[ValwF]

@R1mpl0

I don't disagree with your stance, and yes, they should abide by the rules. I haven't read the IGA's regulations, but they stated that the developer agreed to participate in the nomination without using AI in game development.

I don't think that their regulations, in detail, are public? Though in their Game Eligibility FAQ, they did publish this:

"Games developed using generative AI are strictly ineligible for nomination."

Claire Obscur: Expedition 33 on release contained asset placeholder artwork. The artwork was created using generative AI. This was discovered and patched out at the soonest. They had assets to replace AI-generated ones. To which extent they used AI is unknown.

Regardless, this was deemed enough to retract their nomination. IGA also pointed to an interview that Francois Meurisse held with EL PAÍS. Citing the article dated July 19th, 2025:

“We use some AI, but not much,” François Meurisse, producer of Clair Obscur, tells EL PAÍS via videoconference. “The key is that we were very clear about what we wanted to do and what to invest in. And, of course, technology has allowed us to do things that were unthinkable a short time ago,” explains Meurisse. “Unreal Engine 5’s tools and assets have been very important in improving the graphics, gameplay, and cinematics.”

When he mentions assets, he’s referring to pre-built 3D elements — like a house, a tree, or a path — that can be used to build scenes, significantly reducing production costs.

Source: EL PAÍS USA Edition

The award process is now done, and all parties have accepted the outcome. I am, however, unsure at which point the rule was introduced, and in what exact wording, but that is at this point irrelevant. It goes without saying today that industry leaders like Tim Sweeney actively promote AI use in game development. Even John Carmack is backing its use.

Now Six One Indie/Indie Game Awards have set a precedent. No AI use at all. The problem they now have is policing it. Indie game publishers/developers would have to avoid all AI tools. Including those contained within game engine pipelines. Then you have to ask, when is a algorithm not considered to be AI. When math, maths. Why would they care, when their work is non-disclosed.

From how I understand it, Clair Obscur's creators didn't deem their UE5 tools to create the game as AI used in-game. As per IGA, such use makes it ineligible. Now they should stand by that rule, and all potential nominees too.

Tricky business.

[Aapje]

@R1mpl0

Ok, I didn't expect them to be this unreasonable. I do think that they are inviting a lot of problems, because it seems very likely that many indie game developers will use AI at least a little bit.

[R1mpl0]

@Aapje, I get the concern about future workflows, but that’s a policy discussion, not this case.

If a studio’s focus is on optimising for awards rather than building the best game they can, that’s not a hill I’m interested in dying on.
However this game seems solid, but it’s just not my cup of tea.

[tntiseverywere]

Interesting news ! Thank you !

[ApolloLupul]

AI is an extension, though some use it as a shortcut to make more money, depends on the values of who useit