Saber Interactive has recently updated the Steam storefront for its title Rideshare Simulator to include a clear disclaimer about the use of artificial intelligence in the game’s development. This move comes after a heated public dispute involving allegations 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 text of the new disclaimer reads as follows: "This update follows remarks made by Saber Interactive CEO Matt Karch concerning former writer Stella Sacco, who was employed by the company from July 2023 until July 2024.
Ms. Sacco claims she was removed from the Rideshare project midway through its production cycle and that her responsibilities were subsequently taken over by an AI language model.
She also alleges additional, undisclosed instances of AI usage throughout the game's creation." In a series of statements released after the controversy erupted, Karch attempted to clarify the situation. He said that Sacco was "replaced by someone more talented and terminated for a variety of reasons a few months later," and added, "in hindsight I would have been comfortable replacing her with AI." The CEO’s comments suggested that the studio had indeed considered, and perhaps employed, AI‑generated content for certain elements of the game, though he framed the decision as a potential benefit for consumers, especially given that Rideshare is positioned as a lower‑priced title. During an interview with the podcast This Week In Videogames, Karch made a somewhat flippant remark about his lack of personal interaction with Sacco: "Stella who? I had to ask Claude because I have never spoken to her or seen her," he said, referencing Claude, an AI assistant.
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 further defended the studio’s approach by stating, "We look at our use of AI in this particular game, which will be a lower priced title, as a plus for consumers." This line of reasoning reflects a growing industry narrative that AI can reduce development costs and allow developers to deliver more affordable products without sacrificing quality. The dispute took another turn over the weekend when Sacco posted on the social platform BlueSky, noting 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 also issued a public response on LinkedIn, where he admitted to an emotional reaction that influenced his initial reply. He posted, "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." The controversy touches on several broader issues currently shaping the video game industry. First, the use of AI for content creation—ranging from narrative text and dialogue to concept art and music—has accelerated dramatically in recent years.
While many studios tout AI as a productivity booster, concerns persist about the ethical implications of replacing human creators, especially when those creators are let go without transparent communication. Second, the episode highlights the importance of clear attribution and disclosure.
Players and consumers increasingly demand honesty about how games are made, and platforms like Steam have begun to require developers to flag AI involvement. Saber Interactive’s decision to add the disclaimer can be seen as a proactive step to align with these emerging standards, even if it was prompted by public pressure.
Third, the personal dynamics between executives and former employees have come under scrutiny. Karch’s admission that he reacted impulsively—"shot first and thought second"—resonates with a wider conversation about corporate accountