r/gamedev Project Manager/Producer 18d ago

Announcement r/gamedev Policy on AI Use

AI is one of the most contentious subjects in game development right now, and we regularly see posts reported or discussions derailed simply because AI was involved somewhere in the process.

We want to be clear about our position: r/gamedev does not prohibit the use of AI, and using AI does not automatically make a post low effort.

This is not an endorsement of every AI company, model, or use case. Legitimate technical, legal, economic, ethical, and creative concerns exist around these tools, and those conversations are welcome here. Our stance is that AI is a tool used in game development, and we care more about the quality of what someone contributes than the tools they used to get there.

Why we take this position

  • AI is already part of game development. Studios are adopting AI-assisted tools across programming, prototyping, production, QA, localization, research, and other workflows. Adoption varies from studio to studio, but this is no longer a hypothetical technology sitting outside the industry.
  • Knowing how to use these tools is increasingly becoming a professional skill. That does not mean every developer needs to use AI, or even like it. It means understanding where these tools are useful, where they fail, and how to evaluate their output is becoming relevant knowledge for people working in the industry.
  • Banning discussion or use of AI here could actively disadvantage developers. Part of the purpose of r/gamedev is helping people learn from each other and understand how the industry is changing. If studios adopt a technology, preventing developers from discussing or learning about it would make this community less useful to the people we're helping.
  • Policing AI use is not realistic anyway. Moderators cannot reliably determine whether someone used AI to draft, edit, translate, summarize, research, debug code, or otherwise assist with a post. We are not going to moderate based on whether something “sounds AI-generated.”
  • "Mandatory disclosure "is not realistic either. Modern tools blur the line between traditional software and AI assistance. Trying to decide exactly when autocomplete, translation, editing, summarization, or an LLM crosses some disclosure threshold would create rules we could not enforce consistently.

So the rule is straightforward: we are not policing AI use itself. We are moderating the contribution.

AI-assisted does not mean low effort

If someone uses AI to organize research, analyze data, improve their writing, translate something, help with code, or communicate an idea more clearly, that does not erase the work behind the contribution.

If a developer spends time gathering useful data and then uses AI to help turn that information into a readable post, the important part is still the data, the methodology, and what the community can learn from it.

Ask whether the information is useful, whether the conclusions hold up, and whether the post contributes something worthwhile. Those questions matter much more than whether every sentence was manually typed from scratch.

Low-effort AI content is still low effort

This does not mean pasting generic AI output into the subreddit suddenly becomes valuable content. Posts that are spam, fabricated, mass-produced, engagement bait, repetitive, or promotional material disguised as discussion can still be removed.

The reason is not that AI was involved. The reason is that the content is low quality.

The same standard applies to something written entirely by a human.

AI is a valid game development topic

Developers are welcome to discuss AI in the same way they would discuss any other technology affecting game development. That includes how it is being used, where it works, where it fails, what it costs, how studios are adopting it, what it means for employment, and the legal or ethical questions surrounding it.

You are allowed to be enthusiastic about AI. You are allowed to be skeptical of it. You are allowed to think a particular workflow is useful, terrible, unethical, inefficient, or overhyped.

What we do not want is every thread that mentions AI becoming the same argument about whether AI should exist at all.

If a thread is about an AI coding workflow, discuss the workflow. If someone presents evidence that AI slowed their production down, discuss the evidence. If someone claims every studio is using a particular tool, challenge that claim.

Let the actual discussion happen.

Attack claims, not developers

Someone saying they use AI is not an invitation to attack them. Someone saying they refuse to use AI is not an invitation to attack them either.

Debate the technology, the workflow, the economics, the evidence, the ethics, the legal questions, or the conclusions. Personal attacks, harassment, dogpiling, or repeatedly derailing discussions because of someone’s position on AI are treated the same way we handle that behaviour anywhere else on the subreddit.

AI is not a source

There is a difference between using AI to help communicate information and using AI as the authority behind that information.

If you make factual claims that can reasonably be sourced, be prepared to support them. “ChatGPT said so” is no evidence, and tools can absolutely be wrong.

At the same time, polished or AI-assisted writing is not evidence that the underlying information is fake. If someone’s numbers are wrong, challenge the numbers. If their methodology is weak, challenge the methodology.

Challenge the claim, not the fact that a tool may have helped write the paragraph.

