Saber Interactive has taken the step of adding a formal artificial‑intelligence disclaimer to the Steam store page for its title Rideshare Simulator after a wave of controversy erupted around claims that the company had dismissed a human writer in favor of AI‑generated text. The notice, now visible to anyone browsing the game’s storefront, is intended to clarify the studio’s current stance on AI usage and to address the accusations that have been circulating online. The full text of the disclaimer 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." According to the statement, the company is acknowledging that the situation surrounding Sacco’s departure and the alleged substitution of her work with AI‑generated content has drawn significant public attention.
The disclaimer is meant to be a transparent response that outlines what the studio has done and what it plans to do moving forward. When pressed for comment, Matt Karch, the chief executive of Saber Interactive, offered his own version of events. He claimed that Sacco was "replaced by someone more talented and terminated for a variety of reasons a few months later," and added a somewhat surprising reflection: "In retrospect I would have been happy to replace her with AI." This admission sparked further debate about the role of artificial intelligence in creative industries, especially in a field as narrative‑driven as video‑game development.
During an interview with the podcast This Week In Videogames, Karch went on to say, "Stella who? I had to ask Claude because I have never spoken to her or seen her." The reference to Claude—an AI chatbot—underscored the irony of the situation: the CEO appeared to rely on an AI assistant to answer a question about a real human colleague he claimed never met.
He continued, "We have already said we are using AI for certain parts of the game and will update the Steam page once we have finalised the feature set." Karch framed the use of AI as a consumer benefit, stating, "We look at our use of AI in this particular game, which will be a lower‑priced title, as a plus for consumers." By positioning AI as a cost‑saving measure that could potentially lower the retail price, he attempted to spin the controversy into a positive selling point. However, critics argued that such a justification overlooks the ethical considerations of replacing a human writer with a machine, particularly when the writer in question claims to have been unfairly dismissed.
The dispute reached a new level of public attention when Stella Sacco posted on the social network BlueSky over the weekend. In her message, she wrote that Karch had "apologised unreservedly for the awful way he spoke about me in the press." She continued, "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." Sacco’s statement suggested a tentative acceptance of the CEO’s apology, but also highlighted lingering uncertainty about what concrete steps would follow.
She indicated that she needed time to consider what restitution, if any, would be appropriate, leaving the resolution of the matter open‑ended. In a separate, more public gesture, Karch posted a comment on LinkedIn acknowledging his own emotional reaction to the unfolding drama. He wrote, "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.
It happens and I am a human being. I have done what I can to rectify." That admission of impulsive behavior—"shot first and thought second"—served as both an apology and a candid confession of a lapse in judgment.
By framing his reaction as a human error, Karch seemed to be seeking empathy, while also pledging to make amends where possible. The broader conversation around AI in game development has intensified in recent months, as studios experiment with large language models to generate dialogue, quest descriptions, and even entire story arcs.
Proponents argue that AI can speed up production, reduce costs, and open creative possibilities that were previously out of reach for smaller teams. Detractors, however, warn that reliance on AI may erode the craft of storytelling, marginalize human writers, and raise questions about authorship and intellectual property.
Saber Interactive’s situation is emblematic of this tension. On one hand, the company is transparent enough to place a disclaimer on its Steam page, acknowledging that AI tools have been employed. On the other hand, the manner in which a human writer was reportedly removed from the project—only to be replaced by an algorithm—has ignited concerns about fairness, workplace ethics, and the future of creative labor in the industry. Industry observers note that the controversy could have ripple effects beyond Saber.
If players and consumers begin to demand clearer labeling of AI‑generated content, studios may need to adopt standardized disclosure practices similar to those used in the film and music industries for deep‑fake technology. Moreover, labor unions representing writers and other creative professionals are likely to monitor this case closely, as it may set a precedent for how AI integration is negotiated in contracts and collective bargaining agreements. From a consumer perspective, the key questions revolve around quality and value. Will a game that incorporates AI‑written dialogue feel as authentic and engaging as one crafted solely by human writers?
Will the lower price point, as promised by Karch, translate into a better overall experience, or will the shortcuts undermine the game's narrative depth? Only time—and player feedback—will provide answers.
In the meantime, Saber Interactive appears to be taking steps to manage the fallout. The AI disclaimer on Steam serves as a public acknowledgment, while the CEO’s public apologies aim to repair relationships with both the former writer and the broader community. Whether these measures will be sufficient to quell criticism remains uncertain, but they illustrate the complex balancing act studios must perform as they navigate the integration of emerging technologies with longstanding creative practices. As the debate continues, the industry watches closely.
The outcome of Saber Interactive’s handling of AI usage and its treatment of a human writer may well influence how other developers approach transparency, ethical considerations, and the future role of artificial intelligence in shaping interactive entertainment.