Given AI’s training data biases it’s not true reflection of reality but more of streotype projection. I don’t think its effect on PoC character, unconventional demihuman types, or any “semi-real” artstyle will accurately enhance artists’ original intent.

Sony had patented streaming game assets on the fly to reduce hardware space in the past few times. I don’t know how it goes but those “bought and owned” titles can also be trapped deep in subscription ecosystem.

Not the OP but I’ll put my PoV.

AI allows to cut junior and entry level artists. Companies only need to retain top 1% talent orchestrating hordes of AI.

While it is still a craft, commercial art is not about being genuine; it is to deliver product and meeting deadline while passing QA. AI’s output rate outpaces human labor, and the top 1% can certainly identify what aspect makes AI output slop. Which means they can cherry pick “OK” part of AI, review, iterate, tweak to deliver product while keeping quality. The process previously involved comunication between senior and junior artits. Now companies don’t need the rest of the 99% anymore as workforce.

What will happen in the long run? Who knows. Companies are known for only keen on immediate profit.

This tendency is widespread and not limited to art field, nor related to the argument of intrinsic value of art. I can argue this is more of labor (and capitalism) issue, on top of people whose art stolen not getting enough compensation for their work. While I’m not against AI technology itself, its effect on peoples livelihood and climate impact makes current AI landscape hard to defend.