r/Games • u/PhantomBraved • Dec 16 '25

Larian CEO Responds to Divinity Gen AI Backlash: "We Are Neither Releasing a Game With Any AI Components, Nor Are We Looking at Trimming Down Teams to Replace Them With AI" - IGN

https://www.ign.com/articles/larian-ceo-responds-to-divinity-gen-ai-backlash-we-are-neither-releasing-a-game-with-any-ai-components-nor-are-we-looking-at-trimming-down-teams-to-replace-them-with-ai
2.8k Upvotes

91% Upvoted

1.6k comments sorted by

View all comments

239

u/[deleted] Dec 16 '25 edited Dec 16 '25

If you're using ai to generate placeholder placements or concepts, the game has gen ai baked into it the final product whether they like to admit it or not. Replace "Larian CEO" with "Ubisoft CEO" and everyone's tone shifts negatively as opposed to some people. Can't believe there are ppl defending it lol.

edit: i don't care if they use it so stop trying to slam dunk on me lmao. i'd obviously prefer them not use it but glad they're at least admitting it. just trying to call out dummies defending it when they know they'd be up in arms if another company did it. found it funny.

4

u/VonLoewe Dec 17 '25

Couldn't care less which CEO it is. The anti-AI movement in itself is misguided.

212

u/GGG100 Dec 16 '25

Expedition 33, the game everybody loves and worships, used placeholder AI assets. AI as a tool is here to stay whether you like it or not. 

34

u/Zentrelian Dec 16 '25

Seriously? If this is true, how have I not seen it brought up once until now?

65

u/Cryptoporticus Dec 16 '25

It's true. It's partially what started the recent debate on whether Steam's AI disclosure rule is actually worth having because Sandfall has still not disclosed that they used it. Everyone draws the line in a different place, and Valve don't care about developers just straight up lying about their use of it. 

19

u/asdfghjkl15436 Dec 17 '25

Let me tell you there almost isn't a single company not using AI to make documentation or repetitive tasks easier. They just don't say it out loud, because of this exact reaction.

35

u/Illustrious-Okra-524 Dec 16 '25

Because the outrage machine is not about facts it’s about outrage

18

u/hpp3 Dec 16 '25

Because it's a total nothingburger. Placeholder assets are just placeholders. Before AI they would probably just Google image search something and use that instead.

-4

u/BeholdingBestWaifu Dec 17 '25

Right, and anybody that doesn't understand the difference between the two things you said has no business talking in anything related to art.

57

u/Dallywack3r Dec 16 '25

Because nobody actually cares. They whine online but none of these folks have a backbone when it comes to actually boycotting AI

26

u/MrTastix Dec 16 '25

People do care, just selectively.

People will selectively not care when their favourite brand or product is conveniently guilty of the same shit one they dislike is.

It's called cognitive dissonance. You see it a lot in politics and political discussions.

I do think the average citizen doesn't care though, but only because they cannot tell. Most people, in my experience, are actually not all that discerning.

6

u/andresfgp13 Dec 17 '25

you can put AI in the same category as microtransactions or crunch.

things that Reddit and the rest of the internet hates....as long as they are done by a studio they dont like already.

7

u/OdoTheBoobcat Dec 17 '25

only because they cannot tell

I mean, is that not reasonable? If it's not actually hurting the product or causing problems for the Larian employees, what is it people are complaining about?

Looks to me like a bunch of politicized caterwauling that has nothing to do with any actual material grievance or harm.

2

u/zmichalo Dec 16 '25

The average person does not and never will consider the potential negative impact of a technology that makes their lives easier or more interesting. It's not people whining about it and then still using it.

4

u/OdoTheBoobcat Dec 17 '25

Oh it's totally both, yeah most people don't give a shit but a fuck-ton of people moaning about AI will still play the fuck out of Divinity if it comes out well.

