Use of generative AI remains one of the most contentious topics in the games industry. Developers who see a bright new future in the tech have increasingly clashed with those concerned by the ethical, artistic and labour implications tools like ChatGPT and Claude Opus bring to the medium. The divisive nature of the subject was starkly revealed in a new report, which calculated that 40% of game developers are actively using generative AI, while more than half of developers believe LLMs and agentic coding tools have a negative impact on the industry.
These were the conclusions of the latest State of the Game Industry report from the Game Developer's Conference (via Eurogamer). The report surveyed over 2,600 respondents from all corners of the industry. Of those surveyed, 40% of respondents said they used generative AI as part of their job, a slight increase from 36% from last year.
Of those surveyed, the report found that older professionals were more likely to use generative AI, with 54% of workers over 45 stating they use the tech. The report also states that men were more likely to use AI tools than women, and that indie developers were less likely to use it than studios working on premium, free-to-play, and mobile-exclusive games.
Among those who have embraced generative AI, the most common use of it was for research and brainstorming. Nearly three-quarters of AI advocates said they use it for this function, while over half (56%) said they use it for code generation and debugging. Use of generative AI seems to drop sharply for tasks viewed as being more creative, however, with 22% saying they use it for concept art and visual ideation, and only 7% using it for player-facing features.
Although use of generative AI has increased, the perception of the technology's impact on the industry remains predominately negative. 55% of those surveyed said that generative AI is having a negative effect on the games industry, an increase of 1% from the start of 2026, and up 25% from 2025. Meanwhile, 35% said the impact was mixed, with only 8% believing that generative AI is having a positive effect.
The report concludes (with the help of AI 'sentiment analysis' tools, it should be noted) that games industry professionals are "forming more nuanced view on generative AI, rather than taking an all-or-nothing stance". At the same time, the report highlighted new concerns that AI use leads to "skill atrophy and loss in professional and personal development" while developers are taking a dimmer view of "using generative AI for player-facing features."
There are other factors that explain the increase in AI usage alongside a growing negative sentiment. Whether you are pro or anti AI, the tech is becoming harder to avoid. A casual Google search in 2026 technically counts as using AI, regardless of how you feel about the presence or quality of the resulting AI summary. At the same time, the effects of AI on the games industry—particularly agentic coding tools—have become more pronounced in 2026. Platforms like Steam and itch are wrestling to deal with a dramatic increase in AI slop games, while use of the tech among developers has triggered heated debates in spaces like the IGF awards.
It will be interesting to see how these opinions shift in the next twelve months, given the current situation within the broader AI industry. After years of unprecedented growth, big tech has been rocked by a series of scandals and growing doubt among investors about the long-term profitability of generative tools. Will 2027 be the year that the so-called 'AI bubble' finally bursts? And if it does, how will that impact the proliferation of generative AI among the games industry and tech more broadly?
