There is a saying that if you stay quiet, you avoid at least half the trouble. But when a poor, tiny game team like ours keeps making games, you also come to understand why the possibility of making art faster and cheaper can feel attractive. At the same time, all of us on the team are otaku, and it was hard to casually look away while the artists who introduced me to worlds I loved were hurting inside that change.
That in-between position was exactly why I did not want to leave this as just another opinion. Rather than forcing it into a neat yes or no, I wanted to leave behind a game that could give creators a reason to talk, even once, about how far to accept AI and what they still wanted to protect.
That is also why we split human-drawn art and AI output apart, and why the same scene appears as two different looks and two different stories. I wanted to pass that feeling on to the player as directly as possible.The structure where the developer appears on screen in the demo came from the same place. It was partly my own story. Instead of speaking from outside the problem, I wanted the game to keep a record that the person making it was also wavering in front of that choice.The developer who appears on screen is me, and the other character is also one of my real teammates. Some people may already know this, but there are three of us, so one person had to hold the camera and could not appear on screen. haha;;That does not mean I thought this game could explain the whole issue. Creators, developers, and audiences all stand in different places, and this is not the kind of problem I can sort out on behalf of everyone else.So rather than trying to do too much, I chose to leave behind the places where people stop and hesitate. What EULA wanted was not to deliver an answer, but to create a chance to talk together about an argument that still has no settled answer.