The CEO of acclaimed developer Larian Studios has found himself at the centre of a growing industry storm over the use of generative artificial intelligence. Swen Vincke's comments on the studio's AI practices have sparked significant backlash from the gaming community and even former staff, dragging the studio's upcoming title, Divinity, into the heated debate.
The Interview That Sparked the Fire
In an interview with Bloomberg published on December 17, 2025, Vincke discussed Larian's approach to generative AI tools. The report paraphrased him as saying the studio had been 'pushing hard' on the technology, despite it not leading to major efficiency gains. He clarified that no AI-generated content would appear in the final version of Divinity, but outlined its use for exploring ideas, fleshing out presentations, and creating placeholder text and concept art.
This characterisation prompted immediate concern. The report also suggested there had been internal pushback from Larian employees, though Vincke attempted to downplay this, stating, 'I think at this point everyone at the company is more or less OK with the way we’re using it.'
Social Media Erupts and a CEO Clarifies
The reaction on social media platforms was swift and critical. Former Larian junior environment artist Selena Tobin voiced her dismay on Bluesky, writing: 'Consider my feedback: I loved working at @larianstudios until AI. Reconsider and change your direction, like, yesterday.' She urged the studio to respect its 'world class' employees who did not need AI assistance for ideas.
The heated response forced Vincke to issue a detailed clarification on X. 'Holy f*** guys we’re not ‘pushing hard’ for or replacing concept artists with AI,' he began. He emphasised the studio's team of 72 artists, including 23 concept artists, and stressed they were hiring more. He argued his comments were misrepresented, explaining that AI is used only for early ideation, like exploring references or creating rough compositional outlines that are then entirely replaced by original art.
'We’ve hired creatives for their talent, not for their ability to do what a machine suggests,' Vincke added, 'but they can experiment with these tools to make their lives easier.'
A Wider Industry Dilemma
This incident highlights a pervasive tension within the games industry. While AI can streamline administrative tasks, its creep into creative domains like art, writing, and voiceovers remains deeply controversial. Platforms like Steam now require AI disclaimers, and developers face the practical risk of AI placeholders accidentally making it into final builds.
Examples abound. Earlier in 2025, 11 Bit Studios (The Alters) mistakenly left AI-generated placeholder text in their game. Similarly, Sandfall Interactive had to patch out temporary AI-generated textures from Clair Obscur: Expedition 33 after launch. Another case involved Jurassic World Evolution 3, where AI-created scientist portraits were only removed after player complaints.
These incidents raise questions about the true time-saving value of generative AI if studios must later audit and remove its outputs. Vincke's admission that the tools offer only minor help echoes a common sentiment. Yet, the technology's adoption appears relentless, underscored by figures like Epic Games CEO Tim Sweeney arguing against AI labelling, calling it nonsensical.
The backlash against Larian, a studio held in high esteem after Baldur's Gate 3, signals a potential inflection point. Whether this leads to more transparent and cautious implementation industry-wide remains to be seen, but the debate over AI's role in creative processes is now undeniably front and centre.
