The controversy surrounding Let it Die: Inferno erupted on the very day of its release, when the game's page on Steam reported "substantial use" of artificial intelligence, as the platform requires for cultural products that incorporate this type of technology. That detail set off alarms among players, artists, and industry members, who interpreted the label as a possible replacement for human labor and as a risk to the sector's creative and labor standards.
In response to the reaction, Supertrick Games published a detailed statement specifying how, where, and why AI was used during the development. The studio attempted to dispel doubts and show that the technology was integrated in a controlled manner and with human intervention, although the explanations leave open questions about originality, copyright, and the impact on creative employment.
How the AI controversy in Let it Die: Inferno originated
The statement on Steam caused immediate suspicion due to the mandatory transparency precedent: if a game uses generative AI, it must be explicitly indicated. In this case, the word "substantial" led many to infer that jobs had been reduced or sensitive areas of development had been automated.
The focus was even greater because it is the spiritual sequel to a cult title created by Grasshopper Manufacture and directed by Suda51. The studio's initial vague statements, combined with imprecise mentions of AI-caused voices, art, and music, fueled criticism and requests for clarification.
AI in voices, art, and music: details from the statement
Supertrick Games explained that only two secondary characters have voices caused entirely by AI, and both belong to artificial entities or mysterious beings within the story. According to the studio, the goal was to reinforce the narrative aesthetic and not to replace human actors. They also stated that no real voices were imitated nor were patterns from existing performers used, in order to avoid legal or ethical conflicts.
