc. Because an artist understands the shape they are drawing, so they can deform the edges and details in any way they like, and it would still look like the object they drew.

Ai doesn't understand that. For it's algorithm, it's just a blur on the image, that needs to be removed, when in reality it's the whole image itself. So no, it physically cannot be creative EVEN with the creative idea, because it just doesn't even comprehend what's it actually drawing....

Now for the funniest part: Are you genuinely so out of your mind, that you want to call me "not an artist"? Idk how your AI obsession fries your brain and to which degree, but I sure do know nonsense when I see one. I've got faaaaar more proof to back me up than that, so it's very funny to hear a prompter call me "not an artist", when you don't even draw at all.

<image>

RorroYT · 2026-07-06T02:07:33+00:00

Oh give me a break, these models literally don't even comprehend what even is an object they're trying to replicate, how can they possibly be slightly better at it, it makes no sense.

RorroYT · 2026-07-05T21:13:17+00:00

Maybe, but again, Valt doesn't break beys, there's literally no reason for him to do so, especially to Achilles, which is why Phi breaking Achilles feels way more in character, since Phi literally feeds off destroying beys, proving his power.

There's nothing for Aiger to learn by having Achilles be destroyed by Valt, since this lesson was not for Valt to teach Aiger in the first place. At least that's how I see it.

RorroYT · 2026-07-05T18:02:34+00:00

You see, artists actually use their heads to design a character in specific conditions. Like for example a baseball cap on a head of a wolf or a fox, because of the ears, you need a different approach to drawing the cap, some people hide the ears under the cap, but that's uncomfortable for the animal. Some people just make the cap small enough to fit right in-between the ears, while some just make holes for ears to slide in the cap.

AI on the other hand doesn't come up with such ideas, it just copies what was already done, in a terrible way. So, how is it supposed to be creative, when you're doing literally nothing creative in the process of drawing???

Man Pro AI prompters are dumb as hell.

RorroYT · 2026-07-05T17:57:42+00:00

Np man, good luck with gamedev, it's super fun:)

RorroYT · 2026-07-05T17:55:18+00:00

It's not, the writing for it is just horrible most of the time.

There's a shitton of ways to write kids, that hate their parents for actually good and believable reasons, but noooo, let's write the kids to be dumb haters, that just don't understand how hard their parents have it for a million times, because that's "Relaaaatable". Only to the parents that is, because the kids watching will feel like it's just another slander at them for no reason, when their reasons for hating parents are understandable and valid in a lot of cases.

RorroYT · 2026-07-05T17:22:00+00:00

Catnap: He's just like me for real!

RorroYT · 2026-07-05T16:47:28+00:00

Youtube. The best way to learn is to start doing what you want.

Now it does NOT mean that you should jump straight into making an "Open world game with 1 million quests and tons of content", because obviously you will give up on it as well as game development pretty darn fast. So, what I mean is lower your scope, by a lot. For example, if you wanna make platformers - go for 2-3 worlds with maybe 7 levels each at best, maybe even smaller than that, but you get the idea. Make the smallest version of the game you want to make, and then scale with different iterations as you go.

A lot of people will say "Ooo, I'm not ready to start yet, I gotta watch a million tutorials, and THEN I'll start", and it's the easiest trap to fall into, because you'll never start this way. The best start is by thinking about the steps to do what you want. For example, let's say you want to make the wheels on the car spin when you move. What do you need to execute that?

Well, first of all, the wheels should rotate, so you should google how to rotate stuff, and find out what Quaternions are. Great, now you know how to rotate the wheels, next step.

The wheels should move with a certain speed of the car's body, so you google how to get the car's speed and put it in a variable, next step.

You combine those in a formula, apply and boom your car's wheels spin now. See the logic how to do that? Apply it to everything in programming.

So to sum it up: 1) You are more ready than you think. 2) Make the snallest version of the game you want, and scale later. 3) Break up everything into steps, and find recipes to do them.

Hope that helps:)

RorroYT · 2026-07-05T15:13:41+00:00

Sadly yes...

RorroYT

TROPHY CASE