The Order Came Down On A Video Call
Epic Games has delayed its Disney collaboration, a shooter built around Marvel and Star Wars characters, and told its developers to work AI first, Bloomberg reported on 12 October. The game had been slated for March, which Ars Technica puts at March 2027. No new release date has been confirmed.
According to the reports, developers learned of the change on a video call last week. They are to build the game with AI tools including Anthropic's Claude, with staff overseeing the output. An internal message from one of the game's directors said "No more hand-written code" and that all art would be "generated with full AI workflows". Some developers were reportedly stunned. Bloomberg noted that no other major games company has tried to make a game mostly with AI.
Epic's communications director Jake Jones said the company is embracing AI-accelerated development, led by its own developers. CEO Tim Sweeney wrote that a huge pivot is under way, with developers moving around to retool for maximum AI acceleration, and that the goal is more and better output from everyone at Epic and for every team that uses Unreal.
Why The Game Was Late In The First Place
Bloomberg's sources say the game fell behind partly because Epic misjudged the staffing and time it would need, which makes the AI order a rescue attempt on a late project. Ars Technica describes development as understaffed and slower than expected, and the delay as indefinite amid the shake-up.
The money and the headcount sit side by side. Disney invested 1.5 billion US dollars in Epic in 2024 and took an equity stake. This shooter was meant to be the first game of the partnership. In March Epic said it was cutting 1,000 jobs, in part because Fortnite engagement had slowed. Sweeney's stated aim is to build more with everyone Epic has. A studio that cut 1,000 jobs in March will be judged on whether that holds.
What Game Developers Actually Use AI For
Epic's order covers all code and all art, which goes well beyond how most of the industry uses these tools today. A survey of more than 2,300 game industry professionals ahead of this year's Game Developers Conference found that 36 percent used generative AI at work, including 30 percent of those at game development studios.
| Use reported in the survey | Share of AI-using respondents |
|---|---|
| Research and brainstorming | 81 percent |
| Code assistance | 47 percent |
| Prototyping | 35 percent |
GamesIndustry.biz cites the same survey for a second finding: more than half of developers believe generative AI is harmful to the industry. Code assistance came second of the three uses reported. Assistance implies a person still writes and reviews. A rule that all code is AI-written moves Epic well past where most AI users are today.
Three Measurements Before You Copy This
A studio that wants to copy Epic's experiment should copy its design and measure the result, because Bloomberg reports that no other major games company has tried it.
First, cost per shipped feature, counting the weeks lost to retooling. Second, human review hours: every generated change and asset still needs a person to accept it. That queue is where a saving can disappear. Third, provenance: keep a record of which model produced which asset, so you can answer a publisher, a platform or a court later. Valve's Steam already requires AI disclosure tags, which Sweeney has said make no sense, so that record may be asked for sooner than you expect.
Write the exit condition before you start. Set the date by which the numbers must beat your old pipeline, and decide what you do if they don't. Epic has announced no new release date, so the first number to watch is when one arrives.
Read next: Character.AI Filed for Chapter 11 and Could Shut Down | Anthropic's $42B Loss Is Mostly Not Cash
