The recent controversy surrounding AI-generated games and the growing number of seemingly derivative titles at Steam Next Fest feels like another reality check for the game industry.

In some ways, it reminds me of what artists experienced when generative AI image tools first became widely available.

Is AI a tool? I think it is. But things become complicated when that tool is misused and starts causing harm to others.

Personally, I've never been entirely convinced by the distinction between "AI-made games" and "non-AI games."

I suspect AI assistance is already part of many developers' workflows, whether for programming, research, prototyping, or other tasks. But there's an important difference between using AI to support the development process and relying on it to mass-produce content, imitate someone else's work, or replace creative decisions without much thought.

Of course, clones and low-effort games existed long before generative AI. The concern now is how much easier and faster these tools might make producing them.

Still, where should we draw the line?

I think that's one of the hardest questions to answer right now. We're dealing with a technology that's evolving incredibly fast, and its implications for game development are still unfolding.

What I do believe is that AI can be genuinely helpful, particularly for developers and small teams with limited resources.

But its use should exist within an ethical framework, one that doesn't turn technological progress into an excuse to exploit other people's work or cause more harm than good.

I don't think rejecting AI entirely is the answer. But neither is accepting every possible use of it simply because the technology allows it.

And perhaps that's the real conversation we should be having