Epic Games, developer of Unreal Engine, wants its developers to go all in on AI, and the people who’ll actually be playing the results aren’t convinced it’ll make anything any better, with the Fortnite maker now facing a fresh backlash after reports that its unannounced Disney shooter, a Marvel and Star Wars mash-up, has been delayed indefinitely while the studio nudges its teams towards AI-generated code and artwork (AI tools have been revealed as a big part of the upcoming Unreal Engine 6).
According to a Bloomberg report, the game was pencilled in for March 2027, but developers have now been told to work to an “AI first” model using tools like Anthropic’s Claude, with one director reportedly telling staff there would be “no more hand-written code” and the artwork set to come out of full AI workflows, and if you head to Reddit to see how that’s landed, you’ll find players circling the same question over and over, which is what AI is actually bringing to games that makes any of this worth doing.
Over in the r/Marvel discussion, one of the most upvoted comments from monkeymad2 points out: “The leadership demanding “no hand written code” will also have a negative effect on games (and software generally) both on the game being made & the industry as a whole” Another is blunter about what’s behind it all and simply writes: “Aaaaand I'm out.”
That worry crops up across gaming communities, mostly because there’s a big difference between AI helping developers get through their day and AI being the way the whole game gets made, and while some people are happy with the first part, many more are furious about the second.
In r/Games, one commenter drew a line between AI-assisted software development and art made through full AI workflows; they also pointed out that using AI isn't a magic bullet. Lazzyman64 wrote: "The fact they want ALL of the art to be generated is insane to me. Maybe if they wanted it to be used to generate material textures I'd probably get it, but getting good results by throwing an AI at all assets is a recipe for disaster when they inevitably waste tokens not getting what they want and having to make it all manually anyways."
Many gamers, who are also likely indie devs and artists, see Epic's pivot less as a bold new way of working and more as an attempt to rescue a production already in trouble, which isn’t helped by the game's delay and lack of a new release date. iceburg77779 wrote, "Epic's Disney project has been rumoured to be a complete mess for a while, so them pushing to finish this project with AI makes this sound like even more of a mess".
Sweeney says more and better; fans say prove it
Epic CEO Tim Sweeney has quickly defended the bigger AI plan, saying that after the report that Epic was moving developers around to maximise AI acceleration, the aim wasn’t to get the same amount of work out of fewer people, but to let everyone build “MORE and BETTER stuff”. AI tools could well help teams prototype ideas faster, take care of the boring repetitive jobs and make more ambitious games than they could before, but players don’t play prototypes or workflows; they play the finished thing, and so far nobody’s explained why it’ll be better rather than just cheaper and quicker to churn out.
The reaction in r/fuckepic is about as hostile as you’d expect, with commenters picking at the quality of AI-generated code, laying into Epic’s leadership and tying the whole thing back to the company’s earlier job cuts, and the timing doesn’t do Epic any favours there because it announced 1,000 job cuts in March 2026, which makes “this isn’t about doing more with fewer people” a tough line to sell. Add that not everyone was sold on a Marvel and Star Wars crossover shooter in the first place (one commenter in the Marvel thread said as much, and that was before the AI news landed), and this project is carrying a lot of baggage before anyone’s seen a single frame.
Artist Karla Ortiz, who has worked on Loki, Doctor Strange, Eternals, Forspoken, FFXVI, and Magic: The Gathering, and has been a vocal opponent of AI responded on X, writing: “All Artistic GenAi models are trained off the works of artists like myself. This was done so without our credit, consent or compensation. Which is why artists like myself are suing GenAi companies.”
@TimSweeneyEpic Hey, you’re using GenAi for art. Consider this a friendly reminder: All Artistic GenAi models are trained off the works of artists like myself. This was done so without our credit, consent or compensation. Which is why artists like myself are suing GenAi companies. Epic-October 12, 2026
Where that leaves Epic
Reddit isn’t the whole gaming audience, and not every player is against AI in development, but the threads do show how fast a studio’s production choices can turn into part of a game’s pitch, and right now Epic’s pitch is that handing the work to AI will give its developers more creative freedom, which is a promise it’ll need to back up with something playable.
Ortiz’s response also highlights the legal and ethical concerns many gamers, artists, and creators have about how AI has been trained, and includes artists like; it’s a position that isn’t going away and one Epic Games will need to consider, though everyone is aware AI will have the biggest impact on the future of gaming.
Of course, there’s no finished Disney game to judge it against, and no release date either, so “MORE and BETTER stuff” will be measured against the product, and right now there isn’t any.
