Capcom draws line on AI use: No generative assets in games, but efficiency tools stay

After all that furore over Nvidia's AI-powered DLSS 5 makeover of Resident Evil Requiem, Capcom promises gen-AI assets won't be part of its games any time soon

We've seen a slew of comapnies clarify their stance on generative AI over the past few months, and now it's Capcom's turn to outline its boundaries with the tech. "We will not implement assets generated by AI into our games," Capcom stated, adding that it won't be shying away from "proactively" using other AI tools "as a contributing technology to improve the efficiency and productivity of the game development process." How all those things are likely to be folded into the development pipeline are not yet clear, but it's important to note that, in early 2025, Capcom communicated it aimed to toy with generative AI in collaboration with Google for "idea generation." A summary of the session aimed at investors is available here if you're curious To put it simply, Capcom will use generative AI to help streamline time-consuming and repetitive game development tasks, and form the foundation for a lot of work that eats into development time. It's worth noting that other developers are already trialling techniques similar to this, and it leads to AI-generated assets 'slipping through' QA processes and ending up in front of players. So, while Capcom is avoiding gen-AI for use in in-game assets for now, its stance is slightly confusing, especially after last week's DLSS 5 saga, which directly affected recent survival horror hit Resident Evil Requiem as the game became an unofficial lightning rod for players complaining about Nvidia's 'yassification filter'. While publishers like Square Enix seem more bullish about their plans for AI implementation in games, Capcom is seemingly trying to take a more moderate approach. But a week after signing off on Nvidia's AI-powered assault on Resident Evil Requiem's artistic vision, it sends a conflicting messag.e Meanwhile, another one of 2026's biggest releases so far, Crimson Desert, is facing its own battle after developer Pearl Abyss was called out on the extensive use of gen-AI art assets in the launch build. Don't expect the AI issue to go away any time soon.

Capcom Promises No GenAI In Its Games, But There's A Catch

Players should not encounter anything AI-generated, but the publisher intends to use it behind-the-scenes Capcom has released its latest round of investor information this morning, March 23, containing third-quarter results (going well, despite "sluggish" Monster Hunter Wilds sales), a continued non-committal stance on mobile games, and something much more intriguing: A promise that Capcom will "not implement the materials generated by our AI into game content." It was during the investor Q&A portion of the financials that Capcom was asked how the company intends to hand generative AI in its game development. That's a question that could be taken in two extremely different ways in such circumstances; perhaps it's coming from someone concerned that the technology might be damaging to the company's reputation, or it could be the precise opposite, an enthusiast demanding to know how Capcom intends to embrace this latest faddish tech. And indeed, the response is moderated, suggesting a willingness to use genAI for all the usual improving of "efficiency" during production that c-suite types like to imagine it can do, but at the same time making clear it won't be reaching anything players actually see in a game. Via machine translation, Capcom's succinct response begins, "Our company will not implement the materials generated by our AI into game content," and that's the crucial takeaway here, the implication being that the Resident Evil company is aware of the reputational harm it causes every time a game is discovered to be using the slop. However, the company adds that it will be "exploring ways" to make use of it during production "to improve efficiency and productivity": "However, we plan to actively utilize this technology to improve efficiency and productivity in the game development process. Therefore, we are currently exploring ways to use it in various areas, such as graphics, sound, and programming." It really does suck to see any company making such pledges to allow the non-creative act of plagiarizing others' code, art and audio in the development of its games. It would be such a treat to see just one larger corporation saying, "We value the creative acts of our incredible employees, and have listened to our artists, coders and audio engineers when they tell us how much harder it is to fix the broken results of a predictive text machine than to just create for ourselves, and so we intend to make savings by not wasting millions on this latest distraction." But alas. But at least Capcom is promising not to let any of it actually visibly or audibly reach the games we play. Um, until you remember that Capcom was one of the companies at the forefront of Nvidia's announcement of DLSS 5, its AI sloppifier tech that replaces the art created by a developer with its own yassified, crassified mediocrity. Perhaps this pledge to investors could be understood as some sort of a climbdown after the furious response to the tech's reveal?

