I'm amazed that anyone thinks this is surprising. The biggest differentiator in terms of games' perceived quality is the quantity and overall 'slickness' of their content - artwork, characters, backgrounds, copy.... Of course developers are going to take the shortcut to add more high quality content to their games.
I would assume real number is much higher.
Games have for decades used generation as source for content, now available methods are just more complex.
It's interesting that Valve's policy requires disclosure of AI generated code:
> Any kind of content (art/code/sound/etc) created with the help of AI tools during development.
But that none of the categories the author of this post identified included code, only visual, audio and text content.
Glad to see Valve figured out a fair solution to this. Gen AI opens up game dev to more people which is a good thing. Coders can use it silently in the background with impunity but visual and audio creators cannot. I expect as the tools become more widespread we will see more games and a lot of them will not be good, because the gameplay and the current trends the gaming community, determines what is successful .
GenAI will continue to be used. People will just learn to hide it better. Eventually it will all be GenAI and you’ll be none the wiser.
The binary thinking around "uses AI" or doesn't is going to burn down indie gaming if it continues. Review-bombing games for having 0.1% AI-generated content doesn't benefit anyone but it's the kind of pointless crusade that gamers love.