Well, here’s a headscratcher. Paolo Pedercini, developer of Future? No Thanks! recently admitted to using generative AI in his ecosocialist satire while also referring to the technology as “a technofascist, anti-human and anti-art project.” Now, the developer has removed several AI generated voice lines from the game, following a backlash to his use of the very technology which the game lampoons.

You might remember Future? No Thanks! from another recent controversy, whereupon the game was briefly delayed after Steam held up its release while it reviewed some fleeting nudity in the game. Pedercini—who also goes by Mollieindustria—received considerable support during that debacle. But the reaction to Future? No Thanks’ AI use has been rather less supportive, prompting Pedercini to rework the game and respond to the backlash.

Pedercini originally revealed his AI use in a blog post (via Rock, Paper, Shotgun). Apparently, the game contained several voice lines generated using text-to-speech, which Pedercini claimed, “used to be an uncontroversial technology and an early application of neural networks” before “AI bros started commercializing AI voices”. Alongside this, the game also includes “a tiny fraction” of AI generated code, which Pedercini said he used for things like “fixing a shader I didn’t write which broke after an update” as well as “finishing touches and minor debugging.”

In this blog, Pedercini defended his AI use by pointing out that Future? No Thanks! “satirizes generative AI and the careless ways it can be used,” adding that the “100% no-AI stance” adopted by many game developers “is very recent, and the game was being developed before a consensus emerged.” He also cited his role as an academic and game design teacher, stating “I have to look into these tools which most of my students use, and I was trying to figure out if there are non-brain-rotting ways to do so.”

Yet it seems these arguments failed to convince Pedercini’s audience, as yesterday he published another blog post revealing he has now removed the offending TTS voice lines, replacing them with lines by human actors. Apparently, these lines were “recorded earlier this year,” but Pedercini opted not to use them because he “thought the actual uncanny text-to-speech was funnier in that context.”

Although Pedercini has removed the lines, he’s clearly not happy about it. In the second blog, he stated that he believes that “the game is worse not, but only, like, 0.001% worse.” He also included a “personal update” through which he responded more broadly to the backlash.

“Somebody from Bluesky (the Twitter/X clone) dragged me due to a post disclosing what I foolishly thought a minor use of generative-AI in Future? No Thanks!” he explained. “I gave versions of that statement multiple times before, whenever asked by festivals and events.” He also pointed out that, per Valve’s updated AI disclosure rules, “Steam doesn’t require disclosure of generative AI for things like code assistance, so many people assume their favorite indie games don’t use AI at all just because the developers stay mum”.

The post then took a weirder turn. Pedercini admitted that his original blog “was not a good post,” and that he thought “nobody would read it”, before claiming that his AI disclosure resulted in “more insults than the time at the height of GamerGate when Adam Baldwin unleashed his half million followers on me.” He followed this by linking to a list of game developers that reject generative AI, claiming that “all studios” who haven’t disclosed genAI use are “using it for coding in some capacity” and began his signoff with “I drank from the chalice of blood. Nothing will ever redeem me and my cursed little game.”

As for what to make of all this (at least, the bits that aren’t about drinking blood), I can sort-of understand Pedercini attempt at deploying TTS voice lines for satirical purposes, and he’s correct in saying that TTS has a history that goes back further than modern LLMs. If that was all the genAI in the game, it would be more defensible.

But the fact he’s also used generative coding tools for clearly non-satirical purposes is much harder to defend. Also, if you’re making a game that satirises generative AI, the primary audience for which is going to be people who are avowedly against generative AI, it’s probably prudent to ensure that the creation of said game is as far removed from generative AI as possible.

Yet among the references to gamergate and accusing the entire industry of secretly using AI, Pedercini did make two other points worth noting. First, he said that players who bought Future? No Thanks and “feel betrayed” by his use of AI can request a refund by emailing their Paypal or Venmo information to him. Second, he promised that his next project “will be completely hand-coded”, as he had already determined that “AI-assisted programming is bad for me.”