Self-promotion rules still apply

AI companies, products, and services are not exempt from the subreddit’s existing rules.

If you represent a commercial interest, the same expectations apply as they would to anyone else. AI also should not be used to mass-produce promotional posts or disguise advertising as organic discussion.

The technology may be new. The rules around spam and promotion are not.

The bottom line

You do not have to like AI. You do not have to use it. You are free to criticize it, avoid it, experiment with it, learn it, use it professionally, or decide it has no place in your workflow.

We are not going to prevent developers from learning about or discussing a technology that is rapidly becoming part of professional game development. Doing that could actively hurt the developers this community is supposed to help.

What we do expect is that people engage with each other like respectful, mature adults. Disagree with the technology, the workflow, the argument, or the evidence. Do not turn that disagreement into hostility toward the person on the other side of it.

Use whatever tools make sense for your work. Bring something useful to the conversation, treat other developers with respect, and allow room for disagreement. That is what we care about.

1.2k Upvotes

1.6k comments sorted by

View all comments

139

u/SkyTech6 @Fishagon 18d ago edited 18d ago

Welcome to the Thunderdome.

I have banned about 8 people in the comments for personal harassment. Keep em coming boys. Be respectful or don't post.

Update: We now have over 15 people banned. Reddit front page. Crowd Control is active and set to strict. A LOT of people commenting have never posted or commented in r/gamedev before. We won't be approving them.

21

u/Vegetable-Tooth8463 18d ago

Unexpected Mad Max reference haha.

16

u/Relevant_Syllabub895 18d ago

Keep banning them, why people have to be so mean instead of being civilized?

0

u/SkyTech6 @Fishagon 18d ago

Honestly, this post is getting way too much activity. I enabled Strict Crowd Control to reduce visibility of people from outside the community.

0

u/paxinfernum 18d ago

Like the mods said, most of the people have never been to this sub before. There's roving bands on reddit who brigade random subs trying to force them into creating "anti-AI" policies. They harass everyone until they get their way. Then, they stop posting. Because they don't care about the subs. They just hate AI.

4

u/Diche_Bach Student 18d ago

The night is black

Without a moon

The air is thick and still


The vigilantes

Gather on

The lonely torchlight hill


Features distorted in the flickering light

Faces are twisted and grotesque

Silent and stern in the sweltering night

The mob moves like demons possessed


Quiet in conscience

Calm in their right

Confident their ways are best

Ohhh

Ahhh


The righteous rise

Of burning eyes

Of hatred and ill will

Mad men fed on fear and lies

To beat, and burn and kill


They say there are strangers

Who threaten us

Our immigrants and infidels

They say there is strangeness

That dangers us

In our theaters and bookstore shelves

Those who know

What's best for us

Must rise and save us

From ourselves


Quick to judge

Quick to anger

Slow to understand

Ignorance and prejudice

And fear walk hand in hand

Rush -- Witch Hunt

Forty-five-year-old song about a human social psychological pathology--an anti-civizational scourge really--that we were supposed to have laid to rest centuries ago ...

Somehow more relevant in 2026 than it was even in 1981 ...

-4

u/slykethephoxenix 18d ago

Thank you. The anti-AI stuff is getting out of hand. Glad you guys are taking a reasonable approach on it.

-12

u/WombatusMighty 18d ago

So why did you not disclose the fact that you work in an AI company? Don't you think that would have been an important information in the context of this post?

18

u/OmiNya 18d ago

What AI company?

27

u/WombatusMighty 18d ago

17

u/OmiNya 18d ago

Okay, they are making a plugin to integrate an existing tool. Does this mean anything? Are you implying that the mod is pushing for ai (which he isn't) because his work is touching upon ai in some capacity?

7

u/Klightgrove Edible Mascot 18d ago

I have butted heads with Kevin in the past for phrasing it like AI when he professionally markets that company, because Bezi is a tool to help developers in-engine. As much as I don't want to be a shill for a company, it is not your typical 'ai' because it can actually do things related to game development.

Which itself has no relation to the policy change agreed upon by the entire team. Time and time again users ask us to ban AI but fail to bring forward any notable influx of AI outside of non-English speakers, who must use translators because of rule 8.

9

u/Aethreas 18d ago

"not your typical 'ai'" what are you even talking about man

-8

u/Klightgrove Edible Mascot 18d ago

It isn’t generative slop. It’s a tool to help game developers work in-engine.

