Let It Die: Inferno just became the latest game to crash into the generative AI controversy wall. The upcoming roguelike sequel updated its Steam page with a disclosure revealing that AI-generated content was used extensively throughout development for voices, music, graphics, and videos. The admission comes just days before the December 4 launch, and the gaming community response has been brutal. Players are calling it AI slop, questioning why anyone would want a game where human creativity was replaced by algorithm-generated content, and comparing it unfavorably to the distinctive style that made the original 2016 cult classic memorable.
What the AI Disclosure Actually Says
Steam’s AI disclosure policy requires developers to specify when their games use generative AI, and Supertrick Games complied by listing exactly where artificial intelligence crept into production. According to the updated store page, AI-generated content has been used and then edited by our team for certain parts of the in-game voices, music, and graphics. The specific elements include background signboard textures, record illustrations, InfoCast videos, voices, and music. That’s a substantial portion of what players actually see, hear, and interact with during gameplay.
What’s particularly concerning is how pervasive the AI usage appears to be. We’re not talking about minor background elements that players barely notice. Music sets the entire atmosphere and emotional tone of a game. Voice acting brings characters to life and drives narrative engagement. Graphics and illustrations create visual identity and artistic coherence. When all three categories rely heavily on AI generation, even with human editing afterward, it raises serious questions about how much actual creative vision shaped this project versus how much was outsourced to algorithms trained on existing work.
Why This Matters More Than Previous AI Controversies
Games have used procedural generation and algorithmic tools for decades without controversy. The difference with modern generative AI is where the training data comes from and what it replaces. Traditional procedural generation uses rules created by human designers to remix content in novel ways. Generative AI is trained on massive datasets scraped from the internet, often without permission or compensation to the original creators. When that AI then produces music, voices, or art, it’s essentially remixing stolen content into new configurations while replacing the human artists who would have been paid to create original work.
Call of Duty: Black Ops 7 recently faced backlash for using AI-generated assets. Arc Raiders drew criticism for AI voice acting concerns. But Let It Die: Inferno represents something potentially worse because the AI usage is so comprehensive. It touches voices, music, graphics, and video content simultaneously. The disclosure suggests a development process where AI generation became the default approach rather than a supplementary tool. This raises uncomfortable questions about whether Supertrick Games was trying to rush the project to market on a tight budget by replacing expensive human talent with cheap AI alternatives.
The Original Let It Die Had Style
What makes this particularly disappointing is that the 2016 original Let It Die had a distinctive visual and audio identity. Developed by Grasshopper Manufacture under the direction of Suda51, the game featured weird black comedy, punk rock aesthetics, ultraviolence, and bizarre characters that felt genuinely unique. The soundtrack was memorable. The art direction was cohesive. The voice acting sold the absurdist tone. Those elements emerged from human creative vision, not algorithmic content generation trained on thousands of existing games.
Inferno isn’t being developed by Grasshopper or Suda51. Development is entirely handled by Supertrick Games, which is essentially a remnant of the original Grasshopper Manufacture that stayed with publisher GungHo when the studio split. Supertrick retained staff from the original team but lost the creative leadership and independent identity. The heavy AI usage suggests they either lacked the resources, time, or creative direction to produce Inferno the traditional way, so they leaned on generative tools as a cost-cutting measure disguised as innovation.
Community Response: Let It Die Then
Reddit discussions about the disclosure have been overwhelmingly negative. One particularly cutting comment suggested the game should just Let it Die, playing on the franchise name while expressing zero interest in an AI-generated sequel. Others pointed out that consumers seem increasingly indifferent to AI usage as long as the final product appears acceptable, which will encourage more studios to slash budgets by replacing human creators without passing savings to players. The cynicism is palpable and justified given how many studios have already started implementing similar strategies.
Concerns about voice actor exploitation are particularly troubling. While Supertrick claims the AI-generated voices were edited by their team, there’s no transparency about whether real voice actors were compensated fairly or if their performances were fed into AI training without proper consent. There have been multiple documented cases of voice actors discovering their work was used to train AI systems they never agreed to participate in, including a Scottish woman whose voice ended up in train announcements without her knowledge. The gaming industry has a terrible track record of respecting voice talent, and AI makes exploitation significantly easier.
The Business Reality Behind the Decision
From a cynical business perspective, the AI usage makes sense for Supertrick and GungHo. Inferno was announced just a few months ago during September’s PlayStation State of Play, suggesting minimal marketing budget and a rushed development timeline. The previous Let It Die spin-off Deathverse was a multiplayer-only battle royale that flopped hard and went back into redevelopment. GungHo probably wasn’t willing to invest heavily in another risky sequel, so Supertrick had to find ways to produce content cheaply and quickly. Generative AI offered exactly that shortcut.
