Happy New Year, everyone! 2026! We made it! I was going to write a cute column about video game New Year's resolutions but then I decided I'd rather waste my week off and instead get angry emails from people who agree with me on 95 percent of other issues. And that's because I fear 2026 will be the year AI in gaming becomes very annoying. We're just going to hear about it endlessly and it's just going to be so annoying.
Well, I'll be honest: it's already annoying. As you probably know, Larian's CEO said in an interview that the team used generative AI in the early stages of planning their new game Divinity. Many fans didn't like this, especially since some people at Larian had already declared their disdain for AI and the company's games are known and loved for their human touch. Other fans felt it was foolish for Larian to avoid testing new equipment (although “Saketa” is doing the heavy lifting here) to help finish games faster and eliminate the crunch. The Internet fought back, as the Internet does.
How AI in Gaming Hits the Headlines by the End of 2025
Larian's CEO clarified that no concept artists were fired and that the tools were meant to help workers rather than replace them. Then everyone pointed out Clair Obscur: Expedition 33 using generative AI in its early stages (to the extent of accidentally dropping in placeholder art) and how it wasn't condemned like divinity. Expedition 33 was then condemned and stripped of its Indie Game Award, although a company representative said no Zen AI was used when the game was submitted.
And then the Expedition 33 team said they only used the AI sparingly and didn't like it from the get-go and kind of regretted it. Also, the director of Kingdom Come: Deliverance 2 jumped in and said that everyone was a fool for not facing the reality of everything. Passion is high! Patience is short!
The Gamer Game of the Year – 2025
It has been 12 months of unexpected hits, leading to a reasonably expected conclusion. Roll on 2026!
And we're just starting to get angry. Now, I lay my cards on the table. I'm not a huge generative AI fan. And I'm specifically saying 'productive AI' because people who hate AI tend to throw the baby out with the bathwater while people who love AI tend to think that the bathwater is also a baby and should be protected at all costs.
When it comes to AI in art (I'm not talking about monitoring crops or protein folding here) there seem to be two solid conversations: those for it are soulless, talentless hacks, and those against it are idiots who stick with horses while cars leave them in the dust.
Gaming needs to figure out what it means to use AI
So, no, I don't like generative AI for a lot of very loud reasons that you may or may not already agree with. We don't need to sue my own personal feelings about the human element of art and I'm going to change your mind about what constitutes creation.
I don't like that the AI is trained on copyrighted material. I don't like data centers raising my electricity bill and possibly polluting my water supply. I don't like that many users already treat generative AI as a bias-free knowledge god who can answer any question correctly, even about ideas or serious mental health issues. Most of all, I don't like that the em dash – the spackle of writing – is now associated with AI.
But what's going to be even more troubling is the fundamental disagreement about how generative AI is being used in game development. What do we mean by placeholders? What is concept art? Are we generating the first draft of art that the concept artists are working on? Are we using AI to iterate and refine already created concept art? Are these vague brainstorming or very specific prompts?
The same goes for writing. What is placeholder text in a role-playing game? Are we talking about a basic plot that has been generated and will be played by professionals? Or do we mean normal dialog trees that allow the game to be tested. Oh, and testing. Obviously the AI is going to test the games. Does it cost jobs? How will the AI test the game? What is the underlying technology? How many questions can I ask in one paragraph?
Your favorite game dev is probably using AI; CD Projekt Red joins Larian in asserting that the tech has “meaningful” advantages
CDPR is already applying AI technology in “production sectors”.
Fewer fans understand how the technology is being used and fewer developers are open about whether or not they're using it, which makes it even more annoying. And, no, I'm not saying fans should 'educate themselves' on how AI works. They understand the basics. Stop saying that if they just learned the mathematical equations behind machine learning, everyone would be on board.
That's not the problem. The problem is that fans aren't told how or if it's being used until it's a PR crisis. There's a big difference between 'we used AI to test some stuff and hated it' and 'we used AI to build the foundation of the game' and they're all going to be met with the loudest voices possible, both professional and amateur.
The battle lines for AI have already been drawn
And just like you can't change your mind because I yelled at you in threads, forcing AI down people's throats won't make them more excited either. I have seen the argument that it is literally impossible not to use an AI product at this point because the technology is writing code that is used in many if not most popular apps and operating systems. 'You already have it on your computer, so why fight?'
So you have proponents who conflate anything that's automated on a computer like procedural generation is like generative AI, so, if you think about it, you've really been using a tool for decades. And, of course, there are standards in between who aren't writing emails for work and are having fun creating quirky pictures of their kids playing in the Super Bowl to share online.
On the flip side, everything is AI now and arguing that the technology is inevitable and that companies are secretly using it doesn't really help your game with the anti-AI folks. All you're doing is creating a paranoid subset of your audience that feels like they have to be constantly on the lookout for a product they don't want. You're not making them feel better about the AI or showing them how it's improving the game itself or the lives of your employees, you're just telling them they have no choice and that if they don't like it they can buy old games on Steam sales.
Gaming's current gen AI controversies haven't affected current Steam top sellers
All four of the platform's paid bestsellers are directly connected to the ongoing debate.
If you think it's all silly, which you understand, the longer this argument goes, the more people will be suspicious of weird ambient music or an awkward line of dialogue or a hand-drawn background that's just slightly distorted. What is real and what is fake, what is useful and what is heartless is becoming a battleground.
I respect that this is an odd position for pro-AI people. They believe it is a groundbreaking technology that could change civilization even more than the Internet. So it must feel weird as hell that a ton of nerds like me are bashing about not loving it. I'm sure it feels like humanity has been given a magic wand and some dummies still prefer to return to the rotting wooden wand. But when fans are worried about AI in games, treating them like naive idiots doesn't win back that trust. This will only increase the volume and create a pressure feedback loop.
When developers circle vehicles or dismiss concerns out of hand as silly, it makes dorks like me dig in. And when dorks like me dig in, pro-AI people get frustrated that there's no more give or take to the conversation and they get fired up too. The catch 22 is that transparency prevents both causation and blowback. Which, again, is going to make it all annoying.
So we're in a situation where we're told AI is inevitable in game development but there's a great deal of confusion about what it's actually being used for, which only annoys fans of every stripe. If the Expedition 33 team tried AI in 2022 but didn't like it, I'm willing to believe them. If Larian says that, despite its AI use, it's actually expanding its creative staff, I'm inclined to believe it. I really want to believe that the vast majority of people, even in disagreement, are somehow coming across in good faith. But the more companies obfuscate and hide the strength in AI, the more AI is going to become a battleground for fans.
I know, I know. It will pass. Even those of us who don't like it will get used to it. Here's a spray. A dash there. What's the harm? But by that point, the whole thing would be so outrageously annoying that I couldn't even stand it. It's also possible that I'm a big part of the problem.
