I, like so many others right now, have completely fallen into the ARC Raiders trap over the last few weeks. I literally can’t get enough of it or say enough good things about Embark’s extraction shooter hit. The sound design, ARC enemies, online community, gunplay — it’s all of the highest standard. Even the world-building is excellent, despite being an online-only title with no semblance of a single-player campaign mode.
However, ARC Raiders has been criticized by some in the gaming media recently for what some perceive to be a cardinal sin — the use of AI. It’s not the first game to use it, and I promise that it won’t be the last. But it seems to be the example that everyone’s using. And honestly, the conversation sucks and has completely lost the plot.
Is AI Replacing Humans When It Comes To Developing Video Games?
Whenever gamers push back against AI, it usually comes from the same place: the fear that studios are using it to replace human labor. I’m not a video game developer, and I have never written out a line of code in my 33 years on this planet, but I can confidently say that AI is not replacing humans who actually craft video games. In fact, when it comes to ARC Raiders — the current punching bag in this debate — the use of AI didn’t replace humans. Instead, it was a tool that helped streamline certain tasks so developers could focus on other parts of the game.
For those who aren’t familiar with the specifics, Embark hired actors to record voice lines for ARC Raiders under the condition that they could insert their voices into an AI system to create additional lines of dialogue for other things in the future, such as added content. Even in this scenario, which has somehow become the centerpiece of the outrage, humans were hired, compensated, and fully aware of how their work would be used. And it’s not like this was something that was done in the shadows — the actors were aware of this condition when they accepted the job, so I’m not too sure what the moral conundrum is here.
The reality is that modern game development already leans heavily on automation. Studios use procedural tools for terrain, physics, lighting passes, asset placement, etc. AI simply pushes that idea further by reducing the time spent on tedious and repetitive tasks, the parts developers already hate. Human judgment is still required for story, level flow, combat balance, encounter design, and everything that makes a game feel good to play.
The reason this matters is because consent is the actual ethical dividing line. Problems arise when AI models are trained on unlicensed voices, when actors are imitated without approval, or when companies quietly swap real talent for synthetic replacements. But none of that happened here. Embark’s system is similar to what SAG-AFTRA was calling for during its strike last year: actors licensing their voices for augmentation, with full clarity on how the technology will be used. The outrage ignores this nuance and treats all AI as identical, which it obviously isn’t.
To sum it all up, let me give you a few examples of why the outrage is white noise to me.
Take calculators, for example. Did the invention of calculators replace the need for mathematicians or math teachers? Or was it simply a tool to aid in, or otherwise flesh out, their findings? Photoshop didn’t kill art; it just gave artists a different canvas to try new things. Spell check software like Grammarly (which I’m using right now) didn’t make writing skills obsolete; it freed up writers to focus on the creative part of writing while being able to catch mistakes. CGI didn’t eliminate set designers or stunt performers, and GPS didn’t replace delivery drivers or logistics teams.
How Will AI Be Used In Sports Titles?
For anyone new here, we at Operation Sports primarily talk about… well, sports games. Funny enough, it was actually the topic of sports games that sparked my interest in the AI debate because, of all the genres of video games out there, sports games are actually the one that stands to benefit the most from AI, should it be used correctly.
Because games like Madden, EA FC, NBA 2K, and the like are developed annually, innovation is typically slow. Every year, sports game fans complain about titles being glorified roster updates with little to no improvements and/or meaningful changes. But what if AI could be used to change that?
Think about it. How often do we, as religious players of these games, complain about repetitive commentary, bad AI, or static career modes? I don’t know about you, but I’ve been craving a more dynamic sports game for years now that isn’t a glorified spreadsheet simulator like Football Manager or Out of the Park Baseball.
Let me provide you with an example. Let’s say, for instance, you’re playing Clubs in EA FC. Instead of the commentary duo of Derek Rae and Stewart Robson simply rehashing the same lines about a tidy finish or a keeper making a huge save, imagine if they could actually talk about you. Not in a vague, generic way, but with real context? What if it could be pointed out that you’re scoring 1.4 goals per match, or that you’re on a five-match win streak, or that you’ve never beaten this particular opponent in a league match?
Now stretch that idea further. What if AI systems allowed Franchise modes to build true scouting reports? Not the same boilerplate text you’ve seen for decades, but a dynamic, evolving profile that reflects how you play. AI could evaluate tendencies over time — whether you always cut inside with your winger, whether your Madden quarterback forces throws under pressure, whether your point guard in NBA 2K refuses to take mid-range jumpers — and relay those patterns through broadcast packages, coaching meetings, and CPU adjustments.
Sports gamers are starved for dynamism, storylines, and personality — something real-life sports provide. And maybe AI is the answer to those issues. Or maybe it’s not, and developers like EA and Visual Concepts are doomed to crunch their way through yearly development cycles in perpetuity. Either way, I feel it’s worth finding out. The alternative is continuing to crusade against a tool that could meaningfully improve the games we claim to want more from.
