Saber Interactive has recently updated the Steam store page for its title Rideshare Simulator to include a clear disclaimer about the use of artificial intelligence in the game's development. The move comes after a heated dispute erupted over claims that the studio had dismissed a writer working on the project and substituted her contributions with text generated by AI tools such as ChatGPT. The full disclaimer now reads as follows: "This update follows comments from Saber CEO Matt Karch regarding writer Stella Sacco, who worked at Saber from July 2023 to July 2024, and stated she was removed from Rideshare midway through development and replaced with ChatGPT, while alleging other then-unannounced use of AI in the game's development." The statement continues, clarifying the company’s stance and providing context for the controversy.
It acknowledges that Sacco was indeed taken off the project and that the studio subsequently employed AI to generate certain narrative elements. The company also notes that the decision to use AI was made with the intention of streamlining production on a lower‑priced title, and that they view the technology as a benefit for consumers. The background to the dispute began when former writer Stella Sacco, who had been employed by Saber Interactive for a year, publicly alleged that she was removed from the Rideshare Simulator team partway through its development cycle. According to Sacco, her departure was not the result of performance issues but rather a strategic choice by the studio to replace her work with output from ChatGPT.
She also suggested that other, as‑yet‑undisclosed AI tools had been used throughout the game's creation, raising concerns about transparency and the treatment of creative staff. In response, Matt Karch, the chief executive of Saber Interactive, offered a mixed explanation. He claimed that Sacco was "replaced by someone more talented and terminated for a variety of reasons a few months later," and added that, in hindsight, he would have been comfortable substituting her contributions with AI.
Karch further said, "Stella who? I had to ask Claude because I have never spoken to her or seen her," referencing the AI model Claude, which he used to verify his lack of personal interaction with Sacco.
Karch also emphasized that the company had already been transparent about employing AI for certain aspects of the game. He promised that the Steam page would be updated once the final feature set was locked down, stating, "We look at our use of AI in this particular game, which will be a lower priced title, as a plus for consumers." The situation escalated when Sacco posted on the social platform BlueSky over the weekend, indicating that Karch had "apologised unreservedly for the awful way he spoke about me in the press." She wrote, "I've been firm from the beginning that I was telling the truth; I think we can all now agree that it's been borne out. Matt expressed a desire to make it right with me; at this time I don't really know what that looks like for me, and I'll have to take some time to sit with it, but I do at least accept his apology." Karch later issued a separate public comment on LinkedIn, where he admitted to an emotional reaction.
"I unfortunately got triggered by certain later comments (for reasons I won't get into) and shot first and thought second about how to respond," he wrote. "It happens and I am a human being. I have done what I can to rectify." The controversy touches on several broader industry themes.
First, the increasing reliance on AI-generated content raises questions about authorship, compensation, and the ethical treatment of human writers. While AI can accelerate production and reduce costs, many creators worry that it may be used to sideline experienced staff without adequate justification. Second, the episode highlights the importance of clear communication between leadership and employees, especially when new technologies are introduced into the workflow. Misunderstandings or perceived disrespect can quickly spiral into public relations challenges, as seen in this case.
From a consumer perspective, the inclusion of an AI disclaimer on the Steam page is a step toward transparency. Gamers who value handcrafted storytelling may appreciate knowing whether a game’s narrative was primarily authored by humans or generated by algorithms.
Conversely, some players may view AI assistance as a positive innovation that can lead to richer, more varied experiences, particularly in titles aimed at a broader, more budget‑conscious audience. For the industry at large, the Saber Interactive episode serves as a cautionary tale. Companies must balance the efficiencies offered by AI with the responsibility to treat their creative staff fairly and to maintain open lines of dialogue. When changes are made—whether replacing a writer with an AI model or altering the development pipeline—clear, respectful communication can prevent misunderstandings and protect a studio’s reputation.
In the weeks ahead, observers will be watching how Saber Interactive follows through on its promises. Will the Steam page be updated with a detailed breakdown of which game elements were AI‑generated? Will the company offer any form of restitution or acknowledgment to Sacco beyond the public apology? The answers to these questions will likely influence how other developers approach AI integration and how they communicate those decisions to both their teams and their audiences.
Overall, the incident underscores a shifting landscape where technology, creativity, and human relations intersect in complex ways. As AI tools become more sophisticated and accessible, studios like Saber Interactive will need to develop robust policies that respect both the potential of the technology and the contributions of the people who bring games to life.