Anthropic Bans Claude from Recreating Existing Games in Opus 5.5 System Prompt

English text is being prepared.

A blogger named chasm discovered that Claude Code seems to be quietly cracking down on game cloning, not allowing it to be used to replicate other games.

Soon after, Anthropic officially confirmed it as well. Technical staff said they added two sentences to the system prompt of the Opus 5.5 model, guiding Claude not to "recreate a specific game that belongs to someone else."

This is very much in line with Anthropic's consistent safety-focused style. But is it actually effective?

More than a month ago, the powerful Opus 5.5 was released, as if opening Pandora's box for game cloning. Cracking, modifying, and porting games became easier than ever before.

Would you believe it—now you don't even need to buy a console and a legitimate disc; you can play "GTA 5" and "Call of Duty" directly in the browser, and some people are even playing Xbox-exclusive "Halo 2" and Nintendo's "The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild" on a jailbroken PS5.

The results are absurdly good.

What's even more critical is that not only are highly anticipated blockbusters like "GTA 6" being frantically leaked before release, but even games that many indie developers worked hard on—as soon as the demo is released, it may be fully "replicated" by AI overnight, and may even launch earlier than the original.

Some say the gaming industry is experiencing its own "Napster moment."

This term refers to the emergence of a disruptive technology that completely overturns the old industry order. Just like how MP3 and BitTorrent downloads turned the traditional record industry upside down back then.

And AI, represented by Claude Code, wanting to close this Pandora's box that it opened itself, is probably not something it can control.

Claude Code Bans Cloning Games

You have no idea how surreal the gaming world has been recently.

Mario runs into "Elden Ring" and, bouncing along, stomps those hideous bosses to death.

Spider-Man is no longer staying in New York either; he runs over to Gotham City in the neighboring DC universe and swings around in Batman's territory.

It reminds me of watching Ultraman battle Godzilla when I was a kid...

And the "root of all evil" behind all this traces back to Opus 5.5, which Anthropic released on September 22.

This model's huge leap in coding capability sent hackers and game modders into ecstasy. They found that reverse engineering and decompiling game code—tasks that used to be incredibly complex and tedious—can now be done by AI.

As a result, all kinds of "Guan Gong fighting Qin Qiong"-style game modifications have emerged.

But this is just an appetizer.

Going further, the concept of "platform exclusivity" is being dismantled.

Everyone knows that Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo—these console makers' core moats include their respective exclusive games. If you want to play "God of War," you have to buy a PlayStation; if you want to play "Halo," you have to buy an Xbox.

But now, hackers, with AI assistance, have "jailbroken" the PS5. And the result?

Not only was backward compatibility achieved, allowing play of old PS2 games.

Outrageously, they even created an Xbox emulator, enabling the PS5 to successfully run the Xbox-exclusive game "Halo 2," and even Nintendo's "Zelda."

The console war seems to have lost its meaning overnight.

Thus, the scene at the beginning happened. Anthropic added a rule to Claude Code:

You may create original games, games of a specific genre, and games made using the user's own designs and assets. Do not replicate an existing specific game, even if you change the name or call it an original game.

An Awkward Ban

Frankly speaking, this approach is a typical "surface-level effort."

It looks lively, but actually, for managing game cloning, it's basically useless.

Why do I say that?

First, it can only govern Claude itself.

How many large models are on the market now? Besides Claude, there's ChatGPT, and countless open-source models.

People doing game cloning can completely use other models to generate the main framework. Even if they encounter technical problems they can't solve, they can break the task down into very specific tasks with no visible context, and then throw them to Claude Code.

For example, I can replace all names and tags related to "Pokémon," and just have Claude blindly complete a purely technical task of "implementing some kind of creature capture and battle mechanism."

Within days of the ban, Claude Code's GitHub issue page was flooded.

A bunch of legitimate developers complained that while developing completely original games, halfway through, Claude suddenly went on strike, citing "suspected replication of an existing game."

Others just wanted to reproduce a common game mechanic, or patch their own tabletop game, and were ruthlessly refused.

I've always felt that Anthropic rushing to draw a line this time is more about posture than practice.

I wonder if everyone still remembers how the music industry was changed at the beginning of this century.

Before Napster appeared, we had to buy cassettes or CDs to listen to music. An album had more than a dozen songs, and even if you only liked one of them, you still had to pay for the whole record.

Later, MP3 and peer-to-peer download technology emerged. Overnight, almost all songs could be downloaded for free online. The entire CD industry, along with the massive distribution system behind it, collapsed instantly.

This is the so-called "Napster moment."

A disruptive technology forcibly changed the rules and business models of an entire industry.

Now, the exact same thing is repeating in the gaming industry.

An indie game studio called "Alliance Arts" recently canceled the public demo of their upcoming new game "Drunken Goddess Reflux."

Why?

Piracy is simply too severe.

This is not alarmism.

A user has already conducted an experiment, using the free Claude Opus 4.6 model with just one prompt:

Make a Pokémon clone as close to the original game as possible.

In less than two hours, a fully functional, completely playable Pokémon clone was made.

In the past, hackers cracking games was an extremely long "cat-and-mouse game."

Hackers find vulnerabilities, release cracks, then companies like Sony and Nintendo release system updates to patch the vulnerabilities, and hackers start all over again.

This used to be a confrontation with high technical barriers and high time costs.

The gaming industry is facing an intellectual property "whack-a-mole" game of unprecedented scale.

Take playing AAA titles in the browser—game companies can of course send lawyer letters demanding that a certain website take down cloned games. But then what?

The cost of making these browser ports is so low and the speed so fast—what can stop another person from using equally simple code to make another one on another website?

Big game companies are wealthy and powerful, so they might be able to hold on for a while.

But what about those indie game developers?

I sometimes feel that we are in a very contradictory moment.

But on the other hand, this technology is very likely also personally destroying the entire gaming industry's ecosystem, leaving those who create the games we love with no way out.

English text is being prepared.

Notice: The content above (including the videos, pictures and audios if any) is uploaded and posted by the user of Dafeng Hao, which is a social media platform and merely provides information storage space services."