Level-5's New Yo-Kai Watch 'Holy Horror Mansion' Teaser Supposedly Features AI Artwork

Wouldn't be shocked if virtually everything in the trailer was done entirely for the trailer and not reflective of the actual game given how chronically incapable of actually releasing anything Level-5 is at this point. Them using a bunch of AI stuff to streamline the process completely tracks, especially when we already know they're using it for other things.

The pesky AI Yo-kai did it.

I think this game needs a lot of improvements
My suggestion:
1. Using non AI art for final product.
2. Change the title into Yokai Craft.

I am praying that they don’t use AI generated images in the final product, and that the AI art is just used for the concept trailer footage they showed. I really dislike companies using AI art instead of getting actual talented and skilled artists on board for any type of project, especially when the companies have shown in the past that they have human artists that can make amazing and beautiful artworks without the use of AI. Using some AI is fine in game development, but I have huge issues when it’s used for art, cuz AI art generators have had a detrimental effect on artists. In art, I think AI is good when coming up with ideas or some kind of inspiration for a final piece of artistic work by a human, or to kind of assist game developers. I have an issue when it’s used for products like games and the AI art looks off, artificial and is full of a lot of mistakes.

Yokai Watch is probably one of the most interesting and fun game series I have played, and they were full of so many unique concepts, and to me, the ideas the game had were very creative. Again, I’m hopeful that they won’t use AI art in the final product, given this was more of a concept trailer rather than an actual game trailer. It would be so disappointing to see it be used in the next installment in a game series that is clearly full of so much heart and creativity with its yokai and concepts, and Holy Horror Mansion seems very intriguing with the new ideas shown in the trailer.

Well, that explains how they have so many games in development. Jk. I don't mind some Ai being used, but I would hope it would be to a minimal.

yo-kAI watch lmao

Hey, remember when Yo-Kai Watch was supposed to be a huge competitor to Pokémon?

Looks cool. I Like the dancing concept. AI is a tool. If it helps devs (most who aren’t artists) I don’t see an issue so long as they don’t steal/flip assets. No different than adding computer generated animations/scenes to animated films rather than working animators to death. Which has been going on for decades.

My initial impression of the trailer was that it looked like an incredible amount of work went into creating it...now I feel like I have been tricked.

I can only hope that generative AI isn't being used for Fantasy Life i, or they wouldn't be getting my purchase.

Are you kidding me? Come on, I hope it’s just for early builds of the game and not in the full release.

I hope Nintendo lawyers-assassins murder this game if it really has AI crap. They are gearing up for M-AI-rio anyway

Please remember that Level-5 is currently working on 17 games right now. I wouldn't be surprised if they're just using AI for the trailer so they have something to show. In other words, it's just placeholder art, something used heavily in game development already, and will more than likely be removed/updated in the final build.

I guess that's why they said the trailer was a "concept" for their new game. Even if it doesn't make it in the final game though, that's still uncool because what you're essentially doing is false advertising.

The way most things are going we will soon be getting news stories about things not using AI as using AI seems to be quickly becoming the norm.

I don't hate the idea of AI being used for game development. Games are taking longer to make and costing more as well. If AI is used in unique and useful ways that make things easier, I say go for it. Please do not rely on the crutch and use it wisely if it's going to be used. If a developer uses it minimally, back off. I imagine the technology is being used for a reason.

@Ryu_Niiyama I have a feeling you don’t quite understand what “computer generated” means cg is an art form and still requires artists to make but yes in terms of background it’s often easier to animate in 2D with 3D backgrounds. Reducing workload for overworked artists is good, but not with AI. AI essentially IS asset flipping, as the “generation” it does is really just really detailed collaging of other artists work. And to properly create enough artworks for AI to base it off of you’d actually be creating MORE work for the artists. On top of that the designs the AI would make would be based off of others designs if the AI uses its existing stolen art to base it off of, adding another layer of theft.

Square Enix and now Level 5. Whatever, everyone will be on it eventually :/

Game still looks cool though.

That tracks. Isn’t Level-5 already known as being pretty scummy these days?

@MurkyDawn I do understand what computer generated means. You are misunderstanding where I am stating what assets are and my view on commercially generated work.

So for instance an animated movie produced by say Disney is not going to let every artist draw however they want. They come up with a general style and decide to go with that for the theme of the movie. The artists have the ability to draw but in the end they are producing a streamlined product. AI does more of the same faster. If a story boarder feeds what they feel is the “theme” and uses that to build images generated from AI, from a production perspective that is no different that having a team of artists restricted to an artstyle. As opposed to an artist creating their own work. Same with using AI with code. And that that style is an asset owned by the producing company. The benefit is less crunch for artists (or programmers in the code example) but it doesn’t wholly replace people. Will some folks lose work? Sure but that is always an aspect of working. Companies shrink and grow. Why is why one keeps skills in high demand. And some trades still work with traditional methods alongside modern technology (Art in particular. I draw by hand. And don’t use tech. I have a friend who is an actual artist and she threw out her paints years ago.) Talent will always find work.

