The GamesIndustry.biz HR Summit took place on October 1, and one topic that came up again and again at sessions throughout the day was generative AI and the impact it’s having on the workplace.
Attitudes towards the technology were mixed. Some pointed to how AI has been able to speed up some aspects of the game creation process, such as coding, or automate drudge work. But the general view was that generative AI falls far short of the miracle cure that some AI enthusiasts pitch it as, and that in addition it has been causing all sorts of workplace problems as firms figure out how best to use and account for it – including worries about the privacy of sensitive company data, an increase in employee anxiety, and a higher workload for HR professionals as a result of lengthy AI-written grievance letters.
One senior leader emphasised that their company was meticulous about not letting any AI-generated content end up in a finished game (the HR Summit ran under the Chatham House Rule). But at the same time, their company recognises AI might have uses elsewhere. “So it’s a fine balance,” they said, acknowledging that “there could be good opportunities for efficiencies and doing some of the more routine jobs or mundane jobs that we never want to do in game development.”
Yet there remains huge anxiety among employees about the use of AI, they warned: “I’ve had emails from people at nine o’clock at night going, ‘Are we using AI? Oh my God, does that mean my job’s going to go?'” That anxiety extends to management teams, which worry about where the tech is going and how to plan for it. “The reality is that we don’t know what the future is going to look like,” said another senior leader.
At last year’s HR Summit, a show of hands revealed that only a minority of attendees’ companies had an AI policy in place. This year, a similar straw poll revealed that most now have an AI policy. But the sheer speed of change is causing headaches. “I wrote a policy two weeks ago, and then I found out about some prompt injection yesterday that means I’ve got to go back and rewrite some of the guidelines,” said one company leader. “It’s changing that quick.”
One of the biggest worries is sensitive data leaking outside the company. Even if firms pay for an enterprise version of an AI model that ensures none of the company’s data is used for training by the AI firm, they have little control over employees’ individual use of AI models. “They could be going off to ChatGPT on their personal account and putting all sorts of NDA things in there. And I don’t see how you can physically stop people doing that,” said one leader. “So being a bit clearer about what we think is acceptable and unacceptable, that’s the best way forward.”
“I haven’t seen AI create anything fun”
Yet there’s still confusion about exactly how AI should be used. “The biggest issue at the minute is that AI is the answer, but people don’t quite know what the question is,” said one leader, who described multiple studios seeking to “use more AI” without a clear idea of what they want it to do.
“We’re in this kind of over-hyped world. We’re all hoping that this great panacea is going to open up, it’s going to be amazing. And like every other advance, it’s not.”
One senior-level attendee summed it up bluntly: “I haven’t seen AI create anything fun. It can replicate, for sure, but I haven’t seen anything fun come from AI yet.”
“You can make crap quicker,” quipped another.
AI workflows
Whatever your attitude towards AI, the message at the HR Summit was clear: you can’t ignore it. Even if your company doesn’t want to use generative AI in any form, that needs to be enshrined in employee guidelines and enforced, and everyone needs to keep up with what’s going on.
“It’s really about understanding what the current state of AI technology is, understanding how that aligns with the values of your organisation, how it aligns with the people of your organisation, and the risks and opportunities that then creates,” said one speaker. “AI technologies are now encroaching on a lot of creative disciplines that five years ago we did not even consider would be an issue.”
Yet we’re only really at the start of the generative AI journey. One session outlined the four stages of AI adoption, from dabbling with AI to becoming an AI-first company. The vast majority of companies are still at the first stage, perhaps buying an enterprise license for Claude to let programmers play around with generating code. But a lot of larger studios are in stage two, where they are trialling generative AI in certain workflows, evaluating the time savings against the potential cost and risk.
“There were more fingers than most humans have on this particular piece of art”
Without rigid enforcement, however, chaos can ensue. One attendee provided an anecdote about an artist using Gemini to generate some shader code while a programmer was out of the office. The inefficient code, which didn’t conform to the company’s coding standard and went against the studio’s terms and conditions on generative AI, was only spotted weeks later, and resulted in the build being reverted.
Another anecdote involved outsourcing a piece of art to a freelancer, who used AI to create it. “There were more fingers than most humans have,” said one speaker. “But another person outside of that department went, ‘That looks great, ship it’, and the community went absolutely wild. So that time and cost saving they thought they got wasn’t there.”
AI workflow pilots can also reveal fatal flaws in studio processes.
“Many workflows collapse because they rely on the personal knowledge of individuals rather than documented procedures,” a speaker noted.
Considering the human aspect, programmers highlighted that while AI-driven workflows may speed up coding, the quality of the process for individuals involved should also be assessed. Moving quickly doesn’t always mean improvement if the experience is frustrating, as one shared, “I spent most of the time arguing with an AI prompt that just wouldn’t cooperate.”
Challenges for HR
Some summit participants mentioned the benefits of generative AI in HR tasks. For instance, AI can assist in composing emails, helping individuals articulate their thoughts. Additionally, AI-based HR systems can offer automated responses to common queries about topics like leave policies.
However, generative AI is also creating challenges. Employees are increasingly turning to AI to draft lengthy grievance letters, overwhelming HR departments. These letters often contain inaccuracies and odd legal references, making it difficult for HR representatives to address them effectively.
“Eight pages of it contained things that we couldn’t even make sense of”
HR teams are obligated to review these AI-generated grievances thoroughly, even when the content is confusing or irrelevant. This not only complicates the process but also doesn’t benefit the employees lodging the complaints.
One suggested solution is to implement word limits for grievance letters or request specific details that AI may not provide, rather than spending excessive time deciphering lengthy, AI-generated complaints.
Overall, it appears that generative AI is increasing the workload for HR professionals without necessarily streamlining processes. “HR teams have become smaller, but the workload remains the same or has even increased,” one attendee observed.
“It doesn’t have heart. It can’t read the person”
Moreover, relying on AI-generated responses may lead to a lack of human connection in HR interactions. While AI can provide answers, it lacks the ability to empathize or understand emotional nuances, potentially depriving employees of the personalized support they may need.
Ultimately, human connection remains crucial in HR, as it fosters understanding and provides holistic support to employees.
Could you please rewrite the following sentence?