‘Baldur’s Gate 3’ Studio Confirms No AI-Generated Art in New ‘Divinity’ RPG
Larian Studios, the acclaimed developer behind 2023’s award-winning role-playing hit *Baldur’s Gate 3*, has made its stance on artificial intelligence in game art crystal clear. The studio has confirmed that its upcoming entry in the *Divinity* franchise will not feature any AI-generated artwork, addressing growing concern among players and artists about the role of generative AI in modern game development.
Studio founder and CEO Swen Vincke responded to questions about the topic and directly tackled speculation that Larian might be leaning on AI to produce visual assets for its next big RPG. He acknowledged that there has been extensive discussion about the studio experimenting with AI tools during the early stages of visual ideation, but drew a hard line between internal experimentation and what ends up in the finished game.
According to Vincke, Larian has no plans to include generative AI art in *Divinity* itself. That means the illustrations, concept pieces, character portraits, environmental designs, and other visual elements seen by players are set to be authored by human artists, not generated by machine learning models. The studio wants fans to know that the final creative output will remain firmly in human hands.
At the same time, Vincke did not portray AI as an irredeemable technology. He left the door open for limited, behind-the-scenes use of AI-powered tools, making a distinction between using AI as a supporting instrument in production and outsourcing creative work to a model. In practice, that could mean AI being used for tasks such as organizing assets, improving workflows, or experimenting with rough visual directions during the very early concept phase—without those AI outputs becoming the actual art shipped with the game.
This clarification comes amid intensifying debate in the games industry about generative AI systems that can create images, animations, music, and even dialogue by training on enormous datasets of existing work. Many artists argue that their creations are being ingested into these models without clear consent or compensation, while studios face backlash when AI-generated assets are discovered in trailers, key art, or in-game content.
For a developer like Larian, which has built its reputation on handcrafted worlds and richly detailed fantasy realms, the perception of cutting corners with AI is particularly sensitive. *Baldur’s Gate 3* was widely praised for its depth, reactivity, and production values; much of its appeal comes from the sense that enormous care went into every line of dialogue, character design, and environment. Any hint that a sequel or successor might rely on algorithmic shortcuts was enough to trigger concern within the fanbase.
By stressing that there will be no generative AI art in *Divinity*, Larian is effectively aligning itself with a “human-first” creative philosophy. The studio appears to recognize that players now associate AI art not just with technological novelty, but with broader issues: job security for artists, the ethics of training data, and the erosion of a distinct, identifiable studio style.
At the same time, the acknowledgement that AI tools can offer benefits reflects a more nuanced, realistic perspective on modern production pipelines. Game development has become incredibly complex, especially for large-scale role-playing games that involve thousands of assets, branching narratives, and enormous worlds. In that context, limited use of AI for non-creative, repetitive, or highly technical tasks—such as tagging files, generating placeholder content for internal use, or speeding up certain iterations—may be tempting for many studios.
The key tension, and one Larian is implicitly addressing, lies in how far that use extends. On one side is AI as an assistive technology, something akin to a smarter brush, search tool, or layout helper. On the other is AI as a content factory, producing final scripts, art, or VO that would traditionally be handled by writers, artists, and actors. Larian is clearly signaling it wants to remain on the first side of that line, at least when it comes to visual art in its flagship RPG.
This stance also speaks to the importance of trust in long-running franchises. The *Divinity* series has a loyal audience that associates it with strong writing, expressive characters, and a very particular visual tone. If that identity were to shift too sharply under the influence of generative AI, the series could risk losing what made it distinctive in the first place. By publicly committing to human-made art, Larian reassures fans that the studio’s core creative DNA is not up for negotiation.
The announcement lands in a broader cultural moment where AI is transforming not only games, but also film, music, publishing, and digital art. In many of these spaces, unions and advocacy groups have sounded alarms about AI being used to replace rather than support human creators. For game developers, especially independent or mid-sized studios, the temptation to cut costs with AI-generated content is real—but so are the reputational risks if audiences feel they’re being given something synthetic or derivative.
Larian’s approach suggests an alternative path: use technology where it meaningfully improves workflow, but preserve the essence of the art form by ensuring that the final aesthetic decisions are made by people. In practical terms, that could mean a process where AI helps generate quick visual prompts or mood sketches that are later completely reinterpreted or replaced by human artists, or where AI is kept strictly to non-artistic tooling and pipeline management.
There’s also a competitive dimension. As more studios experiment with AI-generated dialogue, NPC behavior, or environmental art, players may start to distinguish between “AI-heavy” and “artist-driven” titles. For a studio that markets itself on craftsmanship and narrative depth, drawing a line and publicly committing to human-made art could become a selling point, not a liability.
Moreover, by speaking candidly about their position, Larian is helping set expectations for the next generation of RPGs. Players now know to look closely not just at graphics and performance, but at how those visuals were created. The conversation around AI is increasingly becoming part of how games are evaluated—not only in terms of quality, but also in terms of values and production ethics.
For artists working in and around the studio, such clarity is likely to be encouraging. The assurance that generative AI will not replace their artwork in *Divinity* can help reduce anxiety about being sidelined by algorithms. It also reinforces the notion that high-end RPGs still rely heavily on human imagination, taste, and intuition—qualities that are difficult to replicate with a model trained on past data.
Of course, the broader industry’s relationship with AI is still evolving. Tools will grow more sophisticated, pipelines will shift, and the pressure to adopt automated solutions will likely increase. In that environment, explicit commitments from high-profile studios carry weight. Larian’s promise that *Divinity* won’t incorporate generative AI art sets a clear benchmark for how one of the most respected RPG developers intends to navigate this transition.
In the end, the message from Larian is twofold: the studio is not technologically regressive—it recognizes that AI has potential utility—but it is also not willing to let machines define the look and feel of its most cherished universes. As anticipation builds for the next *Divinity* installment, fans can at least be confident of one thing: the world they step into will be shaped by human hands, guided by human vision, and crafted to feel as alive and authored as the games that made Larian a household name among RPG enthusiasts.