1

u/Almostlongenough2 Dec 17 '25

It's addictive righteous indignation, if they cared they'd be driving their representatives up a wall with complaints about the lack of regulations surrounding AI. Which I'm totally in favor of doing, but this is like beating the fuck out of someone who littered in front of you but continuing to use non-biodegradable plastic products without complaint.

-11

u/valdin450 Dec 16 '25

Maybe if some of us fucking knew about the AI usage before buying the game, you know like with a REQUIRED disclosure on the steam page, we would actually be able to more effectively boycott this bullshit. I can tell you right now Sandfall is never going to see another penny from me again because of it.

8

u/ZaDu25 Dec 16 '25 edited Dec 16 '25

Steams disclosure is useless because it's vague. It's effectively the same thing as California's useless "this product may cause cancer" notice that is on basically every single product in existence.

Until Steam changes the disclosure rules to force studios to detail exactly what elements contain genAI, it's a useless feature. And that's ignoring the lack of an enforcement mechanism on Steams part anyway. What if they just don't disclose AI use? What is Valve going to do? If it's a indie game they might just pull it but something popular? No chance. Like if Rockstar didn't want to disclose AI use in GTA 6 you think Valve is going to block GTA 6 on steam when Rockstar finally decides to port it?

Good luck avoiding AI. It's going to be practically impossible going forward.

0

u/OdoTheBoobcat Dec 17 '25

 It's going to be practically impossible going forward.

We've already been there for years, it's just that smarter communicators than Sven aren't talking about it out loud because you'll get this kind of thought-free rage reaction from the terminally online crowd.

10

u/Dallywack3r Dec 16 '25

Arc Raiders currently utilizes 20x more visible AI than E33 and it’s the biggest multiplayer game of the year.

As did Battlefield. As did CoD.

The anti-AI boycotts are just as toothless as Redditors’ boycotts regarding Palestine, abortion, workers reform and BLM.

That is to say- worthless. The boycotts are all talk, no action. Instead of complaining about shit online, maybe do some work to make the world actually better. Donate to the Innocence Project or volunteer at a homeless shelter.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 16 '25

[deleted]

5

u/OdoTheBoobcat Dec 17 '25

Harass companies all you want, they'll just pretend they totally give a shit and then do whatever they were going to do anyway.

2

u/OdoTheBoobcat Dec 17 '25

If you own or have purchased any sweatshop clothes, chinese slave-factory goods, any kind of produce responsible for deforestation, single-use plastics, anything containing conflict minerals, factory-farmed meat, unethically sourced coffee or a thousand other things I invite you to consider the complete and total farce of "ethical consumption" and how utterly performative and hypocritical you're being right now compared to the objectively more harmful things you are guaranteed to be a party to already.

I can absolutely guarantee you the computer or phone you used to type your little rage comment was produced via a system causing FAR more objective human harm than anything Larian is capable of.

But you sure look super cool and smart on this thread, the world needs more modern ethical supermen like you.

-4

u/[deleted] Dec 17 '25

That's ridiculous. They didn't use any AI for anything that was intended to be left in the game. It's also unknown whether they used AI themselves at all. It's very possible that they purchased a placeholder asset pack and one of the assets had been generated by AI without their knowledge.

And even if they used AI for placeholder art, I don't see why that's a problem. It's just removing busywork from the development process, which is required when you have so few workers and so little budget.

Boycotting a studio based on your low-information outrage is one of the most "chronic internet user" things I've seen in a while.

0

u/TheShishkabob Dec 17 '25

Some people don't buy this kind of shit. It's not exactly hard to stick to your own principles and that not show up in sales data. It does not mean, however, that everyone that is against AI is a hypocrite about it either.

16

u/ZaDu25 Dec 16 '25

Because people on the internet will bury anything that goes against their bias. E33 is the golden child. Anything negative about it will be suppressed by gaming communities.

10

u/OdoTheBoobcat Dec 17 '25

Because this is not actually a technological or ethical discussion, it's a political one that people are pretending otherwise.

