>>71647220>Companies can hire cheaper artist that make more mistakes, so why don't they?i think that there are actually a lot of different reasons behind this that make it a bit complicated to summarize, so I'll just give the first few I thought of.
First of all, this does happen in other industries - for example comic books, meeting deadlines was way more important than 'good' art, there's videos about inkers and people who did this.
second, the artist themselves is a barrier. the artist's reputation is connected to their work, so they will do the best they can to get future jobs, so it's difficult to tell them to do worse.
third, finding artists who are just the right level of good enough to not lose profits and bad enough to lower standards over time is very difficult. Also, those artists will get better over time, so finding them isn't even a good investment.
Some of this is solved by using AI - it's already at that level where it's good enough but also bad enough, it is consistent, and we've already found it.
>I don't see the problem.>The basic-bitch AI slop is going to be used by smaller projects and developers. Big companies will still have to hire 'real' artists to stand out form that crowd, and they will probably only appreciate in value as a result.if what you described is how it turns out then maybe there won't be a problem, however that isn't really the case, as we've seen by modern patterns. I think it is much more likely that the big companies will be using AI because there is pressure to save costs on them, so only the medium sized developers will have real art. And if big companies aren't hiring real artists, then there won't be a large pool of talent to draw from.
