斯威尼表示：“强迫开发者写下这类政治声明，再被他们一手煽动的仇恨群体拿来当作攻击开发者的武器，这种做法极其恶劣。”
Steam的AI披露规则要求，在游戏中使用生成式AI的开发者必须明确说明AI的具体使用场景。例如《使命召唤：现代战争4》的披露内容为：“开发团队使用生成式AI工具辅助制作部分游戏内资产。”
早在2025年11月，斯威尼就开始反对游戏行业的AI披露要求，称在“未来几乎所有内容生产都会融入AI”的大趋势下，Valve的这套做法毫无逻辑。
今年6月，他更进一步表态，将Steam的AI披露要求比作“红字烙印”，坚称这会“让游戏开发者的成功之路变得无比艰难”。
斯威尼的最新言论是在回复网友马特·沃克曼的评论时发布的。沃克曼的X平台个人简介显示，他就职于生成式媒体云服务商Fal，负责“内容与用户氛围运营”。沃克曼认为，“到2026年还要求披露AI生成内容，这个前提本身就十分荒谬，对Valve和Steam来说实在难堪”，斯威尼显然对此深表认同。
本月以来，Epic Games与斯威尼就游戏及开发领域的生成式AI话题频频高调发声。上周Epic介绍改版后的PC客户端时就调侃称：“我们的Epic游戏商城是靠氛围码出来的。”
就在昨日，Epic宣布举办一场虚幻引擎游戏创作赛——这类赛事要求参赛者在短时间内完成游戏开发。最初的赛事规则强制要求参赛者使用AI，还承诺提供无限的智能代理支持。随后Epic撤回了这一硬性要求，更新后的规则为“AI使用量完全由参赛者自行决定，多少不限”。
另一边，Steam新品节试玩展刚刚落下帷幕，本届参展的AI辅助游戏数量创下历史新高，试玩游戏总数量几乎是2026年6月新品节的两倍。一旦Steam的推荐算法生效，所有粗制滥造的AI游戏很快就跌到了榜单末尾，但大量AI作品涌入确实让游戏商店的内容变得愈发杂乱。
与此同时，还有人利用AI以创纪录的速度复刻热门游戏，爆款作品几乎一夜之间就会出现山寨版本。不少游戏开发者甚至选择取消自家试玩版的发布，只为降低被抄袭的风险。
不出所料，斯威尼的最新言论在评论区引发了两种常见的反驳：既然AI这么好，为什么要藏着掖着?如果答案是“因为有些人讨厌AI”，那人们讨厌它的原因又是什么?
在我看来，这恰好能解释斯威尼口中那个没有明确定义的“仇恨群体”——至少他的表述很容易让人觉得，所有反对或抵触AI的人都属于这个群体。那么，人们为什么会反对游戏中的生成式AI，又为什么希望商店能明确标注AI内容?数十位开发者与行业专家都向媒体阐述过背后的缘由。
法律层面，AI相关的版权问题处处是雷区;创作层面，AI可能会掏空核心创作流程的价值;道德层面，AI服务商始终没有正面回应这项技术的环境影响，以及训练素材中大量盗用受版权保护内容的问题。更关键的是，AI行业本就以盈利困难著称，头部企业靠着虚高的估值勉强维持，这个头重脚轻的市场早已到了需要调整的地步。截至目前，这些AI企业大多只做到了冲击消费级硬件市场，搅乱了软件行业的生态，在生活成本高企的当下，破坏了人们的休闲娱乐与爱好体验。
在游戏领域，对AI的批评大多集中在美术、音乐等资产的生成上。更多开发者认可AI在编程方面的辅助作用，亚洲游戏市场对AI的接受度也普遍高于西方市场，不过全球范围内仍有不少工作室明确反对AI。但即便你认为如今的编程只是机器辅助创作——就连Valve联合创始人加布·纽维尔也持类似观点，甚至看法更激进——也不难理解人们为什么希望对AI的使用加以约束。《死锁》的开发团队也在使用AI，但有意思的是，他们并没有把AI当成整个品牌的核心卖点大肆宣传。
说白了，看看Steam更新后的AI披露条款就能明白，其中写道：“此外，游戏中的AI技术正飞速发展，我们希望能妥善处理相关问题。许多艺术家与创作者对AI的剥削性使用与滥用问题感到担忧，这完全合理。但我们也清楚，技术与工具在未来几年还会发生巨大变化，也有很多富有创造力的游戏开发者正在探索以合乎伦理的方式使用AI，打造优质的娱乐内容。如果你计划在Steam发布产品，认为我们在AI相关规则上有遗漏的重要内容，欢迎与我们沟通。”
本文由 AI图鉴自动抓取并翻译，版权归原作者所有；如需查看原文请点下方链接。
Sweeney stated: “It is extremely bad to force developers to write such political statements and to be used as weapons against developers by hate groups that they incite at first hand.”
