Indie Game Community Divided Over AI Usage in Big Walk

The indie gaming community is facing turbulence in light of a declaration from jurors of the Independent Games Festival (IGF) regarding the use of generative AI. They expressed a clear stance that they would refrain from voting for any games that incorporate AI technology.

Jurors’ Statement on AI

A statement shared by juror Austin Walker highlighted that while this year’s IGF submissions were notably impressive, there has been a marked increase in the number of games reportedly developed using generative AI tools. This trend has sparked significant debate among the jurors, with no clear consensus emerging on the implications of AI in the gaming industry.

The jurors articulated strong beliefs regarding the potential harms of generative AI, asserting that AI-generated code does not escape these negative consequences. They emphasized that the use of AI is not an unavoidable aspect of game development.

Concerns from Notable Developers

Among the signatories of this statement are notable names such as Sam Barlow, known for Telling Lies and Immortality, and Lena Raine, composer of Celeste. Importantly, the jurors clarified that their views do not represent the official stance of IGF or all jury members, as some expressed apprehensions about potential professional repercussions for voicing their opinions.

The Case of Big Walk

Drawing considerable attention is Big Walk, a co-op adventure game from the creators of Untitled Goose Game, House House. Following the IGF statement, House House released their own comments, confirming that they used AI sparingly in the game’s final stages. They noted that while they did utilize some AI-generated suggestions for troubleshooting code issues, this represented less than 0.1% of the total codebase.

Clarifications on AI Usage

According to House House, the primary way they integrated AI was by consulting language models (LLMs) to resolve specific challenges, such as a shadow issue in their game. They stated they referred to LLM suggestions only after conducting thorough troubleshooting and consulting with an engineer from Unity.

In their IGF submission, House House transparently reported their use of AI, but they did not include this information on the Big Walk Steam page, as that platform does not mandate disclosure of such details.

House House’s Position on AI Tools

House House openly stated, “This is not an endorsement of, or argument for, the use of AI tools, however minimal.” They expressed concern that voluntary disclosures might inadvertently contribute to the normalization of AI technology in the gaming industry. They voiced their support for efforts aimed at minimizing the adverse effects of generative AI and expressed regret that their game’s AI usage might not align with certain community standards.

The studio acknowledged the absence of an AI policy during Big Walk's development, describing this as a failure. They plan to implement a more comprehensive policy in future projects.

The Broader Context

Following the discussions, Barlow remarked that Big Walk was not the main driver of the discussion. Instead, it became a complex example in the ongoing discourse about the role of AI in the indie gaming scene. He emphasized that this was not a campaign to boycott any specific game but rather a reflection on what the IGF awards should signify, particularly in relation to indie game development in contrast to larger-scale projects.

Walker also contributed with a detailed blog post expressing his insights on AI's impact within the context of the IGF awards, which adds further depth to the ongoing conversation.