Should gamers not have to pay full price for AAA games if they use AI? That’s the argument players are making after Call of Duty: Black Ops 7 used AI for its calling cards.
On the surface it sounds logical. If AI lowers development costs, then why are players still paying $70 to $80 for a single game?
Yet this reaction misses something important. Gamers don’t know how AI is being used behind the scenes. They only see the results that look very low effort, the layoffs, and the rising prices that never reflect any so-called savings.
Why Players Feel Entitled to a Cheaper Product
The push for lower prices is the culmination of years of frustration. Gamers have listened to publishers justify higher prices by pointing to ballooning development costs and multi-million dollar budgets.
When studios start talking about AI as a solution that makes game development easier, players expect to see those claims reflected in how much they have to pay.
The thing is, the industry has never framed AI as a way to make games more affordable. They say it’s a way to be more efficient. Efficiency in corporate speak tends to mean protecting margins, not delivering better value.
The Fear That AI Cheapens the Work
There is also an argument about quality. Players feel that AI-generated art, dialogue, and voice work is inherently lower quality. The idea of AI doing something that a human can do just as well, cheapens the game for some people.
The industry still doesn’t have clear standards for training data or consent. It feels like AI built on someone else’s labor without compensating that person.
The Part I Have An Issue With
You can’t assume that because AI appears in some parts of a game, the rest of the development process was cheaper or easier. We don’t know if studios used AI to automate tiny tasks or not. Sometimes AI is used to handle the boring parts so designers and writers can focus on making the game better.
If AI gives developers time to improve the story, or polish gameplay mechanics then no, the price shouldn’t drop just because AI was involved. The price should reflect the quality of the final product, not the tools used to produce it.
I also understand the fear of generative AI replacing humans in voice work and game design. In that case, it really depends on the studio and the type of game being developed. Some will use AI thoughtfully. Others will use it to cut corners. That is the part players are responding to. It’s the uncertainty, the lack of transparency.
Games Are Already Too Expensive
I do agree that video games are overpriced. Paying nearly $100 for A SINGLE GAME is ridiculous. Especially if the title has microtransactions.
So when companies brag about using AI, players assume it’ll bring the price down. If studios are laying off staff, cutting corners, automating art, why should players still pay a premium price?
What Players Should Be Pushing For
AI is here and it’s not going anywhere. What players should be doing is find ways to hold studios accountable for using it responsibly. The goal should be demanding better games. If AI helps make development smoother while giving teams time to focus on what’s important, it’s a win-win. If it’s used to push out lower quality content, players lose.
