For better or worse, generative AI has been unleashed on the gaming industry.
On February 4, Roblox announced that it is adding 4D generation to its existing generative AI tool, allowing players to create interactive objects like cars and planes instead of just static objects. The company's generative AI creation tool is similar to Google's Project Genie, which was unveiled on January 29 and allowed users to instantly “create” generative worlds similar to popular comics like The Legend of Zelda.
Project Genie is a text-to-generation tool where users give a prompt like, “create a game where my dog's toys stand up and fight back,” and Genie will fire it up, create the scenario, and let you run around the created world for a limited time.
“I see it as a tool” Todd Howard comments on AI in game development
Bethesda executive producer Todd Howard talks about the use of AI to create games and shares his opinion on its use, calling it a “tool”.
But whether generative AI tools are seen as a Prometheus moment – the titan who stole fire from the gods and gave it to humanity – or more like a Pandora's Box – the chest that was opened and released all evil into the world – is up for debate. In all likelihood, it's probably somewhere in the middle.
Does Generative AI have a place in game development?
Indie game developers give their thoughts on generative AI
According to this year's Game Developer Conference State of the Gaming Industry survey, 52% of gaming industry professionals surveyed believe that generative AI is having a negative impact on the gaming industry. That is 30% higher compared to 2025.
“At first I was a little anxious, because if we can really start just launching games like this, then an entire industry of people who have spent years perfecting their craft could be out of a job,” Alexis Brutman, CEO and game director at independent Astral Clocktower Studios, told GameRant.
At a time when every week seems to bring a new round of layoffs to the industry, Google's Genie or Roblox's Cube Foundation Model aren't doing much to alleviate those strains.
An AI just built a fully playable Pokemon clone with 1 prompt
As AI tools continue to stir controversy in the video game industry, someone is building a fully playable Pokemon clone using a very basic prompt.
While there was some initial concern, Brutman explained that it dissipated somewhat after seeing that Genie wasn't quite powerful enough to make big, immediate changes in the industry. Although it raises some questions: Do these tools have a place in game development, and how far will they go?
“[AI] has no place in creative design work, especially because so many AI models are trained on the work of artists they weren't allowed to be trained on, and games are meant to be made by humans, period, says Brutman. And for the most part, it seems consumers agree.
According to a survey by Quantic Foundry, of the over 1.75 million players who participated, 62.7% indicated that they felt very negatively about the use of generative AI in video games. Respondents had particular issues with generative AI used in the creation of art, music, sound effects, dialogue and narrative story elements such as quests.
“It seems like player opinion is overwhelmingly negative, and at the end of the day, that's what really matters,” Brutman said. “If players yell at developers they don't want to see [generative AI] in games, I think we might just leave it alone.”
Generative AI tools allow studios to cut corners and costs in the name of increased efficiency, which often has an impact on the creators behind the games.
“As humans, there will be trends that come up and we decide we don't like, and our wallets start talking,” Marcus Brown, CEO and co-founder of FanArcade, an independent mobile game studio, told GameRant.
But at the same time you have games like Arc Raiders. The game has been a huge success. At the time of writing, the game has 231,470 concurrent players on Steam. It also uses generative AI for its voiceover work.
Arc Raider's AI Voice Controversy Explained
Hype for Arc Raiders continues to build, but a recent controversy over the possible use of AI voices has the game in hot water.
Larian Studios, the developer behind Baldur's Gate 3another critical success, also caught flak for saying they used generative AI to create concept art. The concept art was always replaced by human artists, but the community backlash was enough to force the developer to say they would no longer use generative AI during development.
It is generally up to the players to decide how generative AI is used
Players may have more power than they think
The power of the consumer lies in the wallet. If it's something a developer does — like using generative AI tools during the development process of their games — players can basically vote how they feel about it.
Mat Piscatella, CEO of Games with Circana, a market research and data analytics firm, likened the situation to Project Ten Dollar.
Project Ten Dollar was a 2010 initiative by EA to try to get publishers to generate revenue from the sale of used games, rather than the money going solely to retailers like GameStop. Basically, if you bought a used game at GameStop, you would also have to pay EA to unlock game features, including multiplayer access.
