Big Walk Studio Admits Chatbot Help on Code as IGF Jurors Reject AI

House House, the studio behind the game Big Walk, has confirmed that it used AI chatbots late in development. It says the use was limited to a small share of the game's code. The disclosure came after jurors for the Independent Games Festival (IGF) announced a stand against AI-assisted games, according to Aftermath and Shacknews.

The studio says large language models were used "sparingly" to work through technical problems and bugs, and that well under 0.1% of the game's code was connected to that use. The revelation has split opinion over how strictly awards should treat AI in game development.

What the IGF jurors said

On Nov. 9, IGF jurors published a statement after weeks of what they described as intense, generous and deeply engaged conversations about AI and the games industry, according to a post cited by Shacknews. Shacknews reported that the jurors said they would not vote for any games in the 2026 awards that use generative AI.

The jurors did not name specific games, Aftermath reported. But within hours, word spread on social media that Big Walk's AI use was among the biggest factors behind what the jurors called a fairly intense discussion and disagreement across the judge and jury pools. Aftermath described Big Walk as one of the best games of the year.

What House House says

House House told Aftermath that chatbots were used mainly to research problems with third-party code. Its disclosure, posted on the FAQ page of the Big Walk website, gives one example. The team wanted to limit how far from the camera shadows were drawn, but Unity's rendering pipeline only allowed that in front of the camera. Shadows behind the player were being drawn at an unlimited distance, which made the game run 50% slower for around 20 seconds at sunrise and sunset.

The studio says it researched the problem, studied the code itself and spoke with a Unity engineer, who concluded the goal was not possible. A chatbot then suggested a possible fix after a few dead ends. House House says it had to change that suggestion extensively. The fix amounted to about 10 lines of code, and the studio says generative AI was not used in any other part of making the game.

House House said it wrote a version of this disclosure because one was suggested as part of its IGF submission. It did not post one on Steam because the platform does not ask for disclosure of code or chatbot use. It is publishing the statement now, it said, because the matter has become one of public interest.

The studio said the statement is not an endorsement of AI tools. It also voiced concern that voluntary disclosures could contribute to the normalization of the technology. It said it supports people trying to limit the harm generative AI does to games, and apologized that its use may fall short of their standards. It called the lack of an internal AI policy during development "a failure" and promised a more comprehensive one.

How the reaction divides

Aftermath reported that some in the IGF jury pool and beyond were deeply disappointed, especially given the game's other progressive stances. Others, the outlet said, see the episode as a sign of the times, or as distrust and exhaustion with the technology turning people against a game that would otherwise appear on many game-of-the-year shortlists.

Why it matters for players and developers

For players, the dispute shows how little visibility there can be into how a game is made. House House said Steam does not ask developers to disclose code or chatbot use, so the information reached the public only because of the awards debate.

For developers, the case tests where awards bodies might draw a line. The jurors' stance covers games that use generative AI in development, and House House's account describes a narrow, code-level use. Whether such use should count against a game is the question dividing people in this debate. The studio's own commitment to write an AI policy points to a step other teams may also face as the issue draws attention.

Read next
People Who Lean on AI Help Gave Up Sooner When It Was Taken Away
Google's Gemini 4 Carbon AI Targets Software Flaws, but Few Can Use It Yet
Two of Six AgiBot Robots Fail 24-Hour Shanghai Convenience Store Shift

Around Prague, based on reporting by Aftermath, Shacknews

Cover photo: TechEquity / Wikimedia Commons, CC BY-SA 4.0, cropped