Sony Interactive Entertainment chief says AI will enable ‘gaming experiences like never before,’ and I wonder: How long are these guys going to talk about it before we actually start seeing it?

Sony Interactive Entertainment president and CEO Hideaki Nishino used Sony’s latest quarterly financial report to share some thoughts on the role that AI will play in the future of game development, and if you’re thinking that he might temper his enthusiasm in the face of consumer discontent, all I can say is—guess again.

Nishino is an unabashed booster of AI, calling it a “powerful tool” during Sony’s corporate strategy presentation that will enable “gaming experiences like never before—more immersion, more adventures, and fresh ways to enjoy [your] favorite characters.”

Naturally, the embrace of AI will also mean a “more efficient production environment” for game makers, but not in a way that would result in job losses, Nishino claims. In fact, Nishino says, “AI is lowering barriers to creation, accelerating development cycles, and enabling more creators to enter the market,” which will result in a greater number and variety of games available to players.

“Within our studios, game developers are automating repetitive workflows, improving software engineering productivity, and accelerating areas like quality assurance, 3D modeling, and animation through new, AI-powered tools,” Nishino said. “For example, our teams created a tool we call ‘Mockingbird’ that quickly animates 3D facial models based on performance captures.

“Importantly, we are not replacing human performers, but rather optimizing how we process the data from these live captures. With Mockingbird, animation work that would have taken hours can now be completed in a fraction of a second.”

Nishino also cited another AI tool created for the normally “labor-intensive process” of animating hair, which uses videos of real hairstyles to generate 3D models with “hundreds” of hair strands rendered. “These practical applications allow our teams to spend less time on manual, high-effort tasks and to instead reinvest their time into building richer worlds and gameplay for our players.”

I feel obligated to state that I’m not reflexively against new technologies, nor am I naive about the nature of human progress, which is always at least a little destructive. At the same time, if a labor-intensive process has been replaced by a much faster automated process, the people involved in that labor will naturally find themselves without much to do—and as much as corporations like to talk about freeing developers from scut work so they can focus on artistry and magic, the reality is that the artists and animators responsible for expressive faces and flowing hair are not suddenly going to find themselves holding creative director roles on a multitude of new, AI-powered games.

Still, Nishino is clearly eager to make the point: “As AI capabilities evolve, the role of our creators will remain unchanged. The vision, the design, and the emotional impact of our games will always come from the talent of our studios and performers. AI is meant to augment their capabilities, not to replace them.”

AI is also a growing part of Sony’s “platform business,” he continued, used in everything from payment processing to storefront curation: “Our AI capabilities will evolve into a consumer-centric experience that not only suggests the next game a player might enjoy, but also the next gameplay moment, subscription, accessory, or merchandise that best reflects their passion.”

Some of the controversy surrounding the use of AI in game development arises from a lack of precision in language and definitions, and the tendency to lump generative AI, LLMs, machine learning algorithms, and any other “it’s thinking” technology that float to the surface into a great pile called AI. But there’s a great gulf between, say, Elon Musk’s promise to “release a great AI-generated game” before the end of 2026—clock’s ticking, bud—and recognizing that these technologies can be very powerful and useful in a real-world sense.

That kind of hand-waving also makes it easier to paper over the less-positive impacts of the rise of AI. Big-name “creators” (another ill-defined term) will be protected, but jobs will be lost, and there’s no doubt in my mind that despite lofty talk about the value of talent, reducing headcounts and payroll is one of the chief goals of the drive to embrace this technology. The AI feeding frenzy is also putting a lot of new hardware out of the reach of normal consumers: It’s why my 10-year-old rig will, in just a few short years, be my 13-year-old rig.

And despite Nishino’s belief that “AI models can outperform manual curation,” the fact is that I don’t want recommendations based on my purchase history and hours spent on this or that: I want people who know me to say, “Hey man, you’re a weirdo—check this shit out.”

No machine will tell you to play this. But we will.

I think the truth is that AI, in whatever guise, is and will continue to be useful to game developers, in some cases invaluably so, and will also continue to cause upheaval: Fewer people employed in the game industry, more sloppy shovelware, and—until the bubble pops, at least—higher costs for consumers. And we will continue to see effusive enthusiasm for it from game industry executives, not necessarily because they have a firm grasp on what it really offers (I suspect nobody can honestly make that claim), but simply because they’re all afraid of missing the boat and getting fired.

“We believe AI will unleash the creativity of our studios, power a more curated platform, and enhance the PlayStation experience for both players and creators,” Nishino concluded. “With our global player base, deep library of IP, and integrated ecosystem, AI is a powerful tool for us to deliver a truly cutting-edge entertainment experience.”