Insomniac recently found itself in a bit of hot water due to a glitch in Marvel’s Wolverine that was perceived as evidence of generative AI. The asset in question was a bathroom sign that’s since been patched, and Insomniac has explicitly stated that the graphic is not AI-generated, but that its unusual appearance resulted from a rendering error.
I’m inclined to believe Insomniac in this case. Unfortunately, running into generative AI is becoming more and more commonplace in this line of work, so I’ve grown fairly accustomed to what janky, low-effort AI-generated assets look like: they don’t really look like the bathroom sign in Marvel’s Wolverine. According to Insomniac, the strange-looking bathroom sign stems from an issue with a “UV map,” which controls how 2D textures interact with 3D objects in-game—this makes sense. But unfortunately, this particular instance doesn’t actually matter that much in the grander scheme of AI panic and mistrust, and things are only going to get worse from here.
Marvel’s Wolverine Is a Prime Example of How AI Has Poisoned Audience Perception and Discourse
Generative AI has grown so indistinguishable from “the real deal” that it often takes a keen, practiced eye to spot it. Even then, the gap between, say, a real photograph and an AI-generated one, is growing smaller and smaller by the day. This is just as true for generative AI in video games as in any other medium.
Insomniac is probably telling the truth about the sign asset not being AI-generated, but there’s no way for anyone to be sure about that, which should be a lot more concerning than whatever may or may not have been included in Wolverine. Remember, Marvel’s Wolverine is one of the biggest, most high-profile AAA games of the year: it’s under intense scrutiny from a significant chunk of the gaming community, and even beyond. Smaller or more niche titles could most definitely “get away” with gen-AI assets, especially ones as small as a bathroom sign.
In this sort of situation, a theoretical developer could deny AI usage following fan backlash, but the overwhelming majority of gamers lack the time, inclination, and tools to actually verify such claims. Even experts are losing their grip on what’s AI-generated and what isn’t, as AI generation gets more realistic and integrated into more minute, granular steps in a company’s workflow. In short, AI-generated assets are getting harder to distinguish from actual, normal-looking ones, let alone visual glitches or other oddities; not every AI-generated asset is going to stand out.
AI Paranoia Is More Significant Than Wolverine’s Bathroom Sign
The growing power of generative AI threatens to plunge all entertainment, including gaming, into a 1984-esque dark age, wherein truth and reality are defined solely by authority figures like studio heads or CEOs of publishers. If there’s no reliable or definitive way to oust something as AI-generated, we might as well assume that everything is. Even though the best video game studios will probably steer clear of generative AI for major creative components, the most cost-effective studios will likely be the ones that fully embrace generative AI to save time and money.
Even experts are losing their grip on what’s AI-generated and what isn’t, as AI generation gets more realistic and integrated into more minute, granular steps in a company’s workflow.
Because it’s not just that AI can regularly pass as human-made art. There’s also the matter of companies cutting corners and trying to reduce overhead by any means necessary—the industry certainly tends toward the Machiavellian in this respect, as indicated by mass layoffs, excessive crunch, and so on. For developers and publishers that already seem to undervalue the contributions of people, to the extent that they regularly offload them in order to enhance a period’s balance sheet, generative AI is a natural next step.
Many AI proponents question whether this actually matters. They would argue that, so long as someone enjoys a game, painting, movie, song, et cetera, it shouldn’t matter if it’s made by an AI rather than a human being. There’s a lot that can be said in response to this, but my personal stance can be summed up as follows: AI-generated “art” robs creative expression of its mystique, dignity, and beauty, and ushers us into a world where art is dead and replaced solely by “content.”
For many people—more than the average AI enthusiast or tech CEO assumes, I’d wager—the fact that a book, movie, or video game came from other human beings is deeply important. This is a personal, emotional phenomenon, not a problem for technology to solve. Perhaps this is why so many in the pro-AI crowd struggle to accept it, or insist that AI art will someday be as moving and culturally relevant as real, human art. It’s for this reason that the influx of AI-generated content in games isn’t going to go over smoothly.
What the Future Might Hold for AI-Generated Content in Gaming
AI-generated content is going to stick around for a while; the question is how audiences will react to it. In the case of video games, AI assets represent a sensitive subject, not just because of the antisocial behavior of corporations which I previously described, but also because of the cost-benefit analysis. If we’re talking about your typical AAA game, it’s probably going to continue to retail for $70 or even $80, setting an expectation of premium quality. AI-generated content is inherently of inferior quality by most standards, since generative AI’s main appeal is that you don’t need human talent for it to work. And if meaningful savings don’t trickle down to the consumer, then the only ones saving money are the developers and publishers, and audiences won’t be happy about that.
Like with most subjects, public opinion on generative AI in gaming will continue to be complex and evolve over time. Something like the Marvel’s Wolverine AI fiasco might seem laughable in a few years’ time, when every other game includes some sort of AI-generated asset. But I think it’s more likely that we’re living through an era of exploration, during which some people will decide they are okay with ubiquitous generative AI, and others will decide they aren’t, and there’s no accounting for how each camp will influence the industry moving forward.
- Released
-
September 15, 2026
- ESRB
-
Mature 17+ / Blood and Gore, Drug Reference, Intense Violence, Partial Nudity, Strong Language, In-Game Purchases
- Publisher(s)
-
Sony Interactive Entertainment
