Hacker News Reader

Comment by vehementi | Hacker News Reader

> Does IGF want to reward human achievement or recognize the best indie games

That's not the dichotomy I think. It's more "does doing XYZ ethically invalidate the achievement". If I go plagiarize the Big Walk code base and add a new feature, well, I've surpassed their game as the new best indie game actually. But obviously we would and should throw my game away. So it's not just "which game is best, the ends justify the means".

View on HN

I think you're arguing that using AI is unethical and therefore no contest would ever allow games made with AI.

But that's a claim and not a universal truth. I don't think there's anything ethically wrong with using AI to create a game (even artwork), and clearly House House didn't think there was anything wrong with using AI for debugging.

The fact that AI-use is controversial--meaning different people disagree--is what makes me think that we'll end up with a bifurcation. There will be communities that accept it and those that reject it.

I'm not arguing that myself. But in general, you and I, hopefully, agree that ethics already come into it (games praise itself, and IGF), and understand that IGF was never only about simply ending up with technically the best game full stop. There are other considerations. We can't and don't wholesale dismiss all considerations based on the end quality of things. So "Does IGF want to reward human achievement or recognize the best indie games" is misframed because it already wasn't about the latter.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com