Resident Evil developer Capcom "will not be implementing any AI-generated assets into our video game content," but plans to "actively" utilize the tech to "improve efficiency"

"We are currently testing out various methods of usage across our departments, including graphics, sound, and programming." Capcom, the developer behind Resident Evil, Street Fighter, and more, says it won't be using AI-Generated assets in its games. However, the company says it's looking into its use to improve efficiency. AI use in games remains a hot topic. The introduction of Google's Project Genie caused a number of gaming companies' stocks to crash because investors think the slop machine can create games people want to play. Even small uses like Crimson Desert's in-game posters are causing a fuss in the community, given that these are the types of roles that could've been done by entry-level staff and instead are used as cost-cutting measures, only for everyone to immediately notice because AI art typically looks clumsy. Capcom was asked by investors (translated by Automaton) about the company's plan for AI usage in game development, with Capcom explaining, "Our company will not be implementing any AI-generated assets into our video game content. On the other hand, going forward, we plan to actively utilize this technology in order to improve efficiency and productivity of game development. That is why we are currently testing out various methods of usage across our departments, including graphics, sound, and programming." This echoes sentiments from the likes of Hideo Kojima, who said he'd like to use AI to handle "tedious tasks" but would leave the creative part to actual humans. Of course, given how much we've seen AI models hallucinate information, developers would likely need to be on hand to monitor it. We've seen in the past how a single coding mistake can completely tank a game, like how a single spelling mistake in the code of Aliens: Colonial Marines absolutely broke the Xenomorph AI (I mean, it was still a bad game with better Alien AI, but it was definitely better without it).

Capcom Pledges No AI Use in Games but It's Still Using It to Make Them

It seems that this will be the new trend going forward for all gaming developers. The gaming industry is slowly pivoting to the use of AI in development, with more companies clarifying their AI policy to their player base. With the backlash received by Larian Studios and Sandfall Interactive for hinting at AI usage in their work, the gaming community is now always on high alert for any AI work that hasn't been disclosed to the players. Crimson Desert's AI backlash has been the talk of the gaming community recently, and Capcom seems to have learned from all these exchanges. Capcom has finally come out and revealed its AI policy. Find out more about it here. During the QnA segment of Capcom's 'Company Briefing for Individual Investors', a question was asked about Capcom's generative AI policy going forward. As an answer, the speaker clarified that Capcom doesn't use AI-generated content for in-game materials and will continue to adhere to it. However, they consider AI to be a good resource for improving efficiency and productivity in game development, so they are currently figuring out how to use it properly, especially in the graphics and sound programs. We do not implement generative AI-generated materials in game content. On the other hand, we plan to actively utilize technologies that contribute to improving efficiency and productivity in the game development process. Therefore, we are currently verifying how to use it in various job fields, such as graphics and sound programs. This is a similar AI policy to Larian Studios. Previously, the director of Larian Studios also made it clear that they plan to continue using AI going forward, but not for in-game assets, unless they are trained completely from data owned by Larian. Crimson Desert became the latest victim of the AI outrage, as they were caught having AI-generated paintings in the game. Pearl Abyss had to make a public statement about it, mentioning that they had only planned on using the AI paintings as a placeholder, with the intention of replacing them before release. They clarified that some of the placeholder work remained added in the game by mistake, and they are going to replace it soon in an upcoming update. With the AI boom hitting all industries, it is bound to seep into gaming more as we continue going forward. What's your opinion on AI usage for game development? Let us know in the comments below.

Capcom "Will Not" Use GenAI for In-Game Assets, But it Will Use it "To Improve Efficiency and Productivity of Game Development"