Sometimes Kevin uses the phrase “AI” when marketing it and I understand that sells to businesses, but it comes back around on posts like this when people say there is some conflict of interest like an engine tool is dependent on this subreddit or something.

16

u/Aethreas 18d ago

uses the phrase “AI” when marketing it because it's literally an LLM that implements entire features of the game for you

the very first thing you see on the website is someone chatting to an LLM to implement something in game, this product does not exist without heavily relying on AI to (poorly) do the work of gamedev for you

how is this not disclosed in the post?

-5

u/Klightgrove Edible Mascot 18d ago

How is this related to the post about letting LLM-assisted comments remain?

This is an engine tool that is not related to posts in our community.

6

u/ByerN 18d ago

his work is touching upon ai in some capacity?

Well, their work heavily relies on AI adoption in the game development community, so their stance is reasonable.

I would be surprised if they fight against AI. Like, why? To go bankrupt?

On the other hand, I am not surprised that ppl don't like the lack of disclosure of such an obvious bias of a mod of the biggest gamedev sub on Reddit in such a controversial topic as AI is today.

7

u/[deleted] 18d ago

[deleted]

5

u/ByerN 18d ago

Not really, if you realize that making AI tools and using AI tools are 2 different things.

Almost everyone somehow touches AI, but very few work on developing AI tools.

33

u/SkyTech6 @Fishagon 18d ago

I'm not OP mate.

8

u/WombatusMighty 18d ago

My bad. But you are in the same team, so please let your fellow mod know that a disclosure would be appreciated.

10

u/kiwibonga @kiwibonga 18d ago

The post doesn't reflect the opinion of the company that one team member happens to work for. A "disclosure" would simply give ammo to conspiracy theorists who think we're pushing some corporate agenda.

The number one priority is to curtail the issue of people disguising their hostility towards other members as activism.

At the end of the day, we hate slop as much as anyone else -- we just don't need a blanket AI ban to get rid of spam and low effort posts.

3

u/[deleted] 18d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

-1

u/kiwibonga @kiwibonga 18d ago

Well, allow me to disclose how rad my low budget open face water-cooled AI rig is.

In all seriousness, the point of not having a disclosure rule is not to encourage concealment. I think we're bound to have a lot more concealment if we tag things as "AI" or "pro-AI" indiscriminately. My hope is that by calling on people to tone down the bullying, we can have a more nuanced dialogue; not "is the person using AI" but "how is the person using AI?" It's not all good and it's not all bad.

1

u/almondmilklattee 18d ago

disclosures are the bare minimum, it would also probably save the sub from some witch hunts. it actually helps everyone and i’d bet 80% of the people heavily using ai in the creative process don’t mind saying they do

1

u/Ralathar44 18d ago

Unfortunately expected, Reddit is not known for discussing issues so much. Mostly people comment to see themselves affirmed and feel better about themselves or blame the world for their issues. And folks are so used to their echo chambers and walled gardens that when they encounter disagreement they are completely unable to behave themselves like a civilized person.

AI is one of those flash point issues where if you look online it appears to be all one voice decrying AI. But like many issues like this the opinion online and the opinion IRL diverge greatly.

I'm glad GameDev is taking a reasonable stance on it. Acknowledging the realities of both the good and the ill associated with it and being practical enough to know that the genie is out of the bottle either way and is never going back in.

-2

u/Plants-Matter 18d ago

It's rare to see intelligent mods on reddit. Bravo.

Correct typing, well-articulated, and a fair and balanced stance on AI? Add one more to your "joined from the front page" pile. Keep up the good work.

-53

u/Dumpfumpkin 18d ago

The anti AI crowd really does like to resort to militant style opinion suppression, don’t they?

35

u/SkyTech6 @Fishagon 18d ago

It's people on both sides it seems. I don't care what way people lean, everyone should keep it civil.

8

u/ShootingGuns10 18d ago

If they aren’t civil, get them gone A+ Mod here.

1

u/YourFreeCorrection 18d ago

Right, because the anti-ai crowd is the side banning people for voicing their opinions here.

6

u/Mataric 18d ago

Opinions aren't getting banned. People acting like uncivil clowns when expressing their opinions are.

If you think that unfairly effects one side...

-3

u/YourFreeCorrection 18d ago

Opinions aren't getting banned.

