Anthropic 工程師阿迪·奧斯曼尼宣布，Claude Code 2.1.317 已調整 Claude Opus 5.5 的遊戲開發限制，允許用戶在描述玩法機制時直接提及現有遊戲，不再因參考而拒單。此前系統因顆粒度太粗，誤傷大量正常借鑒行為，引發開發者不滿。新規則區分「借鑒」與「複製」，支持參考機制創作同類型原創，但明確拒絕照搬代碼與美術。此舉在防抄襲與保護開發靈感間找到平衡。文章作者、來源：AIBase
Anthropic 工程師阿迪·奧斯曼尼於 11 月 4 日在 X 上宣布，Claude Code 2.1.317 已對 Claude Opus 5.5 的遊戲開發限制進行調整。新規則允許用戶在描述玩法與機制時直接點名現有遊戲，Claude 不再因此拒絕。這實際上是被開發者「罵」出來的轉向——就在上周，為防止有人利用 Claude Code 複刻他人作品，團隊曾在 Opus 5.5 系統提示詞中加入兩條硬性規定，要求避開複刻他人遊戲。
誤傷比抄襲更招恨，一條參考就觸發拒單
The problem with this rule is that its granularity is too coarse. Many developers merely mention a game as an example of gameplay, but Claude Code treats it as a serious threat and rejects the entire development task. Complaints from the community about being blocked by the system when saying "I want to make a game similar to XX" are increasing, forcing Anthropic to recalibrate this red line.
The new guideline distinguishes between "drawing inspiration" and "copying": users can now freely mention an existing game and ask Claude to reference its mechanics to create an original game of the same type; however, if the request explicitly demands direct copying, the model will still refuse to replicate the original and instead recommend developing a new game with a similar experience. In other words, gameplay ideas can "borrow light," but direct copying of code and art remains blocked.
For developers relying on AI to create independent games, this represents a comfortable middle ground—maintaining copyright safeguards while no longer stifling inspiration. By shifting from rigid protection to flexible boundaries, Anthropic has carved out a path between "preventing plagiarism" and "not getting in the way."