Generative AI in video games is THE debate that is igniting the industry at the moment. And obviously, when the boss of PUBG Studios speaks on this, it deserves attention. Taeseok Jang, the big boss of the studio behind Battlegrounds, gave his opinion on the question, and his answer will make more than one think.
The Crimson Desert affair relaunches the debate
It all started a few weeks ago with Crimson Desertone of the most anticipated games of the year, which found itself in full storm after the discovery of in-game paintings generated by AI in the final version of the game. Pearl Abyss, the Korean studio behind the title, quickly apologized, explaining that these assets had been included by mistake in the final versionand recognizing that they should have been transparent with players about the use of this technology.
“We sincerely apologize for these errors. HAS”
– Pearl Abyss
Remember that Steam now requires games to clearly display on their page whether generative AI was used in their creation. It is not forbidden, but it must be announced. The question then arises: do studios really have to apologize for using these tools?
PUBG boss: “If the gameplay is good, it doesn’t matter”
It is in this context that Taeseok Jang delivered his vision of things. His response is nuanced, but the essence of the message is clear: as a player, what matters to him is the quality of the gameplay, not the way the artwork was created.
“As a fan, it doesn’t bother me. Because if the gameplay is good, then I don’t care if they used AI for the artwork. HAS”
– Taeseok Jang, patron of PUBG Studios
He specifies, however, that he is still studying the subject, observing how AI is used not only in video games, but also in other creative sectors. An honest position, even if it may not please everyone, particularly artists who see their work potentially replaced by algorithms.
Strategy AI by PUBG Studios
On the PUBG side, Jang is rather transparent about the studio’s approach. For him, AI is above all a tool, just like Maya or any other software used in development for years. The clearly stated objective: automate repetitive tasks to free up time and resources, and reinvest them in the creation of more fun and innovative gaming experiences.
The studio is not yet at the stage of massively integrating AI into the creation of new gameplay, but it is actively working to define how this tool can allow it to offer new experiences to its players. A vision which is intended to be pragmatic rather than ideological.
Krafton, a company that bets everything on AI
The parent company of PUBG Studios, Kraftondoes not hide its ambitions in this area either. The publisher officially declared its transition to an “AI-first” model last October, with the aim of automating internal workflows to re-inject time and energy into creative development. The company is even exploring long-term avenues like physical AI and roboticsdrawing on its expertise in managing large-scale virtual worlds.
It’s difficult not to mention in passing that Krafton is currently in the middle of a legal dispute with the founders of the team behind Subnautica 2. The latter claim that the CEO of the group would have used ChatGPT to think about ways to avoid paying a $250 million bounty to the developers concerned. A case which illustrates the extent to which AI has already infiltrated strategic decisions, not always in a glorious way.
A debate that has only just begun
Ultimately, Jang’s position raises a real substantive question: Does the gaming experience justify all the means used to create it? For hardcore gamers who just want fun and good gameplay, the answer may be yes. But for artists, developers who have lost their jobs in recent years, and gamers attached to the human authenticity behind every pixel, it’s far from being that simple. The debate is open, and it is clear that it will continue to be talked about in the months to come.
