Did Blue Prince Really Use GenAI in Development? What the Evidence Shows

Another day, another internet pile-on. After an awards-night curveball, Blue Prince suddenly found itself accused of using AI. Short answer: no. The people who made and published the game have said it plainly, and there is zero credible evidence to the contrary.

How we got from one disqualification to a brand-new target

The dominoes fell fast. The Indie Game Awards yanked Clair Obscur: Expedition 33 from both Game of the Year and Debut Game after organizers confirmed the team had used generative AI assets early in development. Those assets were removed later, but the IGA rules were about the production pipeline itself, not the final build players download. So, rule broken, trophies pulled.

The IGA posted the change on December 21, 2025 at 12:15 AM, said both categories would go to new recipients, and also pulled one of the Indie Vanguard recognitions. They pointed everyone to their Game Eligibility FAQ for the fine print. Then Blue Prince was bumped up to Game of the Year, and that is when the rumor mill lit up.

Almost immediately, copy-paste posts started pushing the same claim: if Expedition 33 used gen AI, Blue Prince must have too. No receipts. No actual familiarity with the game. Just a new target for the outrage machine.

Raw Fury says it as clearly as possible

Publisher Raw Fury stepped in fast, backing the team at Dogubomb and the game’s creator Tonda Ros, who have been building Blue Prince for eight years.

"There is no AI used in Blue Prince."

Beyond that line, Raw Fury’s point was simple: this roguelike puzzle-adventure was built by people, on purpose, over nearly a decade. Not a single part of it has been tied to AI tools.

Why the accusation never really made sense

If you have actually played Blue Prince, the AI claim falls apart on contact. The game is meticulous and systems-driven in a way that does not line up with gen AI short-cuts. One player summed it up neatly: if you were trying to automate anything here, old-fashioned procedural methods would be faster and cleaner than rolling the dice on generative content in a design this deliberate.

Plenty of players chimed in with relief and congrats after the IGA swap, too. Blue Prince had that slow-burn word-of-mouth moment when it launched, and finally getting a big trophy was cathartic. Having that celebration derailed by unproven AI panic was never going to sit well with the folks who sunk dozens of hours into it.

Quick timeline

• Dec 21, 2025, 12:15 AM: The Indie Game Awards rescind Expedition 33’s Game of the Year and Debut Game for using gen AI assets earlier in development, which violated a no-AI agreement. One Indie Vanguard recognition is also pulled. The IGA points to its Game Eligibility FAQ.
• After the disqualification: Blue Prince is elevated to GOTY, and AI accusations hit social feeds without evidence.
• Dec 21, 2025: Raw Fury publicly states Blue Prince does not use AI, emphasizing the game’s eight-year, human-led development at Dogubomb under Tonda Ros.
• Dec 22, 2025: Players push back on the rumor, noting the game’s intentional design makes the AI theory nonsensical.

The bigger picture

This was less about facts and more about outrage looking for a rebound target. The only concrete thing we have is a firm denial from the publisher and no evidence to contradict it. So where does that leave us the next time an indie wins big? Do we expect every studio to publish a blow-by-blow of their pipeline, or are clear statements from the team still enough unless someone brings actual proof?

For now, the situation is straightforward: Blue Prince is a human-made game, built over eight years, and there is no credible evidence it used AI. If that changes, we will talk about it. Until then, congrats to Dogubomb on the GOTY. And yes, internet, you can put the pitchforks down.