Capcom has drawn its line when it comes to using Generative AI (GenAI) tools and technology. As GenAI tech becomes more prevalent across the entire tech world, video game development included, many are still figuring out whether the tech has a place in game development. Data from the GDC State of the Game Industry Report 2026 showed that as more companies adopt the tech in different ways, more policies are being created on how it is to be used, and we now have an answer on how Capcom will look to use it. Spotted by Game*Spark (via Automaton), speaking during a briefing session held for its investors, which was summarized and published, the company answered investors questions on how the studio is handling GenAI tech in game development. For Capcom, the line it won't cross (at least for now) is using GenAI tools to make assets intended to appear in a game. Which means that as long as this policy holds, in theory, we should never see Capcom run into a situation like the one Pearl Abyss found itself in with Crimson Desert, where the studio is alleging that GenAI-made assets were "unintentionally" left in the release build and only admitted to using the tech after players had caught it in-game. What Capcom will do with GenAI, however, is "utilize this technology to improve efficiency and productivity in the game development process." Departments that will explore how to do this with the tech include graphics, sound, and programming. "Our company will not implement the materials generated by our AI into game content," the full statement begins. "However, we plan to actively utilize this technology to improve efficiency and productivity in the game development process. Therefore, we are currently exploring ways to use it in various areas, such as graphics, sound, and programming." This stance arrives days after the much-maligned NVIDIA DLSS 5 reveal that featured Grace Ashcroft and Leon Kennedy from Capcom's Resident Evil Requiem. The reveal was the latest element of GenAI worming its way into game development, and arguably created an even bigger divide between those who are for and against the technology.

Resident Evil Requiem Developer Capcom Insists It Won't Use AI-Generated Assets in Its Games, but Will Harness Tech to Make Game Development Processes More Efficient

Capcom has clarified its current stance on generative AI in its videogames. The major Japanese publisher and developer behind popular series like Resident Evil, Street Fighter, and Monster Hunter has revealed that while it doesn't use gen-AI assets in their games, it is exploring ways to use generative AI to streamline the game development process. On March 23, Capcom publicized the questions and answers from its latest shareholders' meeting. In this session, Capcom was asked about its stance on using generative AI in game development. "We will not implement assets generated by AI into our games." Capcom replied. "However, we plan to proactively use it as a contributing technology to improve the efficiency and productivity of the game development process. To this end, we are currently exploring ways to implement it in various areas, including graphics, sound and programming." As previously reported by Japanese news site Game*Spark, Capcom revealed back in January 2025 that it built a prototype "idea generation" system using Google Cloud. Basically, it's a system that uses generative AI to help brainstorm ideas to flesh out a game's world, something that Capcom's technical director Kazuki Abe described as one of the most labor-intensive and time consuming tasks in game development, as each item has to be created from scratch. With so many items and background details in the rich environments of games like the Monster Hunter series, Abe noted that "ultimately, we have to come up with hundreds of thousands of unique ideas" for comparison and evaluation. Each of the thousands of items in a game requires multiple proposals including text and visual references, to make sure that even background objects fit the game's setting. Capcom's Google Cloud-based system uses generative AI to read various game design documents (including text, images, and spreadsheets) and output further ideas based on them, thus speeding up the conceptualization process. The system allows individuals to use generative AI to brainstorm and generate ideas on their own, and has apparently been highly evaluated by Capcom's staff. Abe explained that generative AI can be used to produce visual references to convey ideas to art directors and artists, who ultimately produce the finished assets. So it seems that Capcom will use generative AI to streamline time-consuming and repetitive game development tasks, but actual game content will still be made by humans. Generative AI in the games industry is a hot topic, and Capcom has recently popped up in the news due to Resident Evil Requiem being used in the tech demo for Nvidia's DLSS 5 AI graphics tech last week. The reveal drew widespread criticism for giving Resi protagonists Grace and Leon a "photo-realistic" glow-up that some found soulless and an insult to the original artists' vision. Nvidia later confirmed that DLSS 5 is redrawing games by taking frames and motion vector data from the source material, and drawing a new image that's slapped on top. A survey by Game Developer published earlier this year found that 36% of industry professionals are using GenAI in their daily work. However, the survey also showed around 80% relied on it for researching and brainstorming, with more complex and creative tasks still requiring a human touch. Speaking at Gamescom in Bangkok last October, Dead Space creator Glen Schofield argued that AI could be used to fix a games industry beleaguered by rising costs and layoffs. "AI isn't here to replace us," Schofield opined. "It's here to make us faster, better, and more efficient." Still developers are having to tread carefully with AI, and some have endured high-profile backlashes from fans. Last year, Baldur's Gate 3 developer Larian was forced to respond to a Divinity GenAI backlash, eventually promising not to release the game with any AI components. And just this weekend, Crimson Desert developer Pearl Abyss announced it had launched a "comprehensive" audit of all in-game assets after admitting the use of AI-generated images in the final release should have been disclosed.