Games like Dragon Age: Origins and Mass Effect 2 both had downloadable content locked behind this initiative. In the end, consumers voted with their wallets and the project failed.
“[Publishers] everyone went into it heavily because they wanted to get used to fighting [game sales]. Consumers pushed back pretty hard on that concept, and it was dead within a year,” Piscatella told GameRant.
The same thing could happen with generative AI in video games. If consumers don't buy games that have Gen AI assets, we likely won't see too many instances of AI asset usage popping up.
“If every game comes out that has Gen AI, and it's all rubbish, then it's not going to last very long. If we get a bunch of games with Gen AI, and it's good or well received by the player base, then all of a sudden you're going to see more of it,” he said.
Players can shape the industry, and with the precedent set by the reception of Arc Raiders and the push back to Larian's generative AI use, it seems that developers will be listening.
“At the end of the day, the dollar will win out over everything,” Brown said. “About the consumers [say]No, we don't like this because it's so obviously AI, and we're turned off by it, you're going to see game studios pull back from how much they implement.”
Can consumers, developers and managers find common ground?
For better or worse, AI has changed the game
In its latest earnings call, Take-Two CEO Strauss Zelnick said the company is fully on board with generative AI. Take-Two publishes huge games, including Borderlands 4, NBA 2K, and the coming Grand Theft Auto 6.
“We are actively embracing generative AI,” he said in response to a question during the company's earnings call.
“We have hundreds of pilots and implementations across our company, including with our studios, and we see opportunities to increase efficiency, reduce costs and create the ability to do what digital technology has always allowed, which is everyday tasks become easier and less relevant, freeing up our creators to do the more interesting tasks of making great entertainment.”
Overall, it is not a surprising view. CEOs, as Piscatella pointed out to me during our conversation, are generally excited about tools that can save their companies money. And according to GDC's survey, 36% of game industry professionals already use generative AI tools in some capacity as part of their job.
But when a CEO starts saying things like they see opportunities to increase efficiency and cut costs, sometimes that can just translate to layoffs. According to Brutman,
“In general, as a human race, we have to set limits on what we're okay with. It's the wild west out there. They do whatever the hell they want with [AI].
While Brutman doesn't think the creation of AI is inherently bad, it's hard to deny that it has become significantly more negative with a lack of oversight.
“It's become more and more negative, in many different ways, displacing people in their jobs in an already unstable economy in many areas. There really should be some clear standards, and I think every studio should have those standards,” she said.
For example, when Astral Clocktower Studios hires voice actors, their contract includes an AI rider. It's an agreement that says the studio won't train AI with its voice or use AI at all in its game.
That's something she'd like to see more of in the industry — studios taking a clear stance that makes it easier for players to choose what kind of development they want to support.
“Developers are going to have to make very personal decisions about who they're working for and in what capacity they're comfortable using AI,” Brown said. Before starting FanArcade, Brown worked for Epic Games on Fortnite, specifically on the game's Festival Mode.
According to Brown, in the current landscape, studios will likely need to use AI tools to remain competitive. But he said that when it comes to music, voice work, art — the more creative aspects of game development — AI has no place.
“When you look at a painting, nobody expects the artist to hand-craft the canvas that the artist is painting on,” he said. “So all the elements of what we do that I would consider part of the scaffolding or the canvas, I don't necessarily have resistance to using AI. But all the things we create will still have a human touch when it comes to actually painting it.”
AI will never be able to replace human ingenuity. Brown specifically points out that AI, by its very nature, cannot create anything new, as it cannot think outside of what it is trained to do.
Electronic Arts is pushing developers to use AI, and they're not happy
Electronic Arts has reportedly been pushing its employees to use artificial intelligence, and they're not happy with the latest changes.
It will still be up to people to decide what trends come next. But when it comes to making everyday tasks easier, that's where AI can shine in game development.
“Lowering technical barriers doesn't replace the need to have good taste or to come up with good ideas. To be disciplined enough, to have the right creative voice to appeal to players,” Brutman said. “If anything, it can make those qualities even more important, because the audience can see when something has real intent behind it, versus something that's been put together by a machine.”
The conversation around AI and its place in game development will continue to evolve. There will likely need to be a trade-off between what players are willing to support with their money, how managers push AI on their employees, and how much the developers behind the games are willing to accept or push back.
