According to Eurogamer.net, Falcom, the developer of the Trails in the Sky and Ys game series, revealed in a recent shareholder presentation that it has begun integrating AI into its development process. A company representative stated they are proceeding “cautiously” due to legal concerns but are using the technology for brainstorming scenarios and conducting research. The key claim is that tasks which previously took 2 to 3 hours can now be completed in just 10 minutes using AI. Falcom also noted it uses AI to correct typos in game scripts. This news comes as a poll at this year’s Tokyo Game Show indicated over half of Japanese developers are using AI, with giants like Sega and Square Enix publicly outlining their own AI adoption plans.
The Efficiency Play
Here’s the thing: Falcom’s statement is the perfect, bite-sized soundbite for the pro-AI argument in creative fields. Cutting a 3-hour brainstorming or research session down to 10 minutes is a staggering claim. It’s not about replacing a writer’s final draft, but about supercharging the grunt work that comes before—the blank page problem. If AI can instantly generate a dozen scenario ideas or historical references for a fantasy setting, that lets human developers spend their energy on refinement, narrative cohesion, and the actual craft. But it also raises a big question: is that initial 2-3 hours of human brainstorming just “wasted” time, or is it where subtle, unique ideas are born? There’s a risk that efficiency could lead to homogenization if everyone uses the same tools to jump-start the same creative processes.
Japan’s AI Gold Rush
Falcom isn’t an outlier. They’re part of a massive, coordinated shift in the Japanese game industry. When over half the devs at TGS are already on board, and Square Enix is aiming for AI to handle 70 percent of its QA by 2027, it’s clear this is a top-down strategic directive. For these studios, often working on tight schedules and budgets with massive asset demands, AI represents a potential lever to pull for maintaining competitiveness. The contrast with the West is pretty stark. Look at the backlash Larian’s CEO got just for mentioning AI use. In Japan, the corporate statements from Sega and Square are matter-of-fact; in the West, it’s a union-busting, job-stealing third rail. This cultural divide in how the tech is discussed and adopted is going to be fascinating to watch.
The Cautious Caveat
Now, don’t miss the most important word in Falcom’s statement: “cautiously.” They explicitly cite legal issues. That’s the huge, unresolved cloud over all of this. It’s not just about copyright lawsuits on the training data. It’s about who owns the output when an AI trained on a million scripts helps brainstorm your game’s scenario. For a company like Falcom, with decades of prized IP, navigating that minefield is critical. So their approach—using it for internal brainstorming and proofreading typos—feels like a safe, low-stakes testing ground. They’re dipping a toe in the efficiency pool, not diving headfirst into letting an AI write entire character arcs. At least, not yet.
The Human Element
Basically, this is the new normal. The debate is moving from *if* studios will use AI to *how* and *how much*. Falcom’s example is a pretty pragmatic middle ground. The acting unions are right to be terrified about voice and performance, but for pre-production text and research? That battle might already be over. The real test will be whether games that heavily leverage these tools start to feel different. Will we get more ideas, faster, or just the same ideas, cheaper? I think the next few years of JRPGs might just give us the answer.
