Garbage In, Garbage Out
This game has more value as an example of the principle of GIGO (seen above) than it does as a game. If the "future of storytelling" is to loaf around and make a machine do all the work for you, I think it's time to turn the technological progress car around and go back.
Writing: 1/5
Honestly, you can't even call what's in this game writing. The dev clearly just wrote out a short intro, and then took just about anything the AI spit out. AI can help you write interesting stories, but the operative term there is 'help'. You can't simply expect the AI to write the whole bloody thing for you, or else you get a pile of cyclical garbage, which is exactly what we have here. In order to write anything worth reading, an AI needs a human hand to guide it and edit the output.
Art: 1/5
The images in the game look nice at first glance, but if you pay attention you'll realize pretty quickly that they're the same as the writing: a pile of cyclical garbage. All the flaws of AI art are on display here: mangled fingers, anomalous objects, and a general lack of consistency. The images are more enjoyable than the writing, but there's very little rhyme or reason to them, and the game ends up being more of a gallery of AI images with nonsense narration sprinkled on top than anything coherent.
Final Thoughts
There are probably some interesting applications for AI generation in games, but 'the AI will make the game for me' certainly isn't one of them. If the dev wants to take another crack at this concept, I hope they'll keep in mind that AI should be used as an assistive tool, not one to automate the entire process. An AI is completely unmoored from human concepts of story flow and cause and effect, which can make for very inspiring bouts of spontaneity, but also means that it needs a firm hand keeping its output coherent.