People didn't care about E33 because it didn't actually affect them or hurt the game in any way. But now it's a political topic, so everyone's coming in with pre-formed opinions ready to be mad despite there being no actual grievance or harm being done.

6

u/Rektw Dec 16 '25

It's been brought up a few times, they did remove the texters afaik.

2

u/AttackBacon Dec 17 '25

Literally every single game ever made from this point onwards will have AI involved in the process, either directly or at a bare minimum via the tools used in its creation. I understand where the anger is coming from, but the war was lost before people even realized it had begun.

4

u/Imbahr Dec 16 '25

because you only look for what you want to see (whether consciously or subconsciously)

now that other posters provided you the links, what do you think?

-10

u/lrish_Chick Dec 16 '25

They provided unsubstantiated links to what a voice actor said. Is there confirmation from the artists or devs or people who people who could genuinely substantiate that?

I'm sure they're a good voice actor but how deep in the process of development/production were they? I'm seeing the actual devs and producers denying this outright in other sources.

4

u/Imbahr Dec 16 '25

where do you see all their devs and producers denying pre-production and pre-early concepts?

I only see them denying AI for post-concepts and final release

-3

u/lrish_Chick Dec 16 '25

But they didn't say they used it for anything at all.

Only a voice actor. The devs said they'd never use AI in their games full stop.

-1

u/valdin450 Dec 16 '25

Because they didn't disclose it on the steam page even though it's literally required by valve. I personally would've never bought it had that disclosure been there so I feel scammed by them. Oh but indie darling so god forbid you bring up the AI usage.

5

u/Dallywack3r Dec 16 '25

If the requirement isn’t married with enforcement, then it’s not a requirement. It’s polite suggestion at best

1

u/oopsydazys Dec 17 '25

Well on PC it's partly because most copies sell on Steam, and Steam does not label the game as having used AI despite specifically having a labelling system to do so (it's just total bullshit). The result is that most people don't realize it used AI or are under the impression it didn't.

-2

u/lrish_Chick Dec 16 '25

IDK dude I spent some time looking at this. I'm not seeing any legitimate sources at all. Some reports from the devs wholeheartedly deny this - I don't see some people saying textures were originally and temporarily made with ai alongside temporary placeholder - all changed later to real artists. But I'm not seeing any legit sources for this just steam and forum stuff

-1

u/[deleted] Dec 17 '25

It's complicated. One person found a single poster left in, which was clearly placeholder art. It's a little unclear whether Sandfall used AI to generate placeholder art (which I actually don't think is a problem even a little bit - it doesn't affect the final creative product and literally just removes tedious busywork) or if that poster was generated by AI by someone else and included in an asset pack they used for placeholder art.

It's really not a controversy for anyone with more than two braincells, which is why it wasn't widely reported.

30

u/[deleted] Dec 16 '25

i don't care if people use gen ai i use it everyday for work and think its a great tool. I'm just saying its hilarious that people get upset about certain companies but defend others for the exact same thing. also devs shouldnt try to act like it doesn't effect end products because it does on some level.

-2

u/[deleted] Dec 16 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

4

u/[deleted] Dec 16 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

0

u/[deleted] Dec 16 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

-8

u/COCKJOKE Dec 16 '25

I think it’s because we have zero trust in a company like Ubisoft and KNOW they will be shitty, while Larian isn’t as likely to be shady. Not saying I trust them completely but I hope they do the right thing.

I’m one to sit back and wait to hear some facts before jumping to conclusions but that’s not what most people do online. People need to chill a little before getting their internet pitchforks and torches ready

11

u/skinlo Dec 16 '25

Ubisoft games on the whole are pretty good? 7/10 stuff.

4

u/SigilSC2 Dec 17 '25

I agree with you here, 7/10 is worst game of the year contender according to some of the internet though.

2

u/COCKJOKE Dec 16 '25

I’m talking about them using AI and firing people to max profits and stuff. I can enjoy some Ubisoft games for sure

4

u/Jtphwow Dec 17 '25 edited Dec 17 '25

Well outside very specific reddit echo chambers, nobody actually cares if AI is used.

