Dragon Age Co-Author David Gaider Calls Generative AI a 'Terrible Plague' in Game Development

David Gaider, a former screenwriter and co-creator of the Dragon Age franchise at BioWare studio, called generative artificial intelligence a "terrible plague" in an interview with GamesRadar, claiming it prevents novice developers from mastering the craft of game development.

Who Is David Gaider

Gaider worked at BioWare for nearly two decades and was the lead screenwriter for the Dragon Age trilogy, as well as a participant in the creation of Baldur's Gate II and Star Wars: The Old Republic — some of the most renowned role-playing games in the industry. He left BioWare in 2016 and later became co-founder of indie studio Summerfall Studios, where he served as narrative director for the visual novel-musical Stray Gods. The opinion of such a veteran of narrative design carries weight precisely because Gaider spent decades earning a craft whose devaluation he now warns about.

What's the Critique of Generative AI

According to Gaider, generative tools do not so much help as deprive novice developers of the opportunity to go through the difficult but necessary process of learning the craft: writing dialogue, story branches, and game systems requires practice that cannot be replaced by neural network text generation. This is not about providing one-time assistance to an experienced author, but about the risk to newcomers who may become accustomed to delegating the work of thinking itself to a neural network instead of developing their own skills.

"It's a terrible plague," — this is how

Gaider characterized the impact of generative AI on game development in his conversation with GamesRadar.

Why Is the Debate About AI in Game Development Intensifying

Gaider's position reflects broader concerns in the gaming industry. Studios — from major publishers to indie developers — are increasingly experimenting with generative models for text, concept art, and voice work to accelerate production and cut costs. At the same time, screenwriters, artists, and other creative specialists regularly warn that this devalues their profession and deprives the next generation of developers of the opportunity to master basic skills through practice rather than through ready-made drafts from a neural network.

Similar concerns have been heard beyond the gaming industry — for example, during strikes by screenwriters and actors in Hollywood, demanding restrictions on unrestricted AI use in contracts, as well as in disputes around AI art, where artists accuse companies of training models on their work without consent.

The gaming industry as a whole is going through a difficult period: waves of layoffs in recent years have affected both major studios and publishers, and some laid-off developers and unions directly link part of these decisions to management expectations to accelerate content production through generative tools. Against this backdrop, statements by veterans like Gaider are perceived not as abstract moralizing, but as a warning about a concrete professional risk for those just starting careers as screenwriters or game designers.

What This Means

The debate about the place of generative AI in game development is far from over: some studios see it as a tool for accelerating routine work, while veterans of the industry like Gaider warn that today's convenience could turn into a deficit of skill in developers of tomorrow. Until the industry develops common rules for using generative models in game production, such public statements by experienced authors remain perhaps the main guide for novice screenwriters deciding which tools to trust in their own work.