> Many gamers who defend artists and hate AI with a passion turn 180 once you mention software: suddenly LLM code is acceptable, and obviously everyone uses LLM

> Many gamers who defend artists and hate AI with a passion turn 180 once you mention software: suddenly LLM code is acceptable, and obviously everyone uses LLMs anyway, and AI disclaimers for code are unnecessary. There is a big difference from a players point of view. Games are much more than code, and the code is a way to represent game mechanics instead of a product by itself. AI graphics and music are instantly recognizable as bad quality and uncreative but vibe coding only shows when the game is slow or has a lot of bugs. And if that happens players dont care if its AI or not, just that its broken. Games dont really need to care about code quality as much as other projects. They dont have to constantly adapt to competition and developers never really need to update them, unless there are game breaking bugs or a critical security issue. That means they change a lot less than your average code. Balatro is coded in a way that sometimes looks like a beginners first Lua script, even after the publisher got outside help to polish it before full release. But it still works and sold millions of copies. Games are built on design intuition and user testing, not technical quality. For the ethical side, there is a perception that programmers are actively using AI for coding and would do it even if the publisher wasnt making them, but artists are getting fully replaced against their will. And there is clearly some truth to it because we dont see coders in game studios speaking out against it.