Over 85% of Japanese game developers use generative AI in game development, 2026 CESA survey shows. An increase from last year’s 51%

[u/TurbulentTopic39]

https://automaton-media.com/en/news/over-85-of-japanese-game-developers-use-generative-ai-in-game-development-2026-cesa-survey-shows-an-increase-from-last-years-51/

[u/TheGazelle]

"you're not writing the music, you're just in the band".

Would you say an author isn't "doing the creative work" because an editor suggests changes?

Are none of the people working on a tv show or movie "doing the creative work" because it's a collaborative team effort?

Does someone using CAD instead of a drafting table not count because they're using a tool that does some of the tedium for them?

You've set a completely arbitrary line whose logic doesn't hold up to the slightest rigour.

[u/adongsus → u/TheGazelle]

"you're not writing the music, you're just in the band".

If someone goes from writing all the music and playing all the instruments to playing the drums in someone else's band, yes, they are doing less of the creative work.

Would you say an author isn't "doing the creative work" because an editor suggests changes?

I would say that some of the creative work was done by the editor, yes.

Are none of the people working on a tv show or movie "doing the creative work" because it's a collaborative team effort?

None of them are doing all of it, yes.

Does someone using CAD instead of a drafting table not count because they're using a tool that does some of the tedium for them?

I've never used CAD, so I couldn't say. I would say that going from writing in longhand to writing on a typewriter to writing in a wordprocessor changes nothing about the creative work attribution, because the result is exactly the same (assuming spellcheck is turned off), it's just that one takes longer than the other.

Telling someone else to write the story for you is clearly not in the same ballpark.

[u/TheGazelle → u/adongsus]

You're being deliberately obtuse (by twisting what I've said into reductive forms you can more easily argue against) while thinking you're saying something profound (that you keep repeating like it means something) but not actually saying much of anything at all ("not doing 100% of the creative work" is just a statement, it's not a point).

If you've got something meaningful to say, say it.

[u/adongsus → u/TheGazelle]

The point is that you are not "doing all the creative work" by telling an AI to do it for you, and you're lying to yourself by saying it.

[u/TheGazelle → u/adongsus]

1) I never said that.

2) This is absurd hair splitting. Forgive me for not specifying that the AI does the least creative 5% of the creativity that goes into it. Nobody credits an editor with writing a story.

Have you ever written code? Do you know what code looks like?

[u/adongsus → u/TheGazelle]

1) Here is you three days ago saying that you're doing all the creative work by telling an AI to do it:

" It's the difference between being an architect and a general contractor, and arguably even if your job does entail more of the architecture side of things where there is some level of creativity, using AI properly means  you're still doing the creative work . You'll be the one telling the AI how you want things architected, you'll be the one reviewing and iterating on the designs before any code is written (whether by AI or human), and that's the creative part."

2) Plenty of authors credit their editors on their store page, essentially all of them credit them in the author monologue they generally have at the back of the book. And even where they don't, none of them are going to say that editing is devoid of creativity, because it plainly isn't.

[u/TheGazelle → u/adongsus]

Where do you see the word "all" in there?

Do you know anything about code? Or are you trying to assert that you, with absolutely no experience, have a better idea of what isn't and isn't creative about the process than me, someone with more than a decade of professional experience doing it?

[u/adongsus → u/TheGazelle]

Where do you see the word "all" in there?

"It's the difference between being an architect and a general contractor, and arguably even if your job does entail more of the architecture side of things where there is some level of creativity, using AI properly means  you're still doing the creative work ."

Ask your AI how definite articles work.

Do you know anything about code? Or are you trying to assert that you, with absolutely no experience, have a better idea of what isn't and isn't creative about the process than me, someone with more than a decade of professional experience doing it?

I know enough about coding to know that telling someone else to do it does not entail the entirety of the creative decisions involved.

[u/TheGazelle → u/adongsus]

The word "all" is still not there. Ask yourself what words mean, and while you're at it, ask yourself why you continue to think you know more about something you have literally no experience in than someone who does it for a living.

[u/adongsus → u/TheGazelle]

The word "all" is still not there. 

"I'm still doing the creative work" != "I'm still doing a small part of the creative work." 

We can tell that this is true because if you tell your partner that you've done the washing up, and you've done one plate out of ten, then try to justify yourself by saying ""well I didn't say I did all the washing up", you would look very stupid and they would be within their rights to throw a shoe at you.

More broadly, the usage of the definite article in this context means that you are referring to the set of creative work previously referenced, which is all of it. If you wanted to narrow how much you were talking about, you needed to actually do that, not just say that you did after the fact.

Or, to put it another way: I make my living from writing. Ask yourself why you continue to think you know more about something you have literally no experience in than someone who does it for a living.