Stance on AI

Lately, there's been a lot of noise about AI in game dev — especially in indie circles. Some people treat it as a hard "no-go." Others see it as the future.

For me, the truth isn't that binary. It's about how you use it.

I separate AI use into two broad approaches:

1. Direct replacement (what I avoid)

  • Typing "knight" into an image generator and dropping it straight into a game.
  • Generating voice lines from a text prompt and calling it done.
  • Having AI write all your in-game text with zero creative input.
  • Clicking "generate mesh" and importing it untouched.

2. Augmentation (what I embrace)

  • Drawing the knight yourself, then running it through AI for polish or color enhancement, testing prompts, and refining the output.
  • Recording your own voice acting, then using AI to change the tone or timbre while keeping your performance intact.
  • Writing the text yourself, then letting AI clean up grammar or adjust mood — without losing your intent.
  • Generating a rough mesh, then fixing topology, texturing, and rigging it manually.

Both categories technically "use AI." But one replaces creative effort; the other amplifies it. I'm firmly in the second camp.

In short: AI is a tool, not a substitute for creating. If I didn't make the heart of the asset — the concept, the draft, the performance — it doesn't go in the game.