（Singapore, 26.02.2026）The global video game industry, now worth around $200 billion, is facing a new kind of culture clash. As studios race to adopt artificial intelligence to lower costs and speed up production, many gamers are pushing back loudly.
What was once marketed as the next great leap forward in game development has instead become a flashpoint. Players complain that AI-generated voices, artwork and design elements feel cheap, robotic and careless. Developers, meanwhile, argue that without new tools, the economics of making big-budget games simply no longer work.
The tension came into sharp focus with Arc Raiders, a surprise blockbuster from Stockholm-based Embark Studios. The game sold 12 million copies within three months of launch and is currently the most-played paid title on Steam. But despite its commercial success, it briefly became the target of online criticism after players discovered that some in-game voices sounded auto-generated.
Embark’s founder and CEO, Patrick Soderlund, said the studio used AI selectively — mainly for elements that were not central to the immersive experience. Professional actors were still involved, he said, and AI was used to support, not replace, creative talent.
Soderlund, a former senior executive at Electronic Arts, founded Embark with the idea that the industry needed change. Development costs have ballooned in recent years, making it harder to produce games at prices players can afford. The pandemic boom led many companies to overhire and overspend, only to face painful corrections later. Layoffs and canceled projects have become common across the sector.
Major companies are under pressure. Sony recently shut down Bluepoint Games, a studio it acquired five years ago. Ubisoft announced a sweeping reorganization that sent its share price plunging. At the same time, executives have expressed hope that generative AI could help stabilize operations and improve efficiency.
Soderlund believes AI can eliminate repetitive and exhausting tasks that weigh down designers. From its earliest days, Embark experimented with new workflows aimed at allowing smaller teams to build ambitious projects more efficiently.
“We’re still hiring animators and audio specialists,” he said in interviews. “We’re expanding voice actor involvement.” In his view, AI is a tool that helps studios grow and not shrink creative output.
But convincing gamers has proven difficult.
Many players have grown skeptical after years of disappointing launches, studio closures and corporate restructuring. For them, AI feels like another cost-cutting move that risks lowering quality.
Part of the problem is that AI’s flaws are often visible. When it works well, it goes unnoticed. When it doesn’t, it stands out immediately, such as awkward voice lines or mismatched artwork.
Research firm Omdia found that 47% of game developers surveyed last year believe generative AI could reduce overall game quality. That figure has risen from the year before, suggesting concerns are spreading even within studios.
Liam Deane, who compiled the report, said some developers expect productivity gains of 30% to 50% for basic tasks like image generation. However, he noted that truly transformative changes such as fully humanlike characters or entirely new game styles are likely years away. Game development remains complex and multidisciplinary, making it hard for AI to replace skilled professionals entirely.
Professor Youichiro Miyake of the University of Tokyo, who researches AI in games, says current generative tools often deliver results that are “70 out of 100,” while professional artists consistently produce work at “95 or 96.” That quality gap creates extra work rather than savings. Studios must still spend time refining and correcting AI outputs.
There is also the issue of control. AI can generate a general theme, for example, a Middle Eastern-inspired scene, but it may lack the precision needed to recreate 12th-century Persia accurately. For gamers who notice historical and cultural details, such mistakes can be immersion-breaking.
Online communities have amplified these frustrations. On Reddit’s massive r/gaming forum, posts criticizing AI use often attract strong engagement. Major titles like Battlefield 6 and Call of Duty: Black Ops 7 have faced criticism for artwork and design elements that appeared poorly generated or thematically inconsistent. Valve’s Steam platform now includes labels identifying games that use AI-generated content.
Freelance designer Magdy “Leo” Darwish said AI tools have already reshaped his profession. After image-generation software improved significantly last year, he was forced to lower his rates to remain competitive. He now sees peers rushing projects and cutting prices to keep up with the speed of automated tools.
“I’m already in a field that’s being eaten up by AI,” he said.
Beyond artistic concerns, gamers also associate AI with rising hardware costs. Graphics chips used to power AI data centers have driven up demand for advanced components. Memory prices have surged, and top-tier Nvidia graphics cards have reached around $4,000 on resale markets. For PC gamers, that link has created further resentment.
In Japan, another major gaming hub, companies are experimenting with AI cautiously and often quietly. Developers say public discussions about AI use can trigger immediate backlash from players.
Some firms have drawn clear boundaries. Capcom, creator of Resident Evil, has stated that generative AI will not be used in core creative areas such as new game and character design. Activision has emphasized that its creative process remains led by human talent.
Microsoft’s gaming chief Asha Sharma recently reassured players that the company would not “flood our ecosystem with soulless AI slop,” insisting that games are art crafted by humans.
Still, many believe AI’s role will continue expanding. As tools improve, their presence may become less noticeable. Voice models are already becoming more realistic, and artists can blend AI-generated work with human refinements.
For professionals like Darwish, adaptation may be the only option.
“It’s getting to the point that if you don’t use it professionally, you risk becoming irrelevant,” he said.
