We all knew it would happen, and it has now begun – generative AI is now being used in AAA video games instead of being there in just obscure or hardly-selling online games. Plenty of big studios are now using gen AI, because that’s just the world we live in now. Whether it’s for voice acting, loading screens, or even in-game art, mainstream productions in gaming are now using generative AI for their work, and frankly, it’s nothing but worrisome. At its worst, it’s certainly sickening.
I think the worst part about it is that it's thebig AAA studios doing this, because that sends a big, resounding message to the rest of the industry, down to the smallest developers: "it's okay to use generative AI that replaces human effort if that helps you ship your product and move into the profit-making phase faster."
Ubisoft quickly admitted their mistake with Anno 117: Pax Romana
The company admitted to AI images being used but chalked it up to WIP placeholders
Ubisoft's latest production, and the newest title in the beautiful Anno series of games, Anno 117: Pax Romana was actually caught using generative AI. The Anno games, especially 1800, the last one, are genuinely known and appreciated for their in-game art, and the gorgeous loading screens have been part of it too. In Pax Romana, however, players easily caught on to signs of gen AI being used to generate some loading screens – people clipping into each other, men with no hands or arms, and another person with two heads, Professor Quirrell-style. Oh, and to make up for that double head, there's another guy with a missing head entirely.
Once screenshots of AI art usage in Pax Romana started making the rounds online, Ubisoft was quick to issue a statement about how one of those images was a placeholder, which “slipped in” to the final product. The next update is going to remove these images, but that doesn’t do anything about the bad taste it has left in everybody’s mouths.
Now, as someone with plenty of friends in design, there is no denying that AI images do help storyboard and conceptualize a lot of stuff while projects are in the WIP stage, but for such images to make it to the released product says either of two things – either hundreds of QC staff were asleep at the wheel, or they thought that people wouldn't look too hard at loading screens. Either way, the result is the same – we're all going to be looking at this game, and the next Anno, if and when it comes, with narrowed eyes.
OpenCritic Reviews- Top Critic Avg:84/100Critics Rec:93%
- Released
- November 13, 2025
- ESRB
- Teen / Alcohol Reference, Language, Mild Violence, In-Game Purchases, Users Interact
- Developer(s)
- Ubisoft
- Publisher(s)
- Ubisoft
WHERE TO PLAY
- Franchise
- Anno
- Genre(s)
- City Builder, Simulation, Strategy
Embark Studios have been using AI voices for both their shooters
How far can you take text-to-speech before it throws VAs out of jobs?
Arc Raidershas been in the limelight for the past couple of months, and almost entirely for the right reasons. It's on track to be one of the biggest multiplayer games of the year, and it's definitely the most accessible extraction shooter ever made. However, the developers Embark Studios have also been open about their usage of AI in the game, particularly forcharacter voiceovers. Now, that would have had the entire industry, as well as gamers, up in arms, except that Embark stated that they did indeed hire voice actors whoalso signed contracts, knowingly, to let Embark use AI for replicating their voices.
According to the studio, this makesadding new story content and dialog a lot easier, streamlining days worth of scheduling and studio booking processes down to just a handful of hours' worth of work. Now, if the actors consented, then, what's the problem? The problem, of course, is that in an ideal world, no actor would've agreed to such a deal, but in the real one, they knew that some other voice actor would have happily taken on the role and lent their voice toArc Raiders' AI to secure a paycheck.
The studio did try throwing out a reassurance about how eliminating human actors from voice work entirely is not their end goal, but now that the line has been crossed, there's no stopping it. Embark had even done this before in their free-to-play shooterThe Finals, where they replaced their human actors voicing the game's announcers for AI counterparts, and were resultantly met with huge backlash.
- OpenCritic Reviews
- Top Critic Avg:85/100Critics Rec:90%
- Released
- October 30, 2025
- ESRB
- Teen / Violence, Blood
- Developer(s)
- Embark Studios
- Publisher(s)
- Embark Studios
WHERE TO PLAY
- Engine
- Unreal Engine 5
- Genre(s)
- Extraction, Shooter, Third-Person Shooter, Survival
Call of Duty: Black Ops 7 is open to its AI use, too
For a billion-dollar franchise to resort to AI slop is... something
It's absolutely baffling that a billion-dollar franchise likeCall of Duty– a game that is a household name across the entire planet, still ended up having to use generative AI for some of its in-game art, but that's just what has happened.Black Ops 7came out just a couple of weeks ago at the time of writing this, and players were naturally quick to notice that there were a few blatantly AI images in some of the calling cards in the game's multiplayer andzombies mode.
Soon after the latest Black Opstitle launched, players noticed, rather easily, how AI art had been used for some rather cheap-looking calling cards in the multiplayer section. They look like cheap imitations of therecent Ghibli-fication images everyone and their dog made earlier this year, and are so clearly low-effort that it's impossible not to be turned off by it.
Despite being some of the highest-budget games ever, the COD franchise's use of AI to develop their in-game art is just depressing.
The worst part, without a doubt, is the fact that this is Activision and their billion-dollar IP we're talking about.Black Ops Cold War wasthe most expensiveCOD game ever vis-à-vis development costs, andBlack Ops 7 couldn't have cost any less. Even then, they decided to use artificial intelligence to develop several of their calling cards, which is just depressing.
In fact, Activision just updated the game's Steam page very quickly, mentioning that the game uses "AI assets" – a clear sign that they know what we're all talking about, and they're not apologizing. Instead, they're just making sure they've got their bases covered. Oh, and it all just seems entirely pointless, too, because these Ghibli-esque calling cards that are clearly AI? They're also just... bad. What was the point?
- OpenCritic Reviews
- Top Critic Avg:65/100Critics Rec:35%
- Released
- November 14, 2025
- ESRB
- Mature 17+ / Blood and Gore, Intense Violence, Strong Language, Suggestive Themes, Use of Drugs
- Developer(s)
- Treyarch, Raven Software
- Publisher(s)
- Activision
WHERE TO PLAY
- Genre(s)
- Action, FPS, Sci-Fi
If this is the future of AAA, count me out
One loading screen today means full missions tomorrow
What I can't wrap my head around is how these big-shot companies are so open and vocal about using generative AI for their systems, which would only ensure that AI replacements of human-made assets and art increase industry-wide. AI slop remains AI slop. As much asI loveArc Raiders, it does leave an icky feeling in the soul, because even with the VAs' consent, they were most likely bought off with a single paycheck instead of perpetuity payments, which is the only way I'd have been able to come to terms with it.
If we allow one loading screen, one voice line, and one calling card to be automated today, the "why not more?" argument isn't far off. That makes these gen-AI art and voices in AAA games the first domino before AI usage is normalized in major titles, replacing human creativity with AI sludge.
The push back against AI in AAA games must be immediate
If we don't push back now, the AI machine will first automate its own soul, and then come for ours.
At the end of the day, I don't care how efficiently a corporation can render a loading screen or whip up a new line of dialog. Games are supposed to feel alive, and they can only achieve that by being built on the weird, messy beauty only human imagination has.
If billiond-ollar studios think that replacing real artists and real actors is good business, then it must be up to the players to make it bad business. At the very least, keep the conversation going so that more discourse is had, leading to the goalposts being defined and set.
Once we accept AI slop in the biggest games on earth, it won't stop at just loading screens. It would seep into recycled story beats, mission design, and full-blown scripts. If we don't push back now, the AI machine will first automate its own soul, and then come for ours.
