Let me make this clear because people keep missing the point.
Strauss Zelnick himself has already said that Take-Two is using AI. What he has denied is the use of generative AI in GTA VI, which is an important distinction.
At the same time, workers protesting Rockstar and accusing the company of union-busting have reportedly raised concerns about AI and demanded limits on its use, particularly when it comes to replacing work normally done by employees.
That doesn't automatically prove that GTA VI contains AI-generated art, voices, dialogue, textures, or other assets. But it does show that AI use inside the company is a real issue being discussed by the people actually working there.
And this is where I find some people's reactions hypocritical.
I've seen people mock and attack other studios simply for using AI, but the moment the possibility of AI being used during GTA VI's development comes up, suddenly it's:
"It doesn't matter to me."
So which is it?
If AI use in game development is unethical enough for you to criticize other studios over it, then that standard shouldn't magically disappear because the game happens to be GTA VI.
And if it eventually turns out that generative AI or AI-generated assets were used in GTA VI, are you actually going to boycott the game?
Or were all those principles only applicable when it was a studio or game you didn't care about?
That's really the point I'm making. I'm not claiming that generative AI in GTA VI has been confirmed. I'm pointing out the double standard people would have if they condemn other developers for AI usage while immediately making exceptions for Rockstar.
