Assassin's Creed Creator Pulls AI Art From 1666: Amsterdam After Backlash

Panache Digital Games, the studio co-founded by Patrice Désilets, creator of the Assassin's Creed series and director of Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time, has admitted to using AI-generated artwork in its latest production, 1666: Amsterdam. Following a wave of criticism from players, the studio announced that neither the Early Access version nor the finished game will contain any AI-generated assets going forward.

The controversy surfaced shortly after Panache Digital Games showed the 1666: Amsterdam prologue at Summer Game Fest 2026 and released a free demo on Steam and the Epic Games Store. Players quickly noticed that some of the game's artwork bore the telltale signs of AI generation, including character portraits appearing in gameplay.

What the studio admitted

In an official statement, Panache Digital Games said that after looking into the matter, it did indeed find early versions of assets that had made their way into the prologue. The studio described it as a production oversight rather than a deliberate decision to replace artists' work.

We looked into the assets in question and found that there were indeed some early versions of assets that made their way into the prologue - Panache Digital Games, studio statement

The studio said human-made versions of the artwork would be added to the game in an upcoming update. Its statement also stressed explicitly that neither Early Access nor the full game after launch will include any AI-generated assets.

Please be assured that the Early Access and full game will not include any assets generated by AI - Panache Digital Games, studio statement

Assassin's Creed creator speaks out

Patrice Désilets, best known as the creator of the original Assassin's Creed and director of Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time, addressed the matter directly in an interview with GamesRadar+. He admitted that AI had indeed been used in the production process, but said it was limited to the early concept stage.

Yes, we use some AI in the process, mostly at the beginning, in conception and pre-production. It's been totally removed, and we won't be using any AI anymore - Patrice Désilets, Panache Digital Games

Community reaction

Players' reactions to the studio's apology have been mixed. Some have praised the quick reversal on generative AI and the promise to replace the artwork with human-made work, while others remain skeptical, pointing out that the statement only came after the community flagged the problem, not on the studio's own initiative. Some players say they will boycott the game despite Panache's assurances.

Why this matters for the industry

The 1666: Amsterdam controversy is part of a broader industry dispute over the role of generative AI in producing art, textures, and promotional material for games. Development studios are increasingly testing AI tools at the prototyping stage, but Panache's case shows how easily such assets can end up in a finished product without proper oversight, and how strongly players push back once it comes to light.

For game developers, including smaller independent studios, it is a sign that transparency about the AI tools used in production is becoming something the community expects, not just an internal best practice. Missteps like the one at 1666: Amsterdam can cost even established creators with a track record like Désilets's their reputation.