And if you would use an ocr to extract ai made code from an image and have it run, would that count as not having ai code in the files? The image is an image and not code, after all.
But your example is rather clear. Your assets are not the output of generative ai. They are the output of procedural ai.
Let's rephrase it. What if you have a pure human coded local ai system. You ship the system and generate ai images on the fly. Does the game contain the output of generative ai? Yes. Does your project contain output of generative ai? No.
There are games that can ask an online ai servcie for answers. How about them? I remember experimental games, where they would control an npc by an ai system. The game surely makes use of output of generative ai. But what type is it? Is it an asset? No. Is it code? No.
On a side note, the disclosure also does not ask, if the compiler contains any ai. But the executeable would have been literally created by a thing that has gen ai code in it.
For your point about how accepted ai is in a field, that does not really matter. Actually, any legal disputes would hit ai code even harder. Remember all that patent problems and other things certain software is burdened with? And a "copy" is much more clearer in text form. Copying a style and and ideas by machine learning might be ethically questionable, but not legally.