It's no secret that large game studios are leaning into generative AI in search of greater productivity and efficiency, but there is a growing resentment in the gaming and game dev community towards games created with generative AI. In a recent analysis published on Game Oracle, data analyst, Ross Burton, presents evidence that the use of generative AI may be negatively affecting game sales significantly. The exact numbers are hard to pin down, since AI usage isn't accurately reported, and Steam does not publicly disclose sales figures, however, Burton analyzed game performance based on how many reviews a game received instead. He found that, on average, and after accounting for other factors (like luck and developer experience and skill), games that used AI—or at least those that disclosed their use of AI—received around 53% fewer reviews on Steam, indicating that they potentially sold as much as 53% fewer units.

What's more, of the games in the analysis, those with AI-generated content consistently received lower player ratings. The data indicates that for games with AI-generated content, the median review rating was 84.6% positive, while games that did not use AI had a median of 88.3% positive reviews. Digging further into it, the analyst found that AI had a stronger negative correlation when the games in question were made by large studios and publishers. Higher profile games also seemed to be more impacted by AI use than low-quality games, leading the analyst to call the effect a stigma, since the negative response appears to be linked to AI use. Anecdotally, this is also backed up by the backlash related to accusations and confirmations of AI use in games like Clair Obscur: Expedition 33, Crimson Desert and The Alters.