Amid an industry grappling with questions over generative AI in game development, Blue Prince finds itself drawn into controversy after rumors circulated regarding its creative process. Awarded Game of the Year at the Indie Game Awards and recognized for Best Design in the PC Gamer 2025 Game of the Year Awards, Blue Prince’s development journey faced public scrutiny due to an erroneous report. In a fast-paced digital landscape, confirmation of creative authenticity is becoming essential. Many in the gaming community demand clarity as AI-generated content gains traction, prompting publishers and developers alike to address concerns publicly, while fans and producers question where the boundaries of human-made art and machine generation should be drawn.
Allegations about Blue Prince’s use of generative AI surfaced after media outlets incorrectly suggested that AI played a role in the game’s creation, similar to public debates haunting other titles this year. Previous incidents saw games like Clair Obscur: Expedition 33 disqualified from awards for confirmed AI involvement, alongside transparency discussions from studios such as Larian. Raw Fury’s swift rebuttal echoes a growing need for precise statements from creators, while past reporting on generative AI in games demonstrates heightened sensitivity—further fueled by divided audience opinions. These recurring discussions underline an evolving debate over acceptable development practices in game publishing.
How Did Raw Fury Respond to The Allegations?
Raw Fury, publisher of Blue Prince, directly addressed accusations of generative AI use in the game. Through an official statement, they emphasized the entirely human-led creative process.
For people that need confirmation: There is no AI used in Blue Prince. The game was built and crafted with full human instinct by Tonda Ros @dogubomb & his team.
What Role Did the Development Team Play?
Developer Dogubomb, led by Tonda Ros, remained largely silent on social media about the situation but visibly supported Raw Fury’s public clarification by reposting it. The team focused on eight years of development, aiming for imaginative, human-crafted design.
It is the result of eight years of development, fuelled by imagination and creativity, and we are extremely proud of what Tonda has achieved.
Will AI Debates Continue in The Games Industry?
As 2026 approaches, generative AI’s role in video game production remains contentious, frequently influencing award considerations, community trust, and industry policies. Blue Prince’s experience, alongside those of Clair Obscur and Larian Studios, demonstrates how transparency is paramount, with misunderstandings attracting public attention and requiring clarification from studios and publishers. The need for clear communication policies is becoming more apparent as AI adoption becomes a pivotal issue within creative industries.
Situations like this encourage studios to develop transparent best practices surrounding AI use—from outright avoidance to explicit disclosures about their implementation. Players seeking authentic creative experiences benefit from clear signals about development methods. Understanding how studios operate can help consumers, press, and industry insiders better navigate this evolving landscape. For now, Blue Prince’s reaffirmed human touch sets it apart from other, more debated games, while debates over technology’s role in artistic processes remain active and likely to evolve further.
