According to GameSpot, Nexon CEO Junghun Lee stated in November 2025 that “every game company is now using AI” following criticism of Arc Raiders’ AI voice acting. The extraction shooter launched on October 30, 2025, across PC, PlayStation 5, and Xbox Series X|S and quickly became a Steam hit, outperforming Helldivers 2. Lee defended AI’s role in improving efficiency while arguing human creativity remains essential for turning “OK games” into “fabulous” ones. His comments immediately drew condemnation from developers like Strange Scaffold’s Xavier Nelson Jr. and AI in Games founder Tommy Thompson, who disputed the “every company” claim. Meanwhile, Epic Games CEO Tim Sweeney came to Lee’s defense, calling anti-AI sentiment “political” and arguing productivity gains lead to better games rather than fewer jobs.
The reality check
Here’s the thing: Lee isn’t entirely wrong, but he’s definitely oversimplifying. Major players like EA, Krafton, Square Enix, and Sony are absolutely betting big on AI. Krafton plans to invest $70 million to become an “AI-first company”, while Square Enix wants AI to handle 70% of QA and debugging. But “using AI” covers everything from basic automation tools studios have used for years to the controversial generative AI that’s replacing human roles. When developers like Nelson Jr. push back, they’re talking about the latter – the tech that directly threatens creative jobs.
The voice acting battlefield
This isn’t Embark Studios’ first AI rodeo. Their previous game, The Finals, used AI text-to-speech because the team could produce voice lines in hours rather than months. They claimed it wasn’t about replacing actors entirely, just speeding up the process. But look at developer Neil Jones’ Bluesky response – he sees this as an admission that “they’re going to fire you.” And former Chucklefish animator Adam Riches called Nexon “too cheap to care about their craft.” The tension here is real: studios see efficiency, while creatives see their livelihoods disappearing.
Political or practical?
Tim Sweeney’s defense is fascinating. He argues that views on AI are “speculative and generally distributed along political lines” and that productivity gains lead to better games through competition. But is disliking AI really political? Or is it just workers wanting to protect their careers? Sweeney’s position makes sense for a company like Epic that builds the tools everyone uses, but for the individual voice actor facing replacement, this feels deeply personal, not political.
Where this is headed
Basically, we’re watching the gaming industry transform in real time. The cat’s out of the bag – AI is here to stay. But the question isn’t whether companies use AI, but how they use it. Are we talking about tools that assist developers, or systems that replace them entirely? The backlash suggests many studios haven’t figured out the right balance yet. And with Arc Raiders succeeding commercially despite the controversy, other publishers are definitely watching and taking notes.
Your article helped me a lot, is there any more related content? Thanks!