For many years, Unity and Unreal have been the dominant forces in game creation, responsible for roughly 70% of the titles released on Steam in 2025. While Godot has made notable strides recently and large studios still cling to proprietary solutions—Capcom’s RE Engine being a prime example—the market has largely been a duopoly.
Yet three seasoned veterans, Arjan Brussee, Sjoerd De Jong, and Michal Valient, have founded Immersive Technologies (Immens) with the conviction that there is still space for a fresh engine that tackles the shortcomings of the status quo. The founders’ résumés read like a who’s‑who of the industry: experience at Epic Games, the creators of Unreal; stints at Guerrilla Games, Boss Key, and even Apple. Their collective background gives them a unique perspective on why the current generation of engines, despite their power, may be holding developers back. In a recent interview with GamesIndustry.biz, Brussee argued that “the opportunity now is to build something that simply didn’t exist a few years ago.” He believes AI‑assisted programming can revive the notion of starting a project from a clean slate, providing “full functionality fast” while still keeping developers in the driver’s seat.
Valient, Immens’s chief technology officer, clarifies that the AI they are integrating is not the kind of “prompt‑to‑content” wizardry that dominates headlines. Instead, their AI is designed to make the engine itself highly extensible.
"AI can reason over massive codebases and data sets," he explains. "If we architect the engine with that capability in mind, even solo creators or tiny teams can plug in custom systems—like a bespoke particle engine—without being limited to superficial scripting." The motivation behind this AI‑centric approach stems from the harsh realities of today’s game market. Brussee describes the environment as “rough,” noting that development costs continue to climb, making it increasingly difficult for studios to stay afloat.
He asks, “Can we find new, more efficient ways of working that reduce budgets, shrink team sizes, and accelerate timelines?” The answer, according to Immens, lies in leveraging AI to streamline repetitive tasks and enable rapid iteration, thereby lowering the financial risk for creators. De Jong, the chief product officer, observes that the engine landscape has become overly standardized and consolidated.
While this has given developers a reliable foundation, it also stifles innovation. “The industry faces a slew of challenges, and simply repeating past methods won’t cut it,” he says.
“We need a paradigm shift—innovation over standardisation.” He criticises the monolithic nature of existing engines, which often force developers to conform to proprietary file formats and rigid workflows. With AI, Immens aims to deliver an engine that adapts to the user, allowing interchangeable modules, custom toolchains, and personalized interfaces tailored to each project’s unique demands. Valient acknowledges that AI is a double‑edged sword. Its power is undeniable, yet without careful oversight it can “go off the rails.” Immens therefore emphasizes transparency and control: users can track the engine’s actions, understand its decision history, and reproduce results reliably.
This level of insight turns AI from a mysterious black box into a trustworthy assistant. For instance, a developer who once needed weeks to generate five characters with specific traits could now sketch the concept over coffee, let the AI produce the assets, and reuse the same workflow repeatedly—dramatically cutting cost and time. Flexibility is baked into Immens’s architecture.
De Jong stresses that the framework does not impose a single workflow; developers decide how much AI to employ and where. The engine also embraces open standards, meaning that text‑based files can be read and manipulated by any compatible tool. “If you’re using Blender, Maya, or any generative system, you can plug it straight in because everything speaks the same language,” Brussee notes.
This openness counters the “weird outlier” problem where many engines resist interoperability. The broader conversation about AI in game development is polarized.
Some pundits on platforms like LinkedIn hype a future where a single prompt can spawn a Grand Theft Auto‑level experience, fueling fear of a “click‑to‑game” apocalypse. Immens’s team, however, views AI as a catalyst that makes creators better, not a replacement for human ingenuity. Valient says, “AI will improve the craft, but it remains a tool, and like any tool it can be misused.” De Jong adds that responsible, productive use of AI is an industry duty. Economic anxieties also surface, with many questioning whether AI‑driven game tech is a bubble.
Valient draws a parallel to the dot‑com era: the internet didn’t vanish when the bubble burst; only the unsustainable businesses did. “We’re focused on building a solid engine; AI simply accelerates our vision,” he asserts.
Whether the market is overheated remains uncertain, but Immens is betting on lasting value rather than hype. Funding details are still vague.
Immens has secured its “first commitments” but has not disclosed amounts, describing the target as “reasonable.” Brussee warns against excessive capital, noting that too much money can breed complacency. The company deliberately remains lean—just the three founders plus a handful of helpers—believing that a small, focused team can make decisive architectural choices without the overhead of a massive staff. Currently, Immens is racing toward a proof‑of‑concept demo that showcases a generative‑AI‑driven editing workflow, slated for release later this month.
The timeline has already outpaced their original estimate; what they thought would take a year is now being delivered in half that time. As for the business model, Brussee admires Epic’s “we succeed when you succeed” philosophy but admits it’s too early to commit to a specific revenue strategy. Ultimately, the trio hopes Immens will empower developers to push the artistic and technical boundaries of games.
“We love games and want to see more creativity, more risk‑taking,” Brussee concludes. “If our technology can spark that kind of innovation, it would be amazing."