adminAI in game development is drawing attention not only for what it can create, but also for how it may support the people making games. Razer CEO Min-Liang Tan says players are wary of hastily generated content, while tools that help developers improve a game can offer practical value.
Image credit: Razer
AI in game development: content versus useful tools
In an interview on a technology podcast, Tan was asked about Razer’s $600 million investment in artificial intelligence and its plan to hire 150 AI engineers. The discussion focused on a perceived gap between players’ concerns and companies’ enthusiasm for the technology.
Tan said players want games that feel engaging, immersive and competitive. Poorly made character models, including ones with obvious visual errors such as extra fingers, and weakly written stories can undermine that experience. He argued that quickly generated material made with only a few prompts is not what players are asking for.
His distinction is between using AI to produce low-quality game content and using it to support development. Tools that help teams find bugs, review text for typos or improve quality checks could, in his view, help studios deliver better games. For players, the practical test is whether technology improves the finished experience rather than making it feel less carefully crafted.
Where AI may assist game teams
Quality assurance is one example Tan highlighted. AI-supported processes could help developers examine a game more quickly and identify issues for review. In August 2025, Razer partnered with Side on a player-testing solution that uses AI to process feedback.
These tools do not remove the need for human judgment. A useful workflow is to treat automated findings as leads for developers and testers to verify, rather than assuming every flagged issue is accurate or every suggested change is suitable. Human review remains important for assessing writing, character design and whether a game is enjoyable to play.
Why generative AI remains controversial
Some studios and publishers have adopted generative AI in development. Nexon’s CEO said last year that people should assume the technology is being used across the industry. The game Arc Raider has also attracted criticism over its use of artificial intelligence. Embark Studios CEO Patrick Soderlund has said the technology is not being used to replace people in creating the game.
For studios, being clear about how AI is used can help set expectations. Explaining whether it supports testing, handles feedback or contributes to in-game assets gives players more context than a broad claim about adopting AI. The details matter because different uses can have different effects on the final product and the people who make it.
What this means for players
Tan’s position is that players can reject careless, low-quality output while still welcoming technology that helps developers do their work better. In AI in game development, the value of a tool ultimately depends on its results: fewer defects, more polished experiences and creative decisions that remain in the hands of the people building the game.
