Pocketpair has drawn a clear line against generative AI in game development. The studio behind Palworld says it will not use machine-made assets for its next release schedule, even as many large publishers continue to add automation tools to production pipelines.
That position matters because it runs against a fast-growing industry trend. For Pocketpair, the issue is not only technical efficiency but also creative direction and what players actually want from games.
Players first, not automation hype
John Buckley, head of publishing and communications at Pocketpair, framed the company’s stance as a response to audience sentiment rather than debate over new tools. He said the reaction from gamers is already clear enough.
“Gamers don’t want it, and if the gamers don’t want it, I guess that’s it, right? Not much of a conversation to be had,” Buckley said. He also argued that much of the push for generative tools comes from people outside the game industry who are chasing quick profit from a trend.
For Pocketpair, that reading of the market carries more weight than pressure from executives or technology vendors. The studio appears to be betting that player trust is more valuable than adopting a tool simply because it is popular.
Keeping human artists at the center
The rejection of generative art also reflects Pocketpair’s effort to protect in-house creative talent. The company has a large internal art team and prefers to build assets manually rather than replace people with algorithms.
Buckley said there is no reason to remove those artists just to cut costs. “We have a lot of artists in-house,” he said. “They like doing stuff themselves. There’s no reason to get rid of them for the sake of an AI doing it. Just seems pointless.”
That stance is notable because Pocketpair was once the subject of online speculation about the creature designs in Palworld when the game surged in popularity after launch. Even then, the studio kept its traditional design approach and did not shift its production direction.
Why the Steam AI label worries indie creators
Buckley also raised concerns about Steam’s AI disclosure policy and what it means for independent developers. He said the spread of machine-assisted assets is pushing indie creators to explicitly state in press emails and store pages that their games are “100 percent human-made.”
He described that situation as bleak, arguing that developers are now being forced to add extra explanations just to establish basic trust. In his view, players should be able to assume a game was made by humans rather than treat automation as the default.
Buckley called the trend “incredibly bleak” and “pretty dystopian.” The comment reflects a wider anxiety within parts of the industry about how quickly generative AI could change expectations around creative work.
An industry split that is still widening
Pocketpair’s position shows that the game industry remains divided on generative AI. Some companies are moving quickly to use automation for efficiency, while others see it as a threat to human craft and to player confidence.
In Pocketpair’s case, the rejection is grounded in practical concerns, creative ethics, and public perception. The studio is making it clear that Palworld and its next projects will continue to rely on manual creative work rather than machine-generated assets.