AI and games are becoming an inseparable couple. Whether it is AI used in modern graphics rendering or AI used in actual game development, I have said several times that I don’t think they will break up anytime soon..
The rise of AI has been causing setbacks in global PC gaming markets like Steam since the beginning. In January 2024Steam Owner Valve announced that its storefront would now contain AI disclosures of the developers. If AI was used in development, you could clearly see it on the game page.
Since then, you’ve probably noticed a lot of Steam pages sporting that little AI blurb describing how exactly AI was used during development. The phenomenon, of course, begs the question: Is the use of AI in game development hurting sales?
According Research by Ross Burton, PhD, Head of Product and Data at Game Oracle (through pc gamer), he The use of AI hurts sales. and, beyond cold hard cash, it also damages a game’s reputation.
Burton found that approximately 21% of games released on Steam in 2025 (before November) contained a disclosure for some type of AI use. I can’t help but assume that number has only increased since then.
Steam’s recent Next Fest event, which showcased countless new games coming in the near future, was littered with games clearly made with AI, some less harmless than others.
Cracking Steam’s numbers tells an important story
Steam does not reveal how many copies of specific games are sold; that’s up to the developer to know and share it only if they want to. However, Steam sales can be approximated by the number of reviews a title receives, and as Game Oracle points out, it’s a proxy method used throughout the industry.
Game Oracle’s initial investigation, even at a superficial level, is revealing. studied almost 10,000 Steam releases between January and October 2025finding that games that revealed the use of AI averaged only 4 reviews in the first month after launch compared to 7 Reviews of games without AI.
Almost 20% of games with AI disclosure received no reviews, compared to 15% for non-AI games. Scores were also skewed toward titles with at least 100 reviews, with AI games achieving an average score of 84.6% compared to 88.3% for non-AI games.
AI games don’t get as much attention as non-AI games
Game Oracle created a causal statistical model to control for elements such as a specific developer’s prior experience, publisher support (if any), genre, and release date. Games belonging to similar groups were then compared to each other to prevent external factors from interfering.
In this scenario, games that revealed the use of AI received approximately 53% Fewer reviews than non-AI games. So if two games were released around the same time, from developers with similar levels of experience, with similar backing, and of a similar genre, the non-AI games would, in theory, receive 100 reviews while an AI game would receive 47.
This is a huge gap and it is not easy to debunk.
Established studios are being punished more harshly for using AI in game development.
Of course, there are some nuances to the study’s findings. Game Oracle performed a sensitivity analysis to account for unmeasured factors like marketing costs, raw talent, and pure luck.
It was found that developers with no experience and no marketing budget, who likely turned to AI simply due to lack of other resources, hardly saw any negative impact on sales despite the spread of AI. These games would almost certainly have problems even without the use of AI.
They have talent, budget and know-how (factors that usually increase sales between 20% and 65%). They decide to experiment with AI to optimize their workflow. If this narrative is true, if “good” studios use AI, then the use of AI is catastrophic (-40% to -60% sales drop). This is evidenced by the dark blue cells at the top of our heatmap.
Ross Burton, PhD, Head of Product and Data at Game Oracle
It’s a different story for more established studios with existing followings and previous titles. Game Oracle found that these studios’ use of AI resulted in a significant 40% to 60% drop in sales.
👉 Crimson Desert developers apologize for use of generative AI
That’s a big difference. The AI ​​stigma seems to affect competent developers who have a lot to lose the most, and I’m not sure game studios are willing to accept it.
What AI Stigma Means for Gamers
I don’t think gamers are actively boycotting AI games. If I had to guess, I would say that most Steam users never check AI disclosures and instead direct their disposable income towards positive reviews.
Games like The finals and Aspira! are mentioned in the study as examples of successes that used AI. These successes are offset by Black ops 7 and Jurassic World Evolution 3 as examples of brands that were harmed by the use of AI.
The investigation reaches a point where Burton says he doesn’t know exactly what is causing the negative impact on AI games.
Some might be inclined to jump to conclusions and claim that this is a consumer reaction, and that players actively reject games that reveal the use of AI. But there are many other factors at play.
Ross Burton, PhD, Head of Product and Data at Game Oracle
An interesting line that stands out to me is that AI is often “correlated with other decisions that lead to a poorly crafted game.“Burton suggests that the penalty for using AI could be due to both how to use as how much is used.
Burton concludes the research by reminding that AI is not something to be avoided: “Approach AI with caution. Use it with grace. It doesn’t replace hard work, it’s just there to lighten the load.“
Do you agree? Let me know in the comments section below!
Join us on Reddit at r/WindowsCentral to share your ideas and discuss our latest news, reviews and more.