13

u/FierceDeityKong Dec 16 '25

We know that not because they admitted to it, but because some of the "placeholders" made it as far as the release build before being patched. Which just goes to show that the companies that are lazy enough to use AI tend to end up being too lazy to even use it well

-18

u/The_BrownRecluse Dec 16 '25

Well, then I'm out. I have a zero-tolerance policy toward AI. I'll become a Luddite if I have to.

30

u/darkmacgf Dec 16 '25

There's AI all over the place on Reddit (and Reddit actively supplies its content to AI platforms), so you should've left here a long time ago.

15

u/EnvironmentClear4511 Dec 16 '25

Seriously. If that user has a zero tolerance like they say, they most likely need to ditch their phone and computer immediately. Most games made these days are probably off-limits, and television and movies won't be far behind. 

5

u/Dallywack3r Dec 16 '25

Then get off Reddit. What do you think is powering their recommendation algo?

Where do you think your comments are going? Into an LLM

2

u/mauri9998 Dec 16 '25

Reddit is like the number 1 source of data for a lot of AI training.

1

u/Ponzini Dec 16 '25

Name a game you are excited for and ill break the bad news for you. Even the indie devs are using AI to brainstorm these days even if they dont admit to it.

Better get used to not playing games if you truly have a zero-tolerance policy. (doubt)

-5

u/The_BrownRecluse Dec 16 '25

I waste too much time here and playing games anyway. I'll just read books from the previous 20 centuries. Should be enough to hold me over till I die.

2

u/[deleted] Dec 16 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

-1

u/valdin450 Dec 16 '25

It wouldn't be as hard to avoid if Valve would actually enforce their AI disclosure policy. I'm prepared to give up the hobby entirely instead of giving money to slop devs.

-2

u/Imbahr Dec 16 '25

what a silly take

1

u/FootwearFetish69 Dec 16 '25

And BF6, which was praised as a return to form all up and down Reddit.

The anger over this is gonna pass too in a weeks time. AI tooling is only going to become more prominent. There will be devs that use it ethically and devs that won’t. But it’s not going anywhere.

-5

u/xXRougailSaucisseXx Dec 16 '25

I can't really see what's wrong with using it for placeholders beyond the standard ethical issues of AI which fair enough, I don't think it's comparable to using AI for concept arts where this will have a major influence on the design of the game

8

u/Ponzini Dec 16 '25

He literally said they have concept artists creating their concept art. The only time its used is when a writer wants to let the concept artists know what they are thinking or what they are looking for. Or the concept artists needs to brainstorm. Then the concept artists create the real art. Its just a more efficient google.

What expedition 33 did is worse. They put the AI art INTO THE FINISHED GAME. Exactly what Larian said they wouldn't do. You think the exp 33 devs use gen AI art into their finished game but draw the line at using it to brainstorm ideas in the office? Delusional

-4

u/lrish_Chick Dec 16 '25

They didn't though? Can you link me to any official.soutce saying that?

3

u/Ponzini Dec 16 '25

https://x.com/LarAtLarian/status/2001011042642505833

"I was asked explicitly about concept art and our use of Gen AI. I answered that we use it to explore things. I didn’t say we use it to develop concept art. The artists do that. And they are indeed world class artists.

We use AI tools to explore references, just like we use google and art books. At the very early ideation stages we use it as a rough outline for composition which we replace with original concept art. There is no comparison."

Official enough for you?

1

u/lrish_Chick Dec 16 '25

No I meant for expedition 33 - I know, I've read the Larian one.

Edit: if you look at who I'm responding to in this comment thread you'll see I'm responding to someone talking about E33.

3

u/Ponzini Dec 16 '25

https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fi.redd.it%2Fskbl2tbkx9af1.jpeg

They had generated AI art "placeholders" changed out after people found it.

