Hooded Horse draws firm line against AI assets

Publisher Hooded Horse has imposed a blanket ban on the use of AI-generated assets across all games it releases, marking one of the clearest industry rejections of generative art tools at a time when many studios are experimenting with them. The policy applies to every stage of development and is written directly into publishing contracts, making compliance a legal as well as creative requirement.

The stance was articulated publicly by Tim Bender, who said the company now requires developers to commit to zero use of generative art if Hooded Horse is publishing their game. He described AI-generated assets as corrosive to the development process and argued that their growing availability has complicated quality control rather than easing it. His remarks were made during an interview with Kotaku, where he framed the policy as both a business safeguard and a creative principle.

Hooded Horse has become a prominent name in the strategy and simulation space, backing titles that favour deep systems and distinctive art direction over blockbuster scale. Its catalogue includes the medieval city-builder Manor Lords, the 4X fantasy sequel Endless Legend 2, the geopolitical science-fiction strategy title Terra Invicta, and the roguelite city-builder Against the Storm. The success of these games has given the publisher influence disproportionate to its size, particularly among independent studios seeking long-term support rather than short marketing cycles.

According to Bender, the ban reflects frustration with how generative tools blur authorship and provenance. Even when developers claim AI imagery is used only for early mock-ups or placeholders, he said such material can slip into final builds, creating legal and ethical risks. That concern is amplified by ongoing disputes over whether training data for generative models infringes creators’ rights, an issue that remains unsettled in several jurisdictions.

To prevent accidental breaches, Hooded Horse has gone further than many peers by advising partner studios to avoid generative AI entirely, not just for final art but throughout production. The company argues that a clean workflow reduces the need for audits and protects both developers and artists from later disputes over ownership. Internal reviews now focus on traditional asset pipelines, documentation of authorship, and clear attribution, practices that echo older quality-assurance standards but are becoming rarer in a fast-moving industry.

The decision places Hooded Horse at odds with publishers that are openly integrating generative tools to speed up concept art, marketing visuals, and even narrative prototyping. Advocates of AI adoption argue that such tools lower costs for small teams and democratise access to visual experimentation. Critics counter that efficiency gains often come at the expense of human artists and introduce uncertainty around intellectual property, particularly when games are distributed globally.

Industry analysts note that the publisher’s approach aligns with a broader push among some independent studios to differentiate themselves through craft and transparency. By drawing a hard boundary, Hooded Horse signals to players that its games are built without algorithmically generated art, a message that resonates with communities wary of automation’s impact on creative labour. At the same time, the policy narrows the pool of developers willing or able to sign with the publisher, potentially limiting output in a competitive market.

The debate has also surfaced in coverage by outlets such as GameSpot, where the ban has been framed as part of a wider reckoning over generative AI in games. While some studios are drafting guidelines that allow limited use under supervision, Hooded Horse’s all-or-nothing rule stands out for its clarity and enforceability.

The article Hooded Horse draws firm line against AI assets appeared first on Arabian Post.