Yes, as 99% of programmers these days I also used ai coding tools.
I am ok with that, let me know if I need to do anything?
Viewing post in Bros & Cons jam comments
I assigned mostly AI generated now. Not sure how I feel about it though so some input for the next year:
Almost all games will use AI to some degree. If my coding tool uses AI based suggest or my design tool uses ai based features like renaming layers, did I use AI? It will be impossible to tell how much AI was used and also this says nothing about the quality and craft of the game, e.g. I could have my entire game assets ai generated in one shot and then trace the final output by hand in a couple of hours and it would be considered 'hand-made' or I could create tons of sketches and go through several iterations and 60 hours of creating an artwork and mood but the final assets are generated based on this and it would be considered Ai-generated.
So yes trying to measure the amount of ai used, will lead nowhere. Maybe just have a category 100% hand-made and another one Ai was used.
We're already modifying the rules for next year. This was the first year we felt we needed to deal with AI and came up with the labeling system we had very quickly. We've since realized the confusion it created and are correcting that for next year. In fact, I'm writing up my full list of proposals for various changes (including AI labeling stuff) as I speak.
I will say that the plan regarding AI used in programming will be this: if the developer of the game is a programmer, they won't need to disclose that usage of AI at all (we'll also likely allow them to label their game as human made so long as AI is only used in the programming side of things). It will only be when a game is "vibecoded" that it must be labelled properly, and we'll be talking with programmers who use AI to help us come up with ways to more easily identify these entries.