Games have talked about "enemy AI" for 25+ years. Hell, Halo 1 was considered revolutionary for its advanced enemy AI. Was that a hype word? Was that an incorrect misnomer?
"Theory" in law, versus in science is another example.
Super Mario mushrooms and turtles are not AI controlled; Pac-Man ghosts are. (Possibly the earliest and simplest form of game AI, but quite effective for its purpose).
When they hit walls, they change direction
I've worked on and seen games and game engines where scripted NPC behavior was lumped under the "AI" umbrella and implemented by the same people and systems that support the non-scripted behavior.
Architecturally, it doesn't make that much sense to separate out scripted behavior from non-scripted, because non-scripted behavior has most of the same needs to playing animations, triggering, audio, interact with physics, etc.
Scripted behavior is just an "AI" that happens to not read any inputs before deciding its outputs.
There’s even a distinct Wikipedia article on this use: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_intelligence_in_vid...