Steam ' s AI disclosure rules require that developers who use generated AI in games must clearly specify the specific context in which AI is used. For example, the disclosure in Mission Call: Modern War 4 reads: “Developing teams use generation AI tools to assist in the production of part of the game assets.”
As early as November 2025, Sweeney began to oppose the AI disclosure requirements of the game industry, arguing that Valve's approach was not logical in the light of the general trend of “the future integration of almost all content production into AI”.
In June of this year, he went further, comparing Steam's AI disclosure requirements to “red branding”, insisting that it would “make the game developer's path to success difficult”.
Sweeney's latest statement was publish in response to comments made by his netizens, Matt Walkerman. A personal profile of Walkerman's X platform shows that he works for Fal, the generated media cloud servicer, who is responsible for “content and user culture”. According to Walkerman, “the premise that disclosure of AI-generated content is also required by 2026 is in itself absurd and embarrassing for Valve and Steam”, Sweeney clearly agreed.
Since this month, Epic Gomes and Sweeney have spoken frequently about the generation of AI topics in the field of games and development. Last week, when Epic introduced the modified PC client, he said, "Our Epic game mall is made of atmosphere."
Just yesterday, Epic announced the holding of a fictional engine game creation competition — a game that requires that players complete the game development in a short time. The original rules of conduct imposed the use of AI and committed to providing unlimited smart agency support. Epic then withdrew this rigidity, and the updated rule was that “the amount of use of AI is left to the sole discretion of the contestants, to a limited extent”.
On the other hand, Steam's new show has just ended, and the number of AI-assisted games in this show is at an all-time high, with the total number of test games almost double the number of new festivals in June 2026. Once Steam's recommended algorithm came into effect, all rough-made AI games quickly fell to the end of the list, but the influx of a large number of AI works did make the content of the game store increasingly messy.
At the same time, there are others who use AI to retrace the game at record speed, and the blast works will appear almost overnight. Many game developers have even chosen to cancel their home-tested publish to reduce the risk of being copied.
As can be expected, Sweeney's latest remarks in the comment area have triggered two common rebuttals: if AI is so good, why hide it? If the answer is “because some people hate AI”, what is the reason why people hate it?
In my view, this explains precisely what the Sweeney mouth does not clearly define as a “hate group” — at least his formulation is easily perceived as belonging to this group by all those who oppose or oppose AI. So why would people object to the generation of AI in the game, and why would they want the store to clearly mark it? Dozens of developers and industry experts have explained to the media the reasons behind this.
At the legal level, AI-related copyright issues are mined areas; at the creative level, AI may empty out the value of the core creative process; at the ethical level, AI service providers have never responded positively to the environmental impact of this technology; and in the training of asset, a large amount of copyright-protected content has been misappropriated. More critically, the AI industry, which is known for its profitability difficulties, has barely been sustained by a very high valuation of its head, a market that has reached a point where it needs to be adjusted. To date, most of these AI enterprises have only managed to shock consumer-grade hardware markets, disrupt the ecology of the software industry and undermine people ' s recreational and hobby experiences at high cost of living.
In the field of games, criticism of AI has focused mostly on the generation of assets such as art and music. More developers have recognized the complementary programming role of AI and the acceptance of AI in the Asian game market is generally higher than in the Western market, although there are still a number of studios around the globe that are clearly opposed to AI. But even if you think that today's programming is just machine-aided creation — even the co-founder of Valve, Gabe Newville, holds a similar view, even more radical — it is not difficult to understand why people want to be restrained from using AI. The development team for The Deadlock is also using AI, but it is interesting that they have not promoted AI as the core of the brand.
As a matter of fact, it is clear from the updated AI disclosure clause of Steam, which reads: “In addition, the AI technology in the game is rapidly developing, and we hope that the relevant issues will be properly addressed. Many artists and creators are rightly concerned about the exploitative use and abuse of AI. But we are also aware that technologies and tools will change dramatically in the coming years, and that many creative game developers are exploring ways to use AI in an ethical way to create quality entertainment. If you plan the Steampublish product, you will be welcome to communicate with us on the important missing elements of the relevant AI rules.”
Auto-fetched and translated by AI Atlas. All rights belong to the original author.