Elon Musk wants AI to make a full video game by 2026. But Michael Douse from Larian Studios isn’t sold. He believes the core problem in gaming isn’t tech, it’s direction.
AI in game development is no substitute for vision

Musk’s xAI project claims it will deliver a fully AI-built game by 2026, aiming to prove that artificial intelligence can shoulder the entire creative process. Even so, Michael Douse, publishing director at Baldur’s Gate 3 studio Larian was quick to respond online. He made it clear that regardless of how powerful AI becomes, it won’t fix what’s actually holding the industry back: poor leadership and a lack of creative vision.
“We already have all the tools in the world,” Douse wrote, “and they aren’t making up for the incredible lack of cogent direction.”
Tools don’t replace human storytelling
There’s no denying AI can speed things up. Still, Douse argued that an overreliance on systems, whether it’s analytics, retention loops, or machine-generated quests, doesn’t make games better. It just makes them more addictive.
What resonates, he said, are games shaped by people who care about the worlds they build. Not formulas. Not feedback loops. Real craft requires real creators.
AI in game development may assist, but can’t lead
Douse acknowledged AI has potential as a support tool. It can help developers save time and test faster. Yet he stressed that it shouldn’t be seen as a creative core. “There is no craft without the human touch,” he added.
That’s where many studios, in his view, are losing the plot.
Industry problems can’t be coded away
According to Douse, focusing too hard on AI risks distracting from the issues that no software can fix. These include:
- Poor leadership
- Weak creative direction
- Overreliance on data-driven design
- Shallow engagement mechanics
- Lack of meaningful world-building
These aren’t problems AI can solve; they’re problems only people can.
AI in game development won’t make passion obsolete
What the industry needs now isn’t another tech milestone; it’s clarity of purpose. Tools like AI might help along the way, but they can’t set the course.
Douse’s message rings clear: you can automate code, but not conviction.