phore

Been thinking a lot about AI disclosure for games, since it's been a hot topic. Steam requires disclosure for player-facing content created with the help of AI tools, but says efficiency gains from AI development tools aren't the focus. Let's say I'm making a tree mesh for my game. Two obvious endpoints: • I manually model it in Blender. No disclosure. • I generate it using Tripo/Meshy. Disclosure. Now let's interpolate from t=0 to t=1: 1) I model the tree, but use a Codex-written exporter. 2) I model the tree, but use Codex-written UV, LOD and geometry optimization tools. 3) I model the tree, but write some scripts, with Codex help, to automate branch placement, leaf distribution, etc. 4) I automate more of the modelling until I've written a procedural tree generator. 5) I design and write my own procedural tree generator, with Codex helping debug and optimize it. 6) I design the procedural tree generator, but Codex writes the implementation. 7) I give Codex reference images, ask it to suggest improvements to my design, then implement those suggestions myself. 8) Same as above, but Codex implements the suggested improvements. 9) I give Codex reference images and ask it to design and implement the generator itself. 10) I use that generator, manually selecting and tweaking parameters until I'm happy with the trees. 11) Codex operates the generator and chooses the parameters, but I review and approve the results. 12) Codex operates the generator, chooses the parameters, and selects which trees ship, without my involvement. 13) I ask Codex to operate Blender directly and create the trees. 14) I generate the trees using Tripo/Meshy. Under a literal reading, at every point in that list, the player-facing content was "created with the help of AI tools". At what point did this cross from AI-assisted development into AI-generated art? Is this going to be the same for everyone?