Players decide what makes the cut

Every game with an AI disclosure gets credits in six parts: art, audio, writing, code, what happens while you play, and the store page. For each part we show how much AI was used, whether people reworked it, and where that comes from.

• Sources, strongest first: the developer after claiming their page, the Steam or itch.io disclosure, public statements from the developer, then credible press. Every line links to its source.
• "Not stated" means no source says anything about that part. It doesn't mean the part was made without AI. We only show "Made by people" when a source says so.
• A game without a disclosure gets exactly this answer: "The developer hasn't disclosed any AI use." We never write "No AI", because we can't know that.

Each game also gets one label:

AI-made

Part of the game itself is mostly or entirely made with AI.

AI-assisted

AI helped with specific parts.

Unclear

AI use was disclosed without saying which parts.

We read the game's Steam reviews. Reviews that mention AI are sorted into four groups, and only one group is set aside: reviews whose verdict is only about AI being used, for or against. Everything else counts.

• Both directions. Positive reviews that only cheer for AI are set aside the same way as negative ones that only object to it.
• A simple test. Take out every sentence about AI. If anything is left that judges the game, the review counts.
• Steam's number is always shown next to ours. When they match, we say "Same on Steam".
• Only reviews we've read. We never set aside an estimate. For big games we start with the newest 1,000 reviews and then read every new one.

84

Steam78

Steam

The number in the laurel is the percentage of positive reviews, with Steam's underneath. An example with made-up numbers.

The Player Score itself is a little stricter than the percentage. It's the lower bound of a 95% confidence interval on the share of positive reviews (a Wilson score), so it rewards games that are both well liked and well reviewed. 19 positive out of 20 and 164 out of 200 land at about the same score, because the second has far more evidence behind it. That's why a big game at 91% can rank above a small one at 93%.

• Made the cut: at least 20 reviews after setting aside the AI-only ones, and a Player Score of 0.75 or higher. A game leaves the cut only when it drops below 0.70, so games don't flicker in and out.
• New and promising: 5 to 19 reviews, 85% or more positive, and released in the last 90 days.
• Everything else is listed. Not making the cut says nothing bad about a game. Most listed games simply don't have enough reviews yet.
• Money never buys the cut. If we ever sell placement, it will only be for games already in the cut, and always labeled "Sponsored".

Moderators can pin a game into the cut or take one out, put a game on hold, correct a game's AI credits, and relabel a review. Every change needs a reason and is logged. These are exceptions: when the same kind of change keeps coming up, we fix the rules instead.

A game can be put on hold for a moderator when its reviews look unusual, for example a burst of very short positive reviews in a short time.

• Call a game bad, lazy or slop. We describe how a game was made and what players say.
• Accuse anyone of using AI. Everything in the credits comes from a source we link to.
• Republish review text. We read reviews to score games, and describe what players say in our own words.
• Let anyone's taste, including ours, decide the cut. Players do.

Open Credits isn't affiliated with Valve or Steam. Scores come from player reviews on Steam. Back to the games.