itch.io

Thanks sharing your perspective and detailing your journey. I respect the dedication you've put into your craft, and I agree that there's immense satisfaction in mastering a skill through effort. 

However, the belief that "putting in the work" and using generative AI are mutually exclusive is a significant misconception, often held by those with limited exposure to GenAI-assisted workflows.

To be clear, in my case, I'm actively learning and improving my traditional coding, art, and writing skills alongside my generative AI skills. I too have aways to go.  In my view, generative tools are a new type of brush; they don't replace the old ones, but add to the toolkit.

One path does not invalidate the other.

This binary view also assumes everyone has the same reservoir of time. As a single father with three children, my time is (very) finite. I know I am not the only one with a life outside of games, and everyone has something big in life that keeps them busy, be it family, work, disabilities etc. But it must be said, for me, and for many others with significant life constraints, GenAI tools aren't a shortcut to avoid work; they are an essential form of accessibility that makes game creation possible whatsoever at any sort of reasonable time-scale. 

A truly inclusive space must also understand that neurodivergence isn't a single category, but a blanket term for a wide spectrum of experiences. Like you, I have immense respect for the neurodivergent folks who have managed to beat the odds and achieve success at the previous game jams. However, an inclusive community must also welcome the creator for whom - due to their specific neurotype - generative AI is an absolute lifesaver.

This is the nuance that Rule 13 misses. My earlier suggestion for a separate 'AI-Assisted' category was intended as a practical solution to this, preserving the traditional challenge while also making a dedicated space for these new workflows. I sincerely hope the organisers will consider it. 

It may be worth aligning the public messaging with this rule. I was drawn to this jam by the welcoming and inclusive marketing I saw on social media,  only to find that I am in fact excluded. For future events, clarifying the stance on AI-assisted development upfront would help manage expectations for the many creators who now consider these tools a standard part of their kit.

And I totally feel you on the "It's not about the money but the learning and the community" thing. This is precisely why I am being upfront about my workflow and seeking clarification -even though my work is borderline, and definitely IS commercially viable and  copyrightable. Even so I respect the spirit of the jam and as such am taking myself out the running.  

Thank you for the candid response and for clarifying the spirit of the rule.

I understand the distinction you're making between minor assistive tools and generating core, copyrightable assets. On that point about the 'grey space', I believe it highlights a challenge to the jam's goal of being a welcoming space.

To be candid, reading that my integral workflow disqualifies me was disheartening and has made me feel quite isolated from a community I really wanted to become a part of. I suspect I'm not alone in this.

For many developers in 2025—especially solo devs, neurodivergent creators like me, or those without traditional art skills—generative AI is an essential accessibility bridge.

A rule that doesn't account for this risks unintentionally closing the door on the very people you aim to support. Furthermore, if the core mission is to get more South Africans making games, it seems vital to embrace the technologies that are fundamentally democratising the development process.

For a solo developer, these tools can be the difference between a finished game and a frustratingly abandoned project. Allowing their use could empower more people to participate and complete their first game, directly serving the jam's primary objective.

While I understand and respect the ruling for this year (and I accept, with sadness, that I must take my name out of the hat for this jam), perhaps for future jams the organisers might consider an 'AI-Assisted' category? This would allow the jam to maintain a space for traditional development (with an even playing field, competition-wise) while explicitly welcoming and making a home for the developers who are leveraging these new, powerful workflows.

Thanks again for your response

Regarding rule 13: "13. No generative AI allowed. Entries using generative AI will automatically be disqualified." 

This feels hastily tacked on as an afterthought, and needs some clarification.

Given that generative AI is already integrated into most common IDEs, CLIs and even common dev. tools like photoshop and MS word, there is no way to know whether generative AI is used. Where do you draw the line? For example Photoshop has Generative expand,  so if anyone uses photoshop are they now disqualified?

The rule doesn't make sense in 2025.  Where is the threshold, where is the burden of proof?
The way I see it ALL game devs use GenAI in 2025, one way or another, even if they don't like to admit it, or are possibly unaware that it's Gen AI under the hood.

I'm vibe coder and solo dev, and since GenAI is an integral part of my workflow on multiple levels, so are devs like me simply automatically excluded?