Now if Disney pulled a bunch of Nickelodeon assets and plug that into AI algorithms to generate images then that is theft and not what the tool is intended for. Which is my only issue but that is what IP/Copyright/Trademarks are for. Or if someone passes off AI as an original Van Gogh or something again that is theft of owned creative work. Which is bad. But that happens with art forgeries done by hand everyday. Don’t need AI for that. I am not going to conflate the two to form a false argument against AI.

Folks have been screaming [insert boogyword] is taking our jobs since forever. Tools are meant to make work more efficient so that talented workers can shine through and not be worked to death (yeah companies push that but that is a different conversation). I work in IT and I for darn sure don’t want to give up my monitoring tools or Scripting Triggers. Because I would be chained to my desk and I work too much as is. But my brain and eye are still needed for my job. If I feel AI can replace me, I need to skill up more. So I stand by my comment.

There’s something about how AI does dark scenes with lights and highlights everywhere that just looks grotesque to me.

After watching the trailer, how could anyone not be excited about this because of the AI-generated backgrounds? It's just concept art for a game that probably won't be out until 2026. If the game has that much character and life as just a concept with over a year more of development, then this game looks to be an absolute winner.

Am I missing something? They don't really look AI generated?

Actually, in the scene with the trees, the trees look copy pasted. AI is terrible at consistency like that.

Nintendo ninjas: ah $#!+, here we go again

@axelhander generative AI models aren't inventing anything, they're fed stolen artworks (by huge numbers of unknown artists who were never asked if they agreed for their property to be used in such a way) scraped from the internet by shady developers. GenAI is theft, simple. Plus it has enormous environmental costs as a result of the processing power required, Google's emissions rocketed by either 50% or 150% (sorry I can't remember which is the right figure) solely due to the increased consumption needed to run their AI programs

@PinballBuzzbro level 5 is not a Nintendo owned developer

@Otoemetry Nope. AI does more quickly what could already be done more slowly with more people.

AI businesses, whose interests are in financial enrichment, will use that as a means to line their coffers, yes; but AI in and of itself is a tool that streamlines tasks that would otherwise take a long time.

AI is like the automobile; revolutionary and immensely useful, despite the potential for abuse. That's not on the tool itself; the billionaires will leverage anything against us, AI or otherwise. They'll leverage the wheel AND the sled to keep their power.

AI is amazing, but not creative, and all these temporarily embarrassed millionaire artists are vilifying the wrong thing.

@Otoemetry ohhh gotcha nvm

@axelhander I won't disagree that AI can be an incredible tool for good, however there are different kinds of AI and the excellent tools aren't the ones being used here... GenAI models are built on mass scale art theft (current AI techbros are trying to argue than anything posted publicly on the internet is fair game with incredible disregard to copyright and ownership law) and using them to generate assets as they have done here is simply stealing from enough people to smoosh enough parts together to get something out the other end that looks vaguely original.
Machine learning to aid in disease detection, AI processed upscaling, these are useful applications for the tech but unfortunately the worst people in society are actively pushing AI to replace artists and I really don't think that's ok

I seriously don't get the hate around artists using AI. That's like hating on a writer for using a word processor instead of a pen and paper. It's a tool. It quickens the process. And with games getting bigger and more expensive, AI can cut down on that.

I can’t really see how the backgrounds are AI generated? But I don’t like seeing companies using stuff like this to just cut corners. Makes Nintendo’s statement about not using it reassuring that they’ll actually put effort into their games.

@HotGoomba That is mainly due to their incompetence and inability to do global releases.

We here in the West had to literally wait years before a Yo-kai Watch to release due to heavily delayed localization. By then the hype had worn off and sales tanked. Nintendo of America did the localization for them in the end for the first game to finally able to release in the West. Yo-kai Watch 2 and 3 still were over a year delayed in the West due to localization.
The toys we already in stores along with Japan release, but we then had to wait a year for western release to use said toys. It was a joke. It was just destined to fail.
We never got Yo-kai Watch Switch (Yo-kai Watch 4) here in the west nor the Yo-Kai Watch 1 remake on the Switch.

I hope enough people express that they don't like it. AI is ruining art as a cultural good. at least If it's used like this.

@Xeacons The equivalent of a word processor in the art world would be an artist using a digital drawing program instead of paintbrushes and paint. The artist is still using their skills and a tool to create art. What AI does is remove that artist altogether, and Frankenstein its own image from a mash of stolen artwork made by real artists. Same with AI that does text. An exec could make the AI write an unoriginal TV show pilot, and remove the need to ever hire writers. AI in the creative space is a tool, but a tool used almost exclusively by thieves to steal original work and never pay the deserving creators.

Calling it now! In the next decade, AI generated Pokemon!