This creates a troubling precedent. If Inferno sells decently despite the AI disclosure, it signals to other publishers that gamers will tolerate AI-generated content as long as the price is right and the marketing is flashy enough. If it bombs, studios might be more cautious about relying so heavily on algorithmic generation. Either way, the industry is clearly testing boundaries to see how much cost-cutting via AI replacement consumers will accept before outrage translates to actual sales impact. The next few weeks will provide important data on whether disclosed AI usage actually hurts commercial performance or just generates negative internet comments that don’t affect revenue.
What Steam’s Disclosure Policy Reveals
The fact that we even know about Inferno’s AI usage is because Valve implemented mandatory disclosure policies on Steam. Without that requirement, the game would have launched with nobody knowing until players experienced it firsthand and started sharing suspicions online. The disclosure is useful for consumers who care about supporting human-created content, but it also highlights how many games might be using undisclosed AI on platforms without similar policies. Epic Games CEO Tim Sweeney has argued such disclosures will become impractical as AI integration becomes ubiquitous, suggesting the industry wants to normalize algorithmic generation so thoroughly that tracking it becomes impossible.
That’s the real fight here. Not whether AI tools have legitimate uses in game development, which they probably do for certain technical tasks. But whether the industry will transparently distinguish between AI-assisted human creativity and AI-generated content that replaces human creators entirely. Let It Die: Inferno’s disclosure puts it on the wrong side of that line, using AI not as a tool to enhance human work but as a replacement for composers, voice actors, and artists who would have been paid to create original content. The gaming community’s negative response suggests many players understand the difference and don’t appreciate being sold algorithm-remixed content at full price.
Frequently Asked Questions
What AI content is in Let It Die: Inferno?
According to the Steam disclosure, AI-generated content was used for in-game voices, music, graphics, background signboard textures, record illustrations, and InfoCast videos. Supertrick Games states the AI content was edited by their team afterward.
When does Let It Die: Inferno release?
The game launches December 4, 2025 on PC via Steam and PlayStation 5. A demo has been available on PC, though it received mixed reactions from players who tried it.
Is Suda51 involved in Let It Die: Inferno?
No, neither Suda51 nor Grasshopper Manufacture is involved in Inferno’s development. The game is being made entirely by Supertrick Games, which is essentially a remnant of the original Grasshopper studio that stayed with publisher GungHo when the companies split.
Why are players upset about AI in Let It Die: Inferno?
Players view the extensive AI usage as replacing human artists, composers, and voice actors to cut costs. The original Let It Die had distinctive style created by human talent, while Inferno appears to rely heavily on algorithmic content generation across multiple aspects of production.
What was the original Let It Die game?
Let It Die was a 2016 action roguelike from Grasshopper Manufacture that combined hack-and-slash combat with base infiltration and asymmetric multiplayer. It featured distinctive punk aesthetics, black comedy, and Suda51’s signature weird style.
How does Steam’s AI disclosure policy work?
Valve requires developers to disclose when their games use generative AI and specify which aspects were AI-generated. This policy allows consumers to make informed purchasing decisions based on how much AI content they’re comfortable with.
Will the AI controversy hurt Inferno’s sales?
Unknown. The game faces significant backlash online, but it’s unclear if negative social media sentiment will translate to actual sales impact. The next few weeks will show whether disclosed AI usage affects commercial performance or just generates internet complaints without revenue consequences.
What happened to Deathverse: Let It Die?
Deathverse was a multiplayer-only battle royale spin-off that flopped and went back into redevelopment. Its failure likely made publisher GungHo less willing to invest heavily in Inferno, potentially explaining the cost-cutting AI usage.
Conclusion
Let It Die: Inferno represents a crossroads moment for gaming and generative AI. The extensive disclosed usage across voices, music, and graphics makes this one of the most AI-heavy releases from a recognizable franchise to date. Whether players will tolerate algorithm-generated content depends on factors like price, quality, and how much they value supporting human creators over cost-optimized production. The backlash has been fierce, but backlash doesn’t always translate to boycotts. If Inferno succeeds commercially despite the controversy, expect many more studios to follow the same playbook of replacing expensive human talent with cheap AI alternatives. If it bombs, we might see temporary pullback as publishers recalculate the risk-reward of disclosed AI usage. Either way, Steam’s disclosure policy has done exactly what it should: given consumers information to make informed choices. Whether they choose to reward or punish this approach will shape gaming’s AI future more than any policy or executive decision.