Postal spinoff canceled within 48 hours after explosive AI accusations — what’s the real story?

Why this cancellation actually matters – and why I noticed

This caught my attention because it’s rare to see a publisher kill a title within 48 hours of unveiling it. Running With Scissors (RWS) scrapped Postal: Bullet Paradise after community members claimed the game’s assets were generated with AI – allegations the outsourced developer, Goonswarm Games, denies and says it has evidence to refute. That rapid collapse says less about a single game and more about how fragile trust – and a studio’s reputation — has become in the age of generative AI.

• RWS canceled Postal: Bullet Paradise within two days of its reveal due to fan accusations that assets used AI.
• Goonswarm insists no generative AI was used and provided layered PSDs, WIPs and other files as proof.
• The incident highlights community policing, publisher risk aversion, and the fuzzy burden of proof for “AI” claims.

Breaking down what actually happened

On December 3 RWS revealed Postal: Bullet Paradise — a Vampire Survivors-style roguelite shooter developed externally by Goonswarm. The trailer and first impressions drew immediate backlash from parts of the Postal community who believed art assets looked AI-generated. By December 5, RWS publicly stated the backlash had “caused extreme damage” to its brand and severed trust with the external developer. They then canceled the project and apologized — sort of — while also calling out death threats they said they’d received.

Goonswarm’s defense — real files, or not enough?

Goonswarm responded by flatly denying any use of generative AI for the reveal trailer or game assets. They say all art was produced by human artists with “standard tools” and that they’ve shared layered PSD files and work-in-progress materials to prove it. That matters: layered files and WIPs can show the step-by-step creative process, and faking every layer convincingly is a lot of work. But it’s also true that non-experts will keep pointing to weird seams, duplicated textures, or odd composition as “AI proof.”

Why this matters now — context and timing

There are three overlapping trends here. First, publishers are hypersensitive to PR risk around AI — RWS had publicly taken a hard line against generative tools just last week, criticizing Epic’s Tim Sweeney for downplaying disclosure. Second, online communities have become vigilant and quick to flag perceived AI usage. Third, proving a negative — that something wasn’t created with AI — is messy. Together, those trends create a perfect storm where accusation can become action.

The gamer perspective: applause, skepticism, and consequences

On one hand, community policing can catch real issues. If studios were quietly outsourcing asset generation to black-box tools and selling them as human-made, gamers have a right to call it out. On the other hand, immediate cancellations based on public outcry risk punishing developers before evidence is vetted. Goonswarm says they provided layered files — which should count for something — but trust is fragile and publishers are legally and financially cautious.

There’s also cultural fallout: developers may stop outsourcing or show fewer experiments in public, fearing a mob reaction. Smaller teams could be especially vulnerable: one misinterpreted brushstroke or a reused prop might become a career-killing allegation. The industry needs clearer standards for disclosure and a more reliable way to adjudicate these disputes than Reddit screenshots and Twitter threads.

What this could mean going forward

Expect publishers to be quicker to distance themselves from controversy, for better or worse. Expect developers to keep more rigorous documentation of their pipelines, and possibly to preemptively publish WIPs when controversies loom. And expect the community to grow both more powerful and more dangerous — capable of holding studios accountable, but also of wrecking careers on shaky evidence.

TL;DR

Running With Scissors canceled Postal: Bullet Paradise after a wave of AI-asset accusations. Goonswarm denies using generative AI and provided layered files as proof. This episode shows how fragile trust and reputations are right now — the industry needs clearer standards for proving what is and isn’t AI-made before accusations become cancellations.