Skip to main content

Indie game storeFree gamesFun gamesHorror games
Game developmentAssetsComics
SalesBundles
Jobs
TagsGame Engines
(+1)

  I agree with you. I think this is a well thought out take. If it has one flaw it is that you are using factual information to fight an emotional position. I think you would do better opening with an appeal to emotion. "I like your passion but I think your anger is miss placed." Notice how my comment opened with I agree with you and you read past the first line. Your argument opens with "Your arguments are not good enough". I doubt someone who is emotionally invested in their argument would read another word. Remember Kairos (that which is said must be said at the right time). I make educational games and I have found researching things has gotten harder. I have talked about it a few of my games. There is a website World Atlas that is inedited with AI lies. I nearly put lies about cows in one of my games, but when I went to check a second source (something most people looking up fun facts about cows would not do) I found them to be lies. Further research uncovered World Atlas was filled with AI lies. I have found more websites like it since. I hate AI on principle. Your arguments are right, but they didn't convince me of anything. I still agree with OP because I am ruled by emotion.

I like your passion but I think your anger is miss placed.

That's how AI talk. Not kidding. Though they would use different punctuation and less spelling errors.

And for an emotionally invested person, nothing I say can reach them. Also, I am not even disagreeing about the general goal. There is too much ai and people are sick of it.

I hate AI on principle. Your arguments are right, but they didn't convince me of anything. I still agree with OP because I am ruled by emotion

People should use good arguments against ai. That is my point. You are disagreeing with that? Really?

(+1)

  I know you are not disagreeing with the general goal, that is why I think your language is less affective than it could be. You came off as antogonistic rather than mentoring. "Your reasons are not good enough". I think you are right. I think you could have done a better job of communicating your points. I think you should look up the rhetorical triangle. Maybe I am wrong. Maybe the things you say are more important than the way you say them.