Big Walk developer House House has confirmed that it used AI during the “final stretch” of its development. The studio recently updated its FAQs page to confirm its use of the tech, with the news coming after 19 Independent Games Festival jurors announced they’ll decline to vote for “any game that uses generative AI in any capacity” during the 2027 awards show.
House House hasn’t confirmed if its admittance was connected to the IGF–the IGF hasn’t named any games either–and the studio said to Aftermath that it estimates “that well under 0.1% of Big Walk’s code” was built with AI. “We have some concern that voluntary disclosures like this might contribute to the normalization of this technology, or its treatment as ‘inevitable.’ We support the work of those who are trying to limit the harm generative AI is doing to videogames and our world, and apologize that Big Walk’s LLM usage may not meet their standards,” House House said. The developer also mentioned that AI was used as a last resort for solving technical issues, as even an engineer at Unity–the engine that Big Walk was developed in–believed that one of their problems wasn’t possible to solve.
There’s a lot to unpack here, starting with why House House didn’t disclose the use of AI for Big Walk. The game is hosted on platforms like Steam, where studios can voluntarily disclose AI usage when it comes to generated code (however, it is mandatory to disclose if a game has AI-generated assets), but House House says it only did so after the topic became a matter of public interest. It also added that it will continue to support developers looking to limit “the harm generative AI is doing to video games and our world.”
Pathologic 2 localization writer Bruno Diaz also touched on the controversy, explaining that IGF rules required studios to disclose the use of AI in development. Game designer Austin Walker posted online that the IGF committee has been debating the use of AI in game development, leading 19 jurors to issue a statement. While the group says it doesn’t speak for the entire IGF organization or all jurors involved in the IGF Awards, IGF leadership supports the statement. Overall, if AI is used in any part of a game’s development, from coding to visual assets, the jurors will not vote for it.
“Programming is a creative discipline whose labor deserves the same respect we extend to any part of making a game,” the IGF juror’s statement reads. “This extends to the past work used to train these models without the creators’ consent.”
The IGF’s stance comes as the discussion over AI heats up in the games industry. Proponents argue it’ll make video game development faster and more affordable; others argue it contributes to environmental harm and is leading to job losses across multiple fields. Others have argued that House House’s use of AI to solve challenging coding bugs isn’t a big deal, but critics say the AI disclosure should have been there from the beginning.
At the same time, the frequency of AI slop games has exploded in recent months, with the October edition of Steam Next Fest being a dumping ground for hastily vibe-coded game demos. Copycats have also become a major headache, with several game developers withdrawing their demos from the public over fears that bad actors will copy their work and rush a clone to market.