Ren'Py Daz Illusion What 3D engine should my new game be made in? Honey Select or Daz?

[Satori6]

ai girls like yours look even more creepy and like possessed dolls with that porcelain skin

ITT: Porcelain skin



The point of AI is that you can tell it what you want. If you ask it to only make pale girls, that's what you will get.

Back to the topic: neither AI nor HS aim at realism, while Daz does. That's the key difference: a cartoon doesn't give any uncanny valley feelings, because it doesn't resemble a real human.

Daz can get close, but still fails in most cases, and that's what gives the creeps, much like a lifelike robot does.

 

[peterppp]

ITT: Porcelain skin
View attachment 3524026 View attachment 3524027 View attachment 3524028 View attachment 3524030


The point of AI is that you can tell it what you want. If you ask it to only make pale girls, that's what you will get.

Back to the topic: neither AI nor HS aim at realism, while Daz does. That's the key difference: a cartoon doesn't give any uncanny valley feelings, because it doesn't resemble a real human.

Daz can get close, but still fails in most cases, and that's what gives the creeps, much like a lifelike robot does.

lol way to miss the point. by porcelain i mean the texture, or rather lack of - not the color. smooth like porcelain

you can't dictate what gives other people creepy feelings. you must know that many people dont like ai girls. i'm one of them and for me one reason is their creepy smoothness. daz girls usually aren't close enough to real humans to be mistaken for one. there can be some creepiness there too but not as much as with ai girls

 

[MissFortune]

ITT: Porcelain skin
View attachment 3524026 View attachment 3524027 View attachment 3524028 View attachment 3524030


The point of AI is that you can tell it what you want. If you ask it to only make pale girls, that's what you will get.

Back to the topic: neither AI nor HS aim at realism, while Daz does. That's the key difference: a cartoon doesn't give any uncanny valley feelings, because it doesn't resemble a real human.

Daz can get close, but still fails in most cases, and that's what gives the creeps, much like a lifelike robot does.

Pseudo-realism like Daz and 2D art are two different things, and I believe peterppp is referring to the former.

The thing is, AI is a long way from being truly lifelike, or replicating it. The issue lies in how the images are created, even with something more Blender-esque like ComfyUI. Everything about AI images is overly soft and silky smooth, there's very little in the way of textured hair, skin pores, texture of eye moisture or lips, and other stuff of that sort. It's why AI images are so easy to pick out versus the real thing.

Anything that's believable tends to be fairly heavily doctored.

 

[Satori6]

The thing is, AI is a long way from being truly lifelike, or replicating it.

Perhaps I didn't word it correctly, but that's exactly my point.

The uncanny valley effect only happens with lifelike human representations, so while AI is in its infancy and has a million flaws, they are of a different order: you may find AI art ugly because of personal taste, but it's not a psychological response like in the case of uncanny valley, which is specific to representations that look almost like a human.

This definition (from Oxford, according to Google) probably explains it better:

Used in reference to the phenomenon whereby a computer-generated figure or humanoid robot bearing a near-identical resemblance to a human being arouses a sense of unease or revulsion in the person viewing it.

AI pictures and HS would be up there with The Incredibles: they are goofy cartoon-like representations that can vary in quality, but which would never be mistaken for a human, whereas some Daz renders are in the Cubo Girl territory: they get too close to a human, and triggers a feeling of disgust in those of us prone to this effect.

Not everybody experiences it, and there are degrees for those of us who do. I seem to be particularly sensitive to it, to the point where even people with botox give me the creeps.

 

[anne O'nymous]

Perhaps I didn't word it correctly, but that's exactly my point.

The uncanny valley effect only happens with lifelike human representations, so while AI is in its infancy and has a million flaws, they are of a different order: you may find AI art ugly because of personal taste, but it's not a psychological response like in the case of uncanny valley, which is specific to representations that look almost like a human.

You know that there's AI that generate lifelike human representations, right ? And it's precisely those wanabe lifelike human representation that fall in the uncanny valley for many people. This whatever if its due to their porcelain textural aspect, too dense symmetry, bad muscles/limb representation, or whatever else.

AI pictures and HS would be up there with The Incredibles: they are goofy cartoon-like representations that can vary in quality, but which would never be mistaken for a human,

In what world would those

You must be registered to see the links

be put at the same level than "The Incredibles" ?

And I just took the first example I found, without searching hard. There's already many sites that offer you a hundred of new human looking porn AI generated images every day. And most of them are as human-like looking than the photography of a real person ; modulo the possible uncanny valley effect they'll trigger in the viewer.

Not everybody experiences it, and there are degrees for those of us who do.

How can you know this, yet clearly refuse to acknowledge that some can experience it with AI generated images ? I mean, it's clearly where the difference in degrees happen.

There's tons of people who wouldn't be sent into the uncanny valley because of what is clear 3D renders, because they are more exposed to them, or because they are older, and therefore have been exposed to their evolution, what make their brain associate the result to a pure built construction.
But AI generated images are something different. Many have the same kind of flaw than a bit not enough realistic 3D renders, while not having their feeling. What mean that their brain do not recognize them as being built constructions, but yet also fail to recognize them as being real person... What is precisely the definition of the uncanny valley.

