Agree with you here. It’s obvious that a lot of effort and love went into the making of this game. Taking time to appreciate what the team at JJP created is what they would want. The point of the playfield art is to be viewed and enjoyed. You clearly did your homework before making a post. You are not in the wrong for pointing out what everyone can see.
I just looked up that picture of Ron. Here’s another picture of him for reference. The pattern on his outfit is actually the number 2. Unbelievable that it was transformed into a strap on his bracer.
Hand drawn implies an actual human artist drawing the art. Reference photos are an essential part of the process in creating a new piece of art. Even if the basis is a tracing of a photo to match a pose or layout, there is plenty of opportunity for originality. The photo of Ron used shows up immediately with a google search of “ron weasley quidditch picture movie”. The AI touch up in my eye detracts from the original photo.
My subjective take is that there was not much effort that went into this part of the playfield. From using a common photo of Ron to the low effort “touch up.”
Generative AI is controversial, to say the least. It is not, however, inherently bad. It is a tool. And tools used well, with genuine effort, create a product that is better than the sum of its parts. But when corner cutting occurs in the creation process, whether it’s generative AI or poor workmanship, the audience can see. I don’t think we are asking too much for what is marketed as a high-quality, luxury product at this price point.