adminHooded Horse has drawn a clear line on generative AI in game development: the publisher says it will not work with studios using the technology to create game assets. CEO Tim Bender says the restriction is intended to keep AI-generated material out of projects, including during early development, when temporary content can be overlooked later.
Image credit: Slavic Magic/Hooded Horse
Hooded Horse generative AI rules for developers
Hooded Horse’s publishing agreements prohibit studios from using generative AI assets. The policy also reaches beyond content intended for a finished release. Bender has advised developers not to use generative AI at any stage of the process, including for temporary placeholder material.
The reason is practical: a placeholder may remain in a prototype or another build and fail to be replaced before release. Bender said even one missed asset could lead to generative AI content appearing in a game unintentionally. He has described the technology as “cancerous” because, in his view, preventing that kind of material from slipping through requires ongoing monitoring.
Practical takeaway: Studios working under restrictions like these can reduce the risk of accidental inclusion by documenting asset origins and checking every build for temporary content before it is shared or released. A clear replacement and review process is especially useful for prototypes that pass between teams.
Generative AI remains a divisive issue in games
Companies across the games industry have taken different positions on generative AI. Nexon CEO Junghun Lee has said it is important to assume that every company is using the technology. Nexon is the parent company of Embark Studios, which has used generative AI for some voice lines in Arc Raiders. Embark has also said it is not using AI to replace people in development.
Sega has said it is using AI in hopes of making development more efficient, while acknowledging strong resistance to the technology. Embracer Group CEO Phil Rogers has called AI a powerful tool but said human authorship remains final. Rockstar veteran Dan Houser has said he uses the technology, while questioning whether it is as useful as some companies suggest. Voice actor Troy Baker has argued against demonising AI, saying it cannot create art. Revolution Software’s Charles Cecil, by contrast, described using the technology in a remake of the original Broken Sword as an expensive mistake.
Platforms and policymakers are also part of the debate. Steam labels games made with AI, a practice Epic Games CEO Tim Sweeney has criticised. In early 2025, the US Copyright Office said that generative AI artwork created without human creativity cannot be protected by copyright law. Data specialist and NYU professor Joost van Dreunen has likewise warned that audiences do not want low-quality AI-generated content.
What Hooded Horse’s policy means for game studios
Hooded Horse’s approach puts the responsibility on developers to avoid generative AI assets throughout production, not merely to remove them before launch. For studios considering a publishing agreement, it is important to clarify what counts as AI-generated material and how contractors, prototypes and internal builds will be reviewed.
The wider industry has not settled on a single standard: some companies use generative AI, while others limit or reject it. Hooded Horse’s generative AI policy is notably strict, treating prevention as a production-wide concern rather than a final quality-control step.
