The gaming community has spoken, and the message is crystal clear: keep generative AI out of our games. New survey data and fresh studio controversies paint the same picture—players aren’t buying what the industry is selling.
The Numbers Don’t Lie
A comprehensive survey from Quantic Foundry released this week confirms what many suspected. The numbers are staggering: 85% of respondents hold negative views about generative AI in gaming, with 63% selecting the most negative option available. That’s not just disapproval; that’s outright rejection.
The survey of nearly 1,800 gamers reveals that players are most opposed to AI in creative elements—artwork scored 83% negative, while music and narrative weren’t far behind. Younger players are particularly resistant, with only 3% of teens viewing AI positively. Perhaps most telling: the more a gamer values storytelling and customization, the more they despise AI implementation.
The Larian Controversy
The survey results arrived just as beloved studio Larian faced an unexpected backlash of their own. The Baldur’s Gate 3 developer—a studio that earned massive goodwill for their creative integrity—found themselves in hot water after CEO Swen Vincke’s Bloomberg interview revealed they’re experimenting with generative AI during development of their upcoming Divinity sequel.
Vincke was quick to clarify: no AI-generated content would appear in the final game, and the studio employs 23 concept artists (and is hiring more). They’re using AI only for internal tasks like placeholder text and PowerPoint presentations, not to replace creative work. But for many fans and former employees, even that felt like a betrayal.
“Consider my feedback: I loved working at Larian until AI,” wrote one former Baldur’s Gate 3 artist on social media. The reaction forced Vincke into damage control mode, culminating in a December 18th statement promising an AMA session in January 2026 where developers can explain their processes directly to fans.
The Trust Issue
What’s fascinating about the Larian controversy is that it’s not really about the technology itself—it’s about trust and values. Larian built their reputation on respecting creative talent and putting artistry first. When they started experimenting with AI, even with careful caveats, it felt like a fundamental shift away from those principles.
The gaming industry has watched major publishers embrace AI as a cost-cutting measure while laying off thousands of developers. When even a studio known for doing things right starts exploring AI, players wonder: if Larian’s doing it, who won’t?
Vincke defended the decision by saying it would be “irresponsible” not to evaluate new technologies. But the survey data suggests gamers disagree. They’d rather have fewer games made the old-fashioned way than more games touched by AI, however minimally.
What This Means for Gaming’s Future
The message from both the Quantic Foundry survey and the Larian backlash is consistent: the gaming community values human creativity above technological convenience. With attitudes toward AI in games actually worsening over the past year, studios experimenting with these tools need to tread carefully—or risk alienating the very players who made them successful in the first place.
As the industry continues pushing toward AI adoption, it’s worth remembering that in gaming, the audience has options. They can vote with their wallets, their reviews, and their social media voices. And right now, they’re voting overwhelmingly for humanity over automation.
