162 articlesWhen developers Embark Studios launched ARC Raiders, an extraction shooter at the heart of PvPvE trends, expectations were really high. And we have to say that the game didn’t disappoint. Most of the users are satisfied with the overall gameplay, design, and features, and some even call it a masterpiece.
The critics and review websites also gave ARC Raiders positive ratings, at least until this week, when a critical review from Eurogamer gave the game a 2/5 (40%) rating, heavily citing the studio’s use of AI-generated voice work, which brought the aggregate score down quite a bit.
So, why is this review important, and what can we learn from all this?
Well, that single review sparked one of the loudest outcries I’ve seen recently in the gaming community, and for a good reason. Players feel the review penalises a game that delivers on so many levels, for what they see as a relatively minor issue.
Hotel Panorama Puzzle Solution in ARC RaidersApr 30, 2026
ARC Raiders: How to Find & Use Dockmaster’s DetectorApr 30, 2026
ARC Raiders: Where to Find Turbine CompressorApr 30, 2026That said, the gaming community, especially critics, seems they have a big problem with AI (generative work) used in games.
Let’s Talk About the Review
Eurogamer’s review opens on a fairly positive note: herds of robot enemies, tense extractions, and a surprisingly friendly multiplayer culture. It says it is quite positive to see positive behaviour, especially in PvP games, and praises the community for “shaming hostile players” – yet it quickly pivots.
The crux of the reviewer’s complaint? “Embark Studios’ continued use of AI voice generation is a black mark.”
Like Embark’s previous shooter, The Finals, Arc Raiders displays considered design. Also like The Finals, this design is overshadowed by the spectre of AI. Arc Raiders uses machine-learning algorithms for its Arc animations, and text-to-speech-based performances generated from the voices of real actors.
The reaction: According to aggregator sites, ARC Raiders’ critic score fell from ~94/100 to 88/100 (or even lower depending on platform) after this review, and it is currently 84.
The question is, should a game’s overall score be brought down just because of AI AI-generated voice? Or do you think that does not make a big difference?
After all, the review should reflect how the game makes you feel, rather than the technology used to make it in the first place.
What Other Critics Have to Say About Arc Raiders?
First of all, we don’t really need critics to know whether the game is performing well, and so far, I think we can all agree that ARC Raiders has had an overall positive score from the gaming community.
But in terms of critics, the situation is even crazier. If we browse Metacritic’s critic reviews, we can see that Eurogamer is the only website that has a negative review (40).
ARC Raiders has 2 mixed reviews (both 60), and 36 Overwhelmingly Positive reviews with 100 from Game Rant, IGN France, and Pocket Tactics.
What’s strange is that Eurogamer Germany, which is the same website as Eurogamer, only for a different market, gave ARC Raiders a 100 on Metacritic.
On social media, the entire gaming community has erupted:
Even big names are joining the conversation, and they are all saying the same thing – this review is too harsh!
Why This Is Such a Big Deal
On aggregator sites like Metacritic, a shift from the mid-90s to the high-80s is highly visible and can influence public perception, headlines, and even purchasing decisions. Many players argue that ARC Raiders delivers on its gameplay targets.
The gunplay is tight, encounters are tense, and the maps are engaging – yet the voice-acting issue, while noted, does not dominate the overall experience.
The controversy taps into a broader industry discussion about AI in game development. Embark Studios disclosed that they used text-to-speech systems for certain item names, location calls, and other minor dialogue. This level of transparency is uncommon, yet the backlash highlights how polarizing AI integration has become in gaming.
At the same time, community mistrust can grow when a review feels disproportionate. Even if the deduction is technically justified, the optics matter. Players often interpret a score drop like this as unfair, which can erode trust in both the review process and the perceived credibility of the site issuing the review.
How AI Impacts the Gaming Industry
Using AI voices or TTS in a game is a legitimate point of critique, especially if it affects immersion or performance. However, when the gameplay, mechanics, visuals, and overall community experience are strong, penalizing the game heavily for AI voice implementation feels out of balance.
Reviews should consider the context: if the voices are deeply broken, causing immersion to collapse, then a large deduction is reasonable. But if the voices are merely “not human-sounding,” a more modest adjustment would be appropriate.
For ARC Raiders, the player community generally regards the AI voices as a minor complaint rather than a game-breaking issue. Many user reviews highlight that the core experience (the tension, the action, and the polish) remains highly enjoyable despite this technical quirk.
In other words, while the reviewer is entitled to deduct points for AI voice work, the community is questioning whether 40 points on a 100-point scale is proportionate.
Regarding the official development studio, Embark Studios has publicly acknowledged the controversy but has not issued a formal statement contesting the review.
They have emphasized that the AI voices were intended as a small enhancement rather than a core feature, and that the game’s main experience remains fully intact. This measured response seems aimed at letting the community voice its opinion while avoiding a direct clash with reviewers.
Final Word
Let’s get one thing straight, ARC Raiders is not without flaws, none of the games are. However, there is no denying that this game is a breath of fresh air in the industry, and that brought something “new” or “different” in terms of the overall package.
This means that the true challenges lie in the reviewing process. There are too many opinions, and nowadays, the process of how games are made and scandals surrounding the company impact their final decision more than the overall gameplay experience.
Is that fair? You tell me.
