The gaming industry is having its “we need to talk” moment with artificial intelligence, and it’s getting messy. While studios are racing to embrace AI like it’s the next big console launch, the people who actually make games—artists, voice actors, designers, QA testers—are watching nervously from the sidelines. Now, U.S. Congressman Ro Khanna is jumping into the fray, arguing that workers deserve a seat at the table when companies decide to let algorithms do the heavy lifting.
The AI gold rush in game development
Here’s the thing: AI in gaming isn’t some distant sci-fi concept anymore. It’s already here, and the biggest names in the business are all in. Sony, Xbox, Electronic Arts, Ubisoft, Square Enix—you name them, they’ve confirmed they’re using AI to speed up development and cut costs. On paper, it sounds great. Faster games, lower budgets, more efficiency. But there’s a catch that’s making a lot of creative professionals lose sleep: what happens to their jobs when a machine can do in minutes what took them hours?
The debate exploded recently thanks to a string of controversies that have the gaming community divided. Krafton, the company behind hits like Hi-Fi RUSH and PUBG, announced they’re going all-in on AI, the same as NCSoft. Reports suggest they’re even offering voluntary resignations to employees who aren’t on board with their AI-first vision. That’s not exactly a subtle hint.
Then there’s Arc Riders, the new shooter from Embark Studios that became a lightning rod for criticism. The studio admitted to using AI for voice lines and dynamic animations, and some reviewers actually dinged the game for it in their scores. Nexon, Embark’s parent company, fired back through executive Junghun Lee, claiming AI helps developers work more efficiently and that “every studio in the industry is already using it.” Whether that’s reassuring or terrifying depends on who you ask.
Call of Duty didn’t escape the spotlight either. Activision confirmed that some assets in the franchise—think images and graphic elements—were created using generative AI tools. Fans weren’t thrilled, seeing it as another example of corporations prioritizing profits over the livelihoods of illustrators, concept artists, and designers who’ve been the backbone of game development for decades.
And if that wasn’t enough, Electronic Arts doubled down on their AI commitment following their sale to Silver Lake, Affinity Partners, and Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund. EA executives have previously called AI “the Holy Grail” of development, which sounds either visionary or ominous depending on your perspective.
A politician enters the game
This is where Congressman Ro Khanna comes in. Representing California’s 17th district (which includes Silicon Valley, by the way), Khanna isn’t anti-technology. But he is concerned about how AI is being deployed in creative industries like gaming. Reacting specifically to the Call of Duty situation, he made his position crystal clear on social media.
“We need regulations that prevent companies from using AI to eliminate jobs and increase profits,” Khanna wrote. “Artists at these companies should have a voice and a vote in how AI is implemented. They should share in the profits. And there should be a tax on mass displacement.”
It’s a bold stance that puts workers front and center. Khanna hasn’t drafted formal legislation yet, but he’s floating ideas like tax reforms to discourage excessive automation and measures to ensure workers and unions actually benefit from AI rather than getting steamrolled by it. Importantly, he’s not calling for an outright ban on the technology—he believes smart regulation is the answer.
“Innovation and technological advancement are patriotic and beneficial to humanity as long as they serve people,” Khanna explained. “Therefore, we must think about how they are adopted and how people can continue to have meaningful work and independence.”
What this means for gamers and the industry
So where does this leave us? The gaming industry is at a crossroads. AI isn’t going away—it’s too useful, too cost-effective, and frankly, too inevitable. But the question isn’t whether AI should exist in game development; it’s how it should be used and who benefits from it.
For gamers, this matters more than you might think. Sure, AI might help studios pump out games faster, but if it comes at the cost of the creative talent that makes games special in the first place, we all lose. The human touch—the quirky voice acting, the hand-crafted environments, the artistic vision—is what turns a game from a product into an experience.
Khanna’s call for regulation represents a growing recognition that technology and humanity don’t have to be at odds. Workers can have a voice. Profits can be shared. And maybe, just maybe, we can have our AI-assisted games without sacrificing the people who make them worth playing.
The conversation is just getting started, and it’s one worth paying attention to—whether you’re a hardcore gamer, a casual player, or someone who just wants to see technology serve people instead of replacing them.