 

[Satori6]

You know that there's AI that generate lifelike human representations, right ? And it's precisely those wanabe lifelike human representation that fall in the uncanny valley for many people. This whatever if its due to their porcelain textural aspect, too dense symmetry, bad muscles/limb representation, or whatever else.

The person who replied to me said "ai girls like yours". My AI images are nothing like your examples, and my replies have been in the context of that post.

Lifelike AI models can obviously produce an uncanny valley effect, although funnily enough, the examples that you posted didn't make me feel like some Daz renders do. Maybe because all of those pictures -except for the second one- have obvious major flaws.

In any case, this is going way off topic. I prefer HS to Daz. If you prefer Daz, that's cool.

 

[anne O'nymous]

The person who replied to me said "ai girls like yours". My AI images are nothing like your examples, and my replies have been in the context of that post.

And he also said that they were looking creepy, nothing more. Whatever peterppp or MissFortune, none of them talked about the uncanny valley. It's not because the cognitive dissonance due to the uncanny valley make what you see feel creepy, that the said cognitive dissonance is the only possible reason that can trigger that creepiness feeling.
It's you who brought, out of nowhere, the uncanny valley into the discussion. So, yeah, I answered without taking count of a context that never existed before the post I answered too...

[...] although funnily enough, the examples that you posted didn't make me feel like some Daz renders do.

Why should they ?
At no time did I said, nor even implied, that they were examples that can send someone to the uncanny valley. I just illustrated the fact that AI generated images aren't necessarily at the same looking level than "The Incredibles" ; this accordingly to the context you created, out of nowhere, all by yourself. And, obviously, for this I needed ones that are more human looking.
To be precise, the fact that I also wrote, "modulo the possible uncanny valley effect", was, more than implicitly, pointing to the fact that it wasn't examples intended to send the viewer into the uncanny valley.

If you prefer Daz, that's cool.

And you get this from what ? There's absolutely nothing in that post, nor even in all my posts in that thread, that can give a single clue regarding what my preference can be...

 

[jamdan]

Anyways, back to the OP topic.

I play several games of both HS and Daz art style.

Honey Select:

+ It's quicker, since you don't actually render. This also means you don't need a great PC.
+ Animations are easier to do, I believe they have quite a lot of pre-made ones available via mods and stuff.
+ Much cheaper, if you don't plan on pirating your Daz assets.
- Not many good male characters available.
- Cannot sell your games commercially, but you can still have subscription sites (Patreon, Subscribestar etc.)

I think people that like HS more than Daz do so because of the previously mentioned uncanny effect some Daz art has. HS, being more stylized, tends to not have this effect. Although I'd say your renders are pretty good.

People on the opposite side of that dislike the stylized effects.

So, overall, liking or disliking HS/Daz depends on whether they like more realistic or more stylized art.

If you're unsure which you like, try out HS and see how it compares.


Also, with Honey Select, remember there are technically several different versions people make their art with. Honey Select 1, Honey Select 2 (most recent), Koikatu etc. These are all actually games made by a Japanese company named Illusion. Yes, people use a game to make other games.

https://f95zone.to/sam/latest_alpha/#/cat=games/page=1/creator=illusion

 

[MLocke]

Eternum is the gold standard for character creation. If I recall, Reincarnotica was a standout at one point. I'm not even sure if it was Honey Select anymore because it was that far above and beyond what you'd expect. If you can't heavily mod Honey Select 2, you won't be able to match up. I think you even need lighting mods, possibly custom props, etc. Remember, these are HS2 studio mods, and then there's StudioNEO. That may have changed. I never really messed with it too much. People have been working wonders even years before the PlayHome days. There are some artists that simply create renders rather than games, and they have a following. I am not sure if they always have to find new clothing, decals, and other twists for their characters.

 

[DuniX]

The good thing about Honey Select 2 is you can make new characters easily, especially with downloading Cards and using the new Morphing Tool mods to mix and randomize between them.
I have no idea how you make or morph characters in Daz but it's a complete pain.
Sure you can make 6 original characters if you put in the effort but you probably aren't going to make 20+ in your game.

 

[Pgsurprise]

I'm not a dev, so I can't help with details, but I did want to say:

1. I think your examples look great.

2. I prefer playing games with the realistic look of DAZ. But, if the story is good enough I will play games with styles I don't really like. Also, there are games with good art that are too poorly written for me to play.

GL with your project, whatever you decide.

 

[OfTheFence]

I feel that if you already know how to use one you should just stick to it. Why start over again? Keep working on what you know so you can get your creations out into the world.

 

[Buletti]

I think your renders are awesome and I definately prefer DAZ over HS.

Imho DAZ also looks better on preview Images.

Pale Carnations is one of my favourite games but for my taste IT would be even better in DAZ.

In the end it comes down to the content.