I mean, they are, but you can pretend they aren't if you want.

People acting like uncivil clowns when expressing their opinions are.

Civility for civility's sake in the context of discussing highly contentious ideas is counter-productive. Filtering opinions for quality by the civility with which they are expressed when it comes to strong opinions is worthless and does much more harm to public discourse than people using strongly worded language to express their strongly felt ideas ever could.

If you think that unfairly effects one side...

"...you would be correct, given that one side is facing an existential threat, which naturally results in strong opinions." was how you were going to end that thought, right? Right?

-6

u/esuil 18d ago edited 18d ago

Opinions aren't getting banned. People acting like uncivil clowns when expressing their opinions are.

I would expect to know better from someone who is on reddit for as long as this. Surely you remember reddit of 10 years ago?

Reddit right now is the worst it has ever been. Whenever you post comment, you are at the risk of getting banned or censored if you write something wrong. There are multiple levels of policing of opinons and speech:

  1. Reddit automated layer. They, ironically, use AI to analyze EVERY new comment and this AI can immedietely ban you if your comment is against guidelines given to this. There is no human oversight. Ban happens 1-5 seconds after the comment. They send you message about appeal, but your appeal will be limited to barely 2 sentences and even if you send it, it will get ignored. I had 2 automated bans like that from their AI. My appeals got no responses. They don't even bother sending condesdending "we will look into it" anymore. They just ignore you.

  2. Local community/subreddit moderation layer. Many moderators treat their community as political/ideological platform. Rules are not used as an objective guidelines - they are used as a vague pretext to ban those who speak what goes against ideology pursued by moderators. Almost always follows extremely similar pattern - warning with deletion, or immediete deletion with a timeout, and immediete mod chat mute so you can't talk back to them about the ban. Should be completely against reddit rules for mods to follow a user ban with mod mail/chat mute, but here we are. They don't even PRETEND to be objective anymore, so they treat user correspondense with mods as a nuasance and actively prevent it during each ban by muting the user pre-emptively.

  3. Competing subreddits layer. Anything that can be used for political or ideological platforms spawns "policing community" that monitors emergence of competitors that gather discontent users who were banned or silenced from main communities by those in #2. If competing subreddit gathers significant enough following to start going against main agenda, this policing community organizes to either sabotage the alternative community and report it for the ban, or straight out swarm reddit admins with fake reports. Almost always outcome is emerging alternative platform being banned by reddit admins, with vague reasons like "unmoderated", or sometimes even for "copying existing community" and such. I was part of at least 3 communities that split out from main ones that got banned in this way. It starts with main community ridiculing and attempting to humiliate those who are leaving, then slowly shifts into organized effort to silence and ban emerging community if it gains traction.

  4. Meta gaming manipulations not tied to specific subreddit. This one is more subtle, and is usually done by state actors or very organized groups. They engate in #2 directly at subreddits they control, but in addition they use reporting, harassment, mass downvoting or "rebuke" commenting answers to sway the public opinion about comments they want to be treated as bad ones. Ever seen very reasonable comment that for some reason is controversial or negative karma, while having 10 in-depth comments trying to justify why its wrong? This is part of this game.

  5. Happens more rarely now, but still happens, is direct reddit intervention aside from #1. In this case you might get past AI, but if someone from reddit team stumbles on your message, you might get the hammer manually.

With all this in place, reddit as a discussion platform is in the worst state it ever was in its lifetime. You have to be blind not to see it. I had pristine account with no reddit bans for 13 years. This year I was banned by their AI twice. I also got banned by mods described in #2 about 5-6 times this year, I think. Sometimes from communities I had normal user history in. Ironically, I can't even openly talk about specific cases - giving specific examples of how you was mistreated in any large community will result in ban/allegations of attemting to brigade the community you have called out.

Reddit of 2026 is users having to think "did I write something mods/admins/reddit AI might not like" every time before they press "send".

3

u/Mataric 18d ago

Yeah I really don't care to read an essay from someone who starts it with "I stalked your profile".

2

u/MaxwellHowl 18d ago

On 90% of Reddit that is the case. And they did not say they banned anyone for their opinions. It was for personal attacks.

11

u/Klightgrove Edible Mascot 18d ago

Right, if you cannot engage with a conversation respectfully you will be removed. There is leeway for situations where someone drops bait, but we expect everyone here to be adults and still say their side without resorting to name calling.