Seems excessive.

There’s AI slop games, the new breed of lazy asset flips. There’s replacing employees with slop machines.

And then there’s “a few of our textures were computer generated.” In a game that is clearly passionately crafted art.

I get it’s about principle, but still.

Also what about AI code tools? Like if they use cursor to help write some code does that disqualify them?

If you do that and proceed to say “No we didn’t use any AI tools”. Then yes, that should be a disqualification.

“When it was submitted for consideration, representatives of Sandfall Interactive agreed that no gen AI was used in the development of Clair Obscur: Expedition 33.”

That’s fair.

But the Game Awards should reconsider that label next year. The connotation is clearly “AI Slop,” and that just doesn’t fit for stuff like cursor code completion, or the few textures E33 used.

Otherwise studios are just going to lie. If they don’t, GA will be completely devoid of bigger projects.

…I don’t know what the threshold for an “AI Slop” game should be through. It’s clearly not E33. But you don’t want a sloppy, heavily marketed game worming its way in, either.

You have to draw the line somewhere, saying any game cant use AI is much simpler than an arbitrary definition of what slop is. Also means we reward real artistry everytime.