 |
| Call of Duty: Ghosts artwork with Battlefield 6 logo |
Just months after launch, Battlefield 6 finds itself in a familiar firefight—but this time, the battle is over its downloadable content. A newly released cosmetic skin is drawing accusations of being a direct lift from a decade-old Call of Duty title, reigniting player concerns about the use of generative AI in asset creation, despite previous executive assurances.
The controversy ignited on the game’s subreddit, where user ForeGhost1013 posted a side-by-side comparison that stopped scrolls. The Battlefield 6 "Objective Ace" skin, a ghostly white skull mask, bears a striking, detail-for-detail resemblance to the iconic "Creed" mask from 2013’s Call of Duty: Ghosts.
You can see the detailed comparison and player reactions in this Reddit thread here.
The community was quick to dissect the images. Commenters like Momentarmknm pointed to uncanny specifics: "Look at the teeth drips, look at the crack along the lower part, look at the mark at the top left, the split down the middle." The consensus wasn't just about a similar theme—it was about precise, replicating details that strongly suggested copying, whether by human hand or otherwise.
The Ghost of AI Accusations Past
This isn't the first time Battlefield 6's post-launch content has raised eyebrows. Recently, a winter-themed DLC pack featured oddities that players flagged as potential hallmarks of unchecked AI generation. A bizarre double-barreled assault rifle design with no real-world or in-game precedent, and a weapon sticker featuring a bear with an irregular number of claws, had fans suspecting automated tools were being used without sufficient human oversight. As one player noted in another thread highlighting these inconsistencies, generative AI, when not meticulously guided, often creates "off" details that betray its non-human origin.
More examples of questionable assets are discussed by the community in this post.
The situation is laced with irony. Electronic Arts (EA) has strict rules within Battlefield 6's powerful Portal mode against user-generated content that mimics other franchises. One player famously received a takedown notice for recreating a tribute to Call of Duty's iconic "Shipment" map. This enforcement makes the alleged appropriation of Ghosts artwork for official, paid DLC seem particularly glaring to the community.
They aren't beating the allegations with this one
byu/ForceGhost1013 inBattlefield
A Question of Trust and Technology
Before Battlefield 6's release, DICE Vice President and General Manager Rebecka Coutaz was clear about the studio's philosophy. "We don't let any AI generate content that goes into the game," she stated, emphasizing a commitment to artist-driven creation for the core title.
That statement may have held true for the October 10th launch version. However, the landscape of DLC development is different—often handled by separate teams under tight schedules and budgets. Coupled with EA's massive, publicly touted investment in generative AI technology across the company, players are now asking an uncomfortable question: is the publisher using the very tools it restricted from players to cut corners on paid content?
While the evidence is currently circumstantial—a suspiciously similar skin here, a biologically improbable bear claw there—the pattern is worrying fans. The explanation could be simple human plagiarism, an overzealous artist, or a prompt given to an AI tool that yielded a result too close to its source material. Regardless of the method, the outcome is a growing credibility gap.
As Battlefield 6 seeks to rebuild its reputation through live service support, transparency will be its most vital asset. Players are now watching every new skin and sticker not just for style, but for the tell-tale signs of a machine mimicking where a master should create. The question for EA and DICE is no longer just if they use AI, but how they ensure its application honors both artistic integrity and the trust of the players funding the battlefield.