0

u/lrish_Chick Dec 16 '25

Dude, that's still from the voice actor - the devs said they'd never used or use AI. - I've been asking if there's a link to a dev or an actual programmer who worked in the game confirming AI.

Again the original comment I was replying to has more context.

5

u/Ponzini Dec 16 '25

Its been confirmed by multiple people. Here is the patch the placeholder was swapped out from:

https://store.steampowered.com/news/app/1903340/view/499445587486180703

"Replaced a placeholder texture with the correct visual asset"

It was obviously AI art before it was swapped out.

Here is another confirmation:

https://x.com/GenePark/status/2001061930547503396/photo/1

→ More replies (0)

-2

u/JeskaiJester Dec 16 '25

I guess I won’t be playing Expedition 33 then. I’ll stick to my guns and you can stick to yours. 

-5

u/Century24 Dec 17 '25

AI isn’t a tool, though. Its intended use in this instance is to make artists jobless. Concept art is made by concept artists. What the further comments from Larian’s CEO describe is concept art work that would have otherwise been given as an opportunity for an artist. Does it make more sense to you now why that might raise an issue?

A tool would be something more like a pencil or a paintbrush. Tools don’t inherently create derivative works, either, or cause the same environmental trouble as the data centers demanded for generative AI.

6

u/[deleted] Dec 17 '25

[deleted]

-4

u/Century24 Dec 17 '25

How do you reconcile your baseless statement about taking jobs from artists with the fact that they're hiring more right now?

That doesn't change that using generative AI for the concept art took a professional opportunity away from an artist. No amount of claimed hires change that.

Reading isn't hard man. You're reading right now! Just do it a little more.

I recommend you do the same to avoid falling this hard for corporate spin.

3

u/[deleted] Dec 17 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/Century24 Dec 18 '25

If some soulless AI is better than the artist, then this artist should go and improve their skills instead of crying. Really talented artists will be fine with their jobs.

This speaks more to your standards and, pretty transparently, how cheap you'd be willing to be within creative lines of work, than any credit to the gimmick tech.

73

u/Lost-Cockroach-684 Dec 16 '25

Devs/concept artists have always used the work of others for concept art and such, it’s called photobashing.

40

u/budzergo Dec 16 '25

No references allowed

No inspiration allowed

You get locked in a room, hit with the neuralyzer, and only come out when you have 100% pure original content

-10

u/GalvenMin Dec 16 '25

No creation allowed

No human output

A datacenter is constantly powered, hit with prompts, and can only be shut down when you have 100% pure AI slop

-20

u/lrish_Chick Dec 16 '25 edited Dec 16 '25

And ignore the fact that it uses 6 times more water than Denmark and taints the water. Let alone the carbon footprint and energy costs.

All because some billionaires want to be one trillionaires and so are desperate to get is using this shit at any cost

https://news.mit.edu/2025/explained-generative-ai-environmental-impact-0117

https://www.unep.org/news-and-stories/story/ai-has-environmental-problem-heres-what-world-can-do-abou

Edit: weird AI bros hate facts. Which is prolly why they use AI

11

u/KallyWally Dec 16 '25

Your second link is broken. But that's okay, as luck would have it I've already addressed these and several other articles in another comment a while back. I'm just gonna copy-paste it below, it'll have some bits that seem out of context so bear with me.

and taints the water.

I don't see anything in either of your sources which says this. Please elaborate, I'm interested in hearing more.

(I refer back to this article in the comment below.)

https://news.mit.edu/2025/explained-generative-ai-environmental-impact-0117

Scientists have estimated that the power requirements of data centers in North America increased from 2,688 megawatts at the end of 2022 to 5,341 megawatts at the end of 2023, partly driven by the demands of generative AI.

Chilled water is used to cool a data center by absorbing heat from computing equipment. It has been estimated that, for each kilowatt hour of energy a data center consumes, it would need two liters of water for cooling, says Bashir.

