Sega is drawing a distinction between using artificial intelligence to improve efficiency and allowing the technology to take responsibility for the creative aspects of its games.
Tsuyoshi Saito, Sega’s senior executive officer and deputy chief business officer, said in an interview with Nikkei that the company is using AI to improve efficiency in publishing and corporate departments and to generate business ideas. However, he said Sega is being “very cautious” about AI in game development and is not entrusting the creative aspects of games to AI. That does not amount to blanket ban on AI throughout Sega’s development pipeline. The company’s own development staff have described using generative AI to generate 3D character models as an efficiency measure, while another Sega team has explored possible AI-generated in-game commentary. Sega also says its developers use AI as a support tool for tasks such as summarizing player feedback, compiling numerical data and assisting with translations, with humans retaining final judgment.
The distinction has particular relevance following the controversy surrounding Crazy Taxi: World Tour. Sega initially disclosed that generative AI had been used to support the development of background assets, with the generated material subject to developer review. After that disclosure attracted criticism, series creator and lead producer Kenji Kanno provided additional clarification, describing the technology’s use as providing ideas and references and saying the final product would be original. Sega has also established Generative AI Committee to help promote responsible use of the technology and evaluate new applications. Sega’s development staff say they work with the committee while researching AI, particularly because player-facing applications raise legal and ethical considerations.
The latest comments therefore appear to establish a boundary rather than a rejection of generative AI. Sega is continuing to investigate and deploy AI where it believes the technology can improve efficiency, but Saito’s comments indicate that the company does not currently intend to hand the creative aspects of game development over to AI. That position is notable given Sega’s existing experimentation with the technology. The company is simultaneously researching AI-assisted development and maintaining a cautious stance toward letting AI determine the creative output that reaches players.
For Sega, the distinction is increasingly clear: AI can remain a tool for developers and business operations, but the company says the creative responsibility for its games will remain with people.