RPCS3 updates contribution guidelines after AI slop code caused regressions in PS3 emulator

RPCS3 Cracks Down on AI-Generated Code Submissions

The team behind RPCS3, the popular PlayStation 3 emulator, has revised its contribution guidelines following a surge of problematic AI-generated code submissions to its open-source GitHub project 1

1

. The updated policies arrived just one day after the team publicly called out what they termed "AI slop code" on social media, warning that contributors who fail to disclose AI use will face bans from the project 2

2

.

Regressions Force Team to Take Action

The decision to tighten contribution guidelines stems from multiple incidents where AI-generated GitHub pull requests slipped through review and caused significant regressions in the PS3 emulator. RPCS3 reported having to revert several of these submissions after they introduced new bugs and performance issues, creating substantial extra work for the unpaid development team 1

1

. "Please stop submitting AI slop code pull requests to RPCS3," the official account wrote on May 9. "We will start banning those who do without disclosing. There are plenty of resources online to learn how to debug and code instead of generating slop that you don't understand and that doesn't work" 2

2

.

New Rules Require Disclosure and Accountability

The updated guidelines do not ban AI-generated code outright but establish clear requirements for transparency and code quality. Contributors must now disclose AI use in their pull request descriptions, specifying which parts were AI-generated and what human testing or review was performed before submission. All communications with the RPCS3 team must be handled by human contributors, and pull requests that omit disclosure may be closed without review 1

1

. Contributors must take full responsibility for submitted code, even if AI was used during the research process.

Vibe Coders vs. Experienced Developers Using LLMs

The team drew a clear distinction between experienced developers who use LLMs to automate repetitive refactoring and the wave of inexperienced vibe coders submitting untested code. "Programmers that can understand the problem, the solution, and the implementation can write the same code without AI, and tend to use LLMs to automate repetitive code refactoring instead. It is not the case with the AI slop PRs we have seen," the team explained 2

2

. The core issue centers on contributors lacking the experience to spot bugs and verify their submissions, resulting in poor code quality that burdens the volunteer team.

Passion-Driven Project Defends Its Standards

RPCS3 operates as an entirely passion-driven project with no paid team members, making the additional workload from faulty submissions particularly burdensome 1

1

. The team emphasized that the emulator "reached maturity with 70% playable games" several years ago, before LLMs became widespread, demonstrating that quality development doesn't require AI assistance. When faced with backlash from AI advocates, the team remained firm: "As for all the AI bros seething on our socials, we're simply blocking you. Learn how to debug, code, and leave behind something useful to humanity when you're gone, instead of peddling slop" 2

2

.🟡 diffusivity=🟡Please stop submitting AI slop code pull requests to RPCS3," the official account wrote on May 9. "We will start banning those who do without disclosing. There are plenty of resources online to learn how to debug and code instead of generating slop that you don't understand and that doesn't work" 2

2

.