For over a year, Sweet Baby Inc. has described itself as a narrative consulting studio—one that advises developers on story and representation, rather than creating games outright. But the mask has fallen yet again, and gamers once more get their vindication.
A recent episode of the Gaming for the Culture podcast unintentionally exposed the company from within. The podcast features interviews of figures within the gaming industry, from streamers to developers. The Sweet Baby Inc. episode featured SBI employee Maria Beck. The official description of the podcast episode in question reads as follows:
“Maria Beck, Producer at Sweet Baby Inc, on Narrative Development & Representation in Games. She talks about being in the industry and in one of the most influential companies to hit the gaming scene. Along with what it’s like to be targeted by potential gamer gate 2.”
However, in the interview, Beck inadvertently (and hilariously) confirmed that SBI does far more than just consult.
The Truth Comes Out…Again
During the episode, Sweet Baby Inc. producer Maria Beck is asked whether game developers need to arrive with a narrative outline before working with the company. Her response: “No, we create those things.”
She goes on to explain that developers may approach Sweet Baby Inc. with little more than an idea—literally, just an idea. From there, the SBI team will “absorb” the information and create narrative outlines, character outlines, produce documents to be used during development, and even write the scripts.
In other words, Sweet Baby Inc. may be involved before a game’s narrative framework even exists. That places the company in a far more foundational creative role than “narrative consultant” typically implies. Such rooted involvement in a game from so early on, when only the idea of it exists at first, means that SBI does in fact develop, write and produce.
How the Backlash Is Explained
As usual for Sweet Baby Inc., Maria Beck took no accountability when asked about the “harassment” towards her and her coworkers during the interview. Instead, she blamed others, particularly men. The interviewer even agreed, quite adamantly, that all the criticism of Sweet Baby Inc. is attributed primarily to “cis white men” who allegedly oppose diversity in games.
Once again, no mention of how the backlash started—of Kabrutus or Chris Kindred—nor any mention of the truth.
Moreover, another notable moment comes when the discussion turns to tracking Sweet Baby Inc.’s own work. Maria mentions wanting to keep a personal list or wishlist of games the company has worked on so she can remember or eventually play them.
That admission stands in stark contrast to the company’s past resistance to third-party efforts to catalog its involvement in games. Particularly Chris Kindred demanding that Kabrutus be cancel on Steam for such a list.
Whether intentional or not, an SBI employee admitting that having a list of SBI games—in order to find and play them later—would be nice, is a blatant display of the company’s hypocrisy.
The Real Problem is Inside the Company
When a company publicly insists it “only consults,” yet openly describes creating narrative outlines, characters, scripts, and foundational development documents—sometimes from little more than a loose idea—players are justified in questioning that framing. When criticism of that influence is dismissed as prejudice rather than addressed on its merits, skepticism hardens into distrust.
The Gaming for the Culture podcast was an opportunity for clarity. Instead, it offered confirmation—directly from a Sweet Baby Inc. employee—that the company’s role often extends far beyond what has been publicly claimed, while dissent is framed as hostility rather than consumer concern.
Sweet Baby Inc. did not need critics, leaks, or speculation to create this contradiction. Their representative explained their own process openly and on the record.
Transparency builds trust. Obfuscation erodes it. And this podcast made clear which path Sweet Baby Inc. has chosen.