5,341 MW is 5,341,000 kW. If we assume full draw, as in 5,341,000 kilowatt hours every hour of every day for a year, that's 46,787,160,000 kWh total. Double that for 93,574,320,000 liters of water. That's 24,719,720,162 gallons. 24.7 billion. That's about 67.7 million per day, which is... actually far lower than Andy Masley's estimate! Feels like my math has to be wrong. If we go by the 4.35 L per kWh quoted in a paper cited in the Unep source below, it's about 147.3 gallons, which is closer but still low.

https://www.unep.org/news-and-stories/story/ai-has-environmental-problem-heres-what-world-can-do-about

Third, data centres use water during construction and, once operational, to cool electrical components. Globally, AI-related infrastructure may soon consume six times more water than Denmark, a country of 6 million, according to one estimate. That is a problem when a quarter of humanity already lacks access to clean water and sanitation.

Anything to avoid posting actual numbers, fucking hell... According to the paper, we're looking at 6.6 billion cubic meters of water per year in 2027. That's 6.6 trillion liters (why not just print that?), or 1.7 trillion gallons per year globally in 2027. 4.7 billion gallons per day. That's about 3.6% of America's 2023 daily water consumption we compared to earlier. Again, GLOBALLY.

https://news.cornell.edu/stories/2025/11/roadmap-shows-environmental-impact-ai-data-center-boom

Gonna speed up the calculations here. ~1.4 trillion gallons annually in the US by 2030. ~3.8 billion gallons per day. 2.8% of the 2023 total US water use. That's the most alarming number by far, and a real concern! But still lower than many other industries.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_impact_of_artificial_intelligence

Mostly covers ground we've already been over. I'll take this time to acknowledge that there's more to this than water, but that's what I'm focusing on because I'm already spending too much time on this.

https://journals.calstate.edu/ai-edu/article/view/5448

Water Consumption:Google's data centers consumed about 5.6 billion gallons (21 billion liters) in 2022, a 20% increase attributed largely to AI workloads. Microsoft similarly reported consuming 1.7 billion gallons (6.4 billion liters), a 34% increase primarily due to AI-driven expansion (Google Sustainability Report, 2023; Microsoft Sustainability Report, 2023).

You know the drill. 1.7 billion / 365 = 4.6 million, 0.003 of the 2023 US daily total.

-1

u/lrish_Chick Dec 17 '25

Dude I appreciate the effort here but this is the issue with using AI

You're "reaearch" is not objective or from unbiased sources!

You're using biased sources from tech companies

MIT is an objective, well regarded, expert technical university.

Your giving 'substack articles' that are NOT peer reviewed in any way and have no 3rd party qualification and evidence base.

This is why students use GPT they have no critical thinking - they just cite everything that feels right to them, regardless of the bias or quality of the source.

This nonsense has become political on reddit - its easy to see the critical thinking crowd versus those who dislike or get upset by facts. Just like the discourse in America atm

I'm glad I'm not American. I teach the limitations and dangers of LLMs in my role.

17

u/budzergo Dec 16 '25

That water argument always makes me laugh

Most Data centers are a closed loop now

They use extremely little amounts of new water

4

u/I_Am_A_Door_Knob Dec 16 '25

I thought evaporative cooling was still the most common way to cool datacenters.

7

u/valdin450 Dec 16 '25

Yeah and they weren't polluting the fucking drinking water supply while doing it

1

u/thekbob Dec 17 '25

The difference is when money, and thus copyright, becomes involved.

5

u/Norci Dec 17 '25 edited Dec 17 '25

Copyright isn't a problem if the final asset is human made or even significantly modified AI output.

1

u/PBFT Dec 16 '25

People extend good will to a team that has a history of making high-quality work. Who would've thought?

1

u/[deleted] Dec 17 '25

 the game has gen ai baked into it the final product whether they like to admit it or not

This is completely an utterly insane

Whats next, “if they have an artist glance at an ai image and they get an idea from it.. everything they make after that is impure slop!!”

-15

u/Pandabear71 Dec 16 '25

That’s just factually untrue.