The AI Divide

The GDC number getting quoted everywhere is 52%.

52% of game developers think generative AI is bad for the industry. Up from 30% last year. 18% the year before.

The number not getting quoted: only 5% use it for player-facing features.

81% use AI for research and brainstorming. 47% for daily tasks. Code, emails, first drafts.

The backlash isn't against AI tools. It's against AI doing the thinking that defines your work. Visual artists are 64% opposed. Game designers and narrative writers, 63%.

You can use a tool every day and still not want it making the calls that matter.

I've used Claude, NotebookLM, and Cowork every day for months. The parts of production admin that used to take 3 hours take 45 minutes. That's real.

What I haven't done: shipped generative AI output as creative work. Not because I'm opposed. Because in mobile live ops, the creative judgment is the job. The AI gets me to the decision faster. It doesn't make the decision.

The 52% aren't irrational. They're looking at the industry's track record. Studios that cut writers and artists and cited AI efficiency as the reason. That happened.

That's the trust gap. Better prompts won't close it.

In your team right now: which roles feel safer because of AI, and which feel more exposed?

Hashtags

#mobilegaming #gamedev #artificialintelligence #generativeai #gameproduction #liveops #gdc2026 #aitools

Related Posts

• AI Replaces Tasks Not Roles (2026-05-11) — same AI pillar, different angle
• LiveOps Event Calendar Skill (2026-05-13) — AI tools in practice