Larian draws a hard line on AI for the next Divinity — and it actually matters

Larian draws a hard line on AI – what that means for Divinity players

This caught my attention because Larian’s last game, Baldur’s Gate 3, rewrote expectations for modern CRPGs – and now the studio is saying, plainly: no generative AI for the next Divinity’s art or writing. In a Reddit AMA, CEO Swen Vincke and the studio’s creative leads made the kind of plain-language policy that’s rare in an industry still fumbling for rules about AI and authorship.

• Key takeaway: Larian will not use generative AI to produce concept art or in-game writing for the upcoming Divinity title.
• They may experiment with AI for non-creative workflow tasks, but only with models trained on studio-owned assets.
• The studio tested text-generation and found it unusable for dialogue quality – their writing director rated it 3/10.
• This stance is a direct response to industry controversies over AI-trained art and the reputational risk that comes with it.

What Larian actually said in the AMA

Vincke didn’t hair-split. When asked whether generative AI would be used in development, he answered bluntly: “There is not going to be any GenAI art in Divinity.” He expanded that the studio has decided to avoid genAI tools during concept-art creation so “there can be no discussion about the origin of the art.”

That said, Vincke acknowledged Larian is still experimenting: using AI to speed up iterations and automate “tasks nobody wants to do” — but only as internal workflow tools. Importantly, he said any models used would be trained on studio-owned assets, not scraped external datasets. That’s an attempt to sidestep the legal and ethical thickets that have dominated recent headlines.

On writing, the message was equally clear. Writing director Adam Smith wrote: “The stance applies to writing as well. We don’t have any text generation touching our dialogues, journal entries, or other writing in Divinity.” Smith added that earlier experiments produced results he rated a “3/10 at best” and that the iteration needed to reach a usable line made the tools pointless for final content.

Why this matters now

AI controversies have consequences. The industry recently saw the fallout when Clair Obscur: Expedition 33 had two Indie Game Awards revoked after revelations about AI-generated assets — even though those assets were later patched out. When award bodies, studios, and players start policing provenance, developers with big expectations face real reputational risk. Larian is one of those studios: after BG3’s breakout success, anything that muddies the creative authorship of the next Divinity could harm credibility and sales.

So why now? The scramble for clear policies follows public backlash, legal questions about training datasets, and the simple fact that players care about where art and writing come from. Larian’s stance reads as defensive—and proactive. They don’t just want to avoid headlines; they want to reassure players, awards juries, and creative staff.

Where the gray areas still are

“No GenAI art” and “no AI-generated text” are strong promises, but there are details to watch. Vincke’s caveat about experimenting across departments and training models on “studio-owned assets” is sensible, but it opens questions: Will contractors and external partners be held to the same rules? How will Larian audit tools to prove a given asset wasn’t influenced by external datasets?

Another gnarly point is iteration speed. Larian says it wants faster concept iteration and believes some machine-learning tools can help sketch ideas or automate menial tasks. That’s not the same as final creative content, but it can blur lines — you can get accelerated creative direction without the model being the artist, and that’s where transparency matters.

What this means for players

Practically: expect human-made concept art and writing in Divinity, which is a selling point for players who dislike the idea of AI-scraped assets in games. For fans of dense, authored RPGs, Larian promising “no AI in dialogue” is reassuring. It also raises expectations: the studio is signaling it will stick to high standards rather than take shortcuts.

But a strict no-AI policy isn’t a magic bullet. It could mean slower pipelines or higher costs if iteration is purely manual. Larian hopes to balance that by using AI for non-creative assists — speed without outsourcing authorship — which is a sensible compromise if enforced consistently.

TL;DR

Larian has put a clear boundary: no generative AI for concept art or the writing in its next Divinity, while reserving AI for non-creative workflow tasks trained only on studio-owned assets. It’s a reputationally smart move after BG3’s success and a useful signal to players and award committees — but the studio will have to prove its policy in practice and keep contractors and tooling audits tight to avoid the same controversies rocking other developers.