In a recent study focusing on the European video‑game sector, a clear majority of developers expressed apprehension that generative artificial intelligence will intensify the pressure to deliver projects more quickly, rather than outright eliminating their positions. Specifically, 61 percent of respondents indicated that the advent of AI tools is likely to push them to increase their output speed and volume, while only about a third—35 percent—believe that these technologies could actually lead to job loss or a diminished demand for their particular expertise. These insights stem from the research paper titled “Talent Signals Reshaping the Games Industry,” authored by Tanja Loktionova, who co‑founded both Values Value and InGame Job. The analysis draws upon data collected in the tenth iteration of the Big Games Industry Employment Survey, a comprehensive questionnaire that captures trends, attitudes, and expectations across the continent’s development community.
A brief, preliminary version of the report is currently accessible online, with the full, detailed publication slated for release in November 2026. When participants were asked about the potential impact of generative AI on the quality of their work, just over half—approximately 52 percent—voiced concern that the technology could erode standards or lead to a decline in craftsmanship.
This worry is echoed by 46 percent of developers who feel that AI makes it more difficult to gauge a colleague’s true abilities, as automated tools can mask or inflate perceived competence. In other words, the presence of AI may blur the line between genuine skill and machine‑assisted output, complicating performance reviews and hiring decisions.
Interestingly, ethical considerations surrounding AI did not dominate the conversation. Only 29 percent of respondents reported having ethical reservations about the deployment of AI in their workflows, while a modest 12 percent indicated they had no concerns at all.
This suggests that, for many developers, the practical implications—such as speed, quality, and assessment—are more immediate than abstract moral debates. The survey also highlighted how widespread AI adoption has already become within development studios. A striking 78 percent of participants confirmed that AI has altered the way they work in some capacity.
Within this group, 33 percent described the change as significant, indicating a transformation of core processes or daily routines, whereas 45 percent experienced a more moderate shift, perhaps incorporating AI tools for specific tasks like asset generation, testing, or localization. Conversely, 22 percent of developers reported that AI has not yet affected their workflow, either because their studios have not adopted the technology or because their roles remain largely manual.
From a hiring perspective, the influence of AI is already shaping recruitment strategies. The study found that 35 percent of company founders admitted they had chosen not to bring a candidate on board because they believed an AI solution could accomplish the same work more efficiently or at a lower cost.
This trend underscores a growing confidence among leadership that automation can replace certain human functions, especially in areas such as procedural content creation, level design, or quality assurance. Financial pressures compound the situation.
Nearly half of the founders surveyed—48 percent—reported that their companies are currently operating at a loss. In response, 60 percent said they are deliberately maintaining lean teams, opting for smaller, more agile groups rather than expanding staff.
This strategic downsizing aligns with the broader expectation that AI will enable higher individual productivity, potentially offsetting the need for larger personnel counts. Supporting these findings, a separate study conducted by Gamescom Dev earlier this year examined speaker expectations across the industry. An overwhelming 83 percent of respondents anticipated that generative AI would influence team structures or overall productivity. When asked specifically about the effect on employment, 36 percent believed AI would reshape job roles—introducing new responsibilities and skill sets—rather than simply shrinking team sizes.
Meanwhile, 33 percent expected that AI would lead to smaller teams, and 14 percent were confident that the technology would boost each employee’s output without necessarily reducing headcount. A minority of 17 percent did not foresee any workforce reductions at all. Taken together, these data points paint a nuanced picture of the European game‑development landscape. While the specter of AI‑driven job displacement looms, the dominant concern among developers is the heightened demand for speed and volume.
The industry appears to be navigating a delicate balance: leveraging AI to accelerate production and enhance creative possibilities, while grappling with the implications for work quality, skill assessment, and ethical use. As AI tools become more sophisticated and their adoption widens, studios will need to develop clear policies, transparent evaluation methods, and robust training programs to ensure that the technology augments rather than undermines the talent that drives the medium forward.