No Man’s Sky was built around technology that could generate more planets than any player could explore in a billion lifetimes. A decade later, Hello Games director Sean Murray is taking a cautious view of the latest wave of large language models and generative AI.
Rather than rushing to adopt the technology, Murray says Hello Games will watch how the wider games industry uses it before deciding whether it belongs in the studio’s day-to-day work. For readers following broader arcade and gaming news, the debate reflects a larger question: can new tools improve development without weakening the craft behind a great game?
A wait-and-see approach
Murray compared his position on AI with the way Hello Games responded to the workplace upheaval that followed COVID. The studio spent time considering whether staff should return to offices, work remotely or adopt a hybrid model. Murray ultimately argued for staying home and waiting to see how other companies handled the transition.
He intends to apply a similar philosophy to generative AI. Instead of following every new claim about productivity or cost savings, Hello Games will observe what becomes standard across the industry over the next few years.
“Let’s just enjoy making games the way we’ve always made games. And that’s still working for us and we still enjoy it.”
Experience with algorithmic game worlds
The position is notable because No Man’s Sky already made extensive use of procedural generation. Its huge universe was created through advanced algorithms, allowing the game to produce an effectively unmanageable number of worlds.
That earlier technology is not the same as today’s generative AI tools. Murray’s comments suggest that Hello Games sees a difference between using carefully designed systems as part of a game’s core structure and adopting fashionable tools simply because other studios are doing so.
Why Hello Games is not rushing
Before co-founding Hello Games, Murray worked at Criterion Games. While serving as lead programmer on the 2006 cult first-person shooter Black, Criterion was owned by Electronic Arts.
He referred to reports that Electronic Arts expects new AI technologies to help produce major savings and offset some of the debt associated with its reported $55 billion sale to Saudi Arabia. Murray’s response was essentially to wait and see whether those promised benefits materialise.
His comments come amid growing concern about generative AI appearing in high-profile games. Recent disclosures involving the Tomb Raider remake and the new Crazy Taxi drew criticism from players. Some audiences are also worried that low-quality AI-generated material could find its way into finished releases, while developers have not always explained the practical benefits clearly.
The difficult part remains making a good game
Murray’s central argument is that artificial intelligence will not remove the hardest parts of game development. Designing a game that feels satisfying, responsive and enjoyable still requires difficult creative and technical work.
“Making video games is really hard,” Murray said, adding that the difficult work of making a game feel good to play will remain difficult.
For now, Hello Games is content to continue making games in the way that has worked for the studio. That measured approach may appeal to developers and players who would rather judge AI by useful results than by ambitious promises.
As studios weigh new production methods, the fundamentals still matter across every format, from major PC releases to a carefully chosen arcade machine buying guide decision at home. For builders, the same principle applies when selecting DIY arcade kits: the technology should serve the experience, not replace the thinking behind it.
Leave a Reply