Larian Studios CEO Responds to Backlash Over Generative AI Use in Divinity Development
Larian Studios entered The Game Awards 2025 with significant momentum following the reveal of Divinity, the studio’s next major fantasy RPG and a continuation of the franchise that predates and even surpasses Baldur’s Gate 3 in scope. While the announcement generated widespread excitement despite being partially leaked ahead of the show, that enthusiasm quickly shifted into controversy days later after comments from Larian CEO Swen Vincke regarding the studio’s internal use of generative AI tools.
In a recent interview by Bloomberg, Vincke confirmed several key details about Divinity. He stated that the game will follow a turn based RPG structure similar to Baldur’s Gate 3 and confidently claimed that the new project will be “way better” than its award winning predecessor. However, it was his confirmation that Larian has incorporated generative AI technology into its development pipeline that sparked intense backlash across social platforms.
Vincke acknowledged that the studio experienced internal debate over the use of generative AI but explained that, from his perspective, most of the team is now comfortable with how the technology is being applied. That reassurance did little to calm the reaction once the interview went live. Criticism quickly emerged not only from players opposed to generative AI, but also from former Larian developers and members of the wider development community.
Discussion escalated across multiple platforms, including Reddit, where a dedicated thread titled Disappointed in Larian using generative AI during development gained traction, as well as on Bluesky. In response to the growing criticism, Vincke issued a formal statement to IGN in an effort to clarify Larian’s position and dispel concerns around job displacement and AI generated content.
consider my feedback: i loved working at @larianstudios.com until AI. reconsider and change your direction, like, yesterday. show your employees some respect. they are world-class & do not need AI assistance to come up with amazing ideas.
— anoxicart🍤 (@anoxicart.bsky.social) December 17, 2025 at 12:21 AM
[image or embed]
In the statement, Vincke emphasized that Larian continues to expand its creative workforce rather than replace it. He confirmed that the studio is actively increasing its number of concept artists, writers, storytellers, translators, and voice actors, while maintaining multiple writer rooms and production pipelines. Addressing one of the most common concerns directly, Vincke explained that Larian currently employs twenty three concept artists with additional positions open, all producing original work on a daily basis for ideation and production.
Vincke further clarified that machine learning tools are being explored strictly as workflow enhancements rather than creative replacements. According to him, any ML tool used properly should be additive, allowing creatives to spend more time creating rather than less. He stressed that Larian has no intention of releasing a game that contains AI generated content, nor does the studio plan to reduce staff or replace developers with automation. Instead, the internal discussion around AI is framed around improving day to day work conditions and enabling the studio to build better games.
Alongside the formal response, Vincke also addressed the controversy more informally through a post on X, where he reiterated similar points in a more direct tone, attempting to reassure both fans and developers that Larian’s values remain unchanged.
Holy fuck guys we’re not "pushing hard" for or replacing concept artists with AI.
— Swen Vincke @where? (@LarAtLarian) December 16, 2025
We have a team of 72 artists of which 23 are concept artists and we are hiring more. The art they create is original and I’m very proud of what they do.
I was asked explicitly about concept art…
The situation highlights how volatile the conversation around generative AI has become within the games industry. While some studio leaders openly advocate for its adoption and several commercially successful games already include AI assisted content, a sizable portion of players and developers remain strongly opposed. For many, the concern is not just about technology, but about creative integrity, labor practices, and trust.
Recent history shows how unpredictable public reaction can be. Earlier this year, Clair Obscur Expedition 33 developer Sandfall Interactive was criticized after generative AI assets were discovered in the shipped game, as detailed in a Bluesky post by Luke Plunkett. The studio quietly patched the assets out without issuing a public response. Despite the controversy, the game went on to dominate The Game Awards and, according to Alinea Analytics, sold an additional 200,000 copies following the show.
For Larian Studios, the broader question now is whether player concern over generative AI will meaningfully impact purchasing behavior, or whether quality and trust built over years will outweigh the controversy. As Divinity moves deeper into development, the studio will be navigating not just technical and creative challenges, but one of the most emotionally charged debates currently facing game development.
Do you think Larian’s explanation is enough to ease concerns about generative AI, or should studios avoid the technology altogether to maintain player trust? Share your perspective.