Article: yokai watch
Comments: aaah! Pokemon

I swear that franchise lives rent free in some people's heads

There is a time and a place for AI and the concept phase is not it. Concept should involve research and artistic freedom, you simply don't know where inspiration will come from, so if you're just typing in whatever you want to see you will never come across anything interesting or unexpected.

If you don't have enough of the game developed to show, don't show it. But it seems like they had plenty to show, so I call BS on this not being used for in-game as well.

I'm not sticking up for companies that have money to employ people like Level-5, using software to replace them or speed up churning out products. Stop being greedy, invest in the product you want us to buy and the people who make it.

So they are using AI and still can't get games out on time 😬.

It's plainly obvious that Level-5 has been stretched thinner than a razor blade at a Rio de Jenior wet t-shirt contest, so of course that Iger style mad-man Hino would use AI. Litterally, only a machine could keep up with his mad ambition to make EVERY game bigger than Pokemon, or at least GI Joe, on it's first relases. The man is friends with Kenji Inafune after all.

As others have said, there is probably some nuance here that there is not when talking about the Mario AI art case.
Did Level-5 use a proprietary tool to produce this trained on their own data? Well, that's not the same thing as putting terms into a slop generator and having it make pictures of Mario.
However, if it turns out it is some version of the latter, for me Level-5 will go into the "never buy anything from this company ever" bin with anti-consumer garbage like Ubisoft and EA.

@JohnnyMind I have these concerns as well, but is Nintendo really targeting fan work? As in works of art that are non-profit? I don't think they can do anything unless someone is making money off of it somehow

I'm not against the use of AI to streamline processes, but it should never be used as a replacement for human creation. Sadly, it's getting so bad that I feel only Nintendo (who's said they won't be using AI for their games) and some others will take a stance against it.

Companies like EA and Ubisoft will probably start using it to outsource the need of creative folks. At one point, I think there's going to be a very big strike in all creative industries to battle the use of AI. It's weird living in some semi scifi reality and not knowing where this whole AI business is going to take us. But to quote Marvin the Paranoid Android: "This will all end in tears."

@Otoemetry The "art theft" angle is predicated on the erroneous belief that IP law actually protects artists. It doesn't; it protects corporate interests. Artists who believe otherwise are just doing the artist version of "temporarily embarrassed millionnaire"; they see themselves as temporarily embarrassed famous artists who will no doubt soon win that virtual scratch ticket.

A certain four hour video on plagiarism and AI has made its audience dumber to this reality (as do most of the videos said content creator spews). It is wrong: in fact, AI scrapes things that humans could (and already did) do, just faster. AI businesses are harmful the same way corporations will always be; AI itself is not.

@Pillowpants 100% agreed that businesses will use AI not as the incredible streamlining tool it should be and as a means to further enrich corporate profits at the expense of people.

But (and I know you're not claiming this) we don't solve this by finding ways to destroy AI or halt its development.

I really do hope they don’t use AI for the final release. Even if it’s just for concept, it’s a sad and worrying sight to see, especially as someone who wants to get into a creative field when he’s older. I think they should have kept the game under wraps for longer so they could have made human-made backgrounds and we wouldn’t have suspected a thing.
And even then, I’m not really super interested in the game. I had a little bit of niche curiosity but the AI rubbish kinda killed it. If it does get removed from the final release I’ll try checking it out.

@axelhander I agree that we should not destroy AI, but there need to be very firm regulations and laws regarding the use of it. It feels very wild west right now. The same thing was back when we were talking about NFTs. I'm glad that blew over, but AI is something different altogether.

@axelhander I don't appreciate your inference that I'm dumb based on an erroneous assumption that I've watched a video when I've no idea to whom or what you're referring. You are wrong here, generative AI models take artworks created by human artists and use them to "learn" how to recreate those styles in different ways. I have several artist friends who have had their art stolen in this way and it absolutely is theft, the model's purpose is to take the human creative out of the equation therefore you're stealing the years that artist has spent honing their craft. Genuinely do not understand your position on this, if you create an artwork you own it, it's very simple.

The only thing I believe will happen is that Level-5 will use AI to make "something" and announce even more games than they can release nowadays.

@Otoemetry You may think I don't see this as a sidestep, but it's blatantly obvious. I accept your surrender.

@Pillowpants Regulations will only benefit capital, not individual artists or indie devs. What really needs to happen is the same thing to fix virtually every problem on this planet, and that's to move past class society and capitalism. One way we WON'T get there is to fearmonger over potentially helpful and revolutionary technology.

@axelhander what? Now I know you're just trolling.

@Ryu_Niiyama so you'd be in favor of me using aI to streamline the process of getting your social security number and bank account info, good to know.

2024: "Won't be in the final game"
2025: "It's only a few assets"
2026: "At least the protagonist is hand made"
2027: "At least the CEO is still employed"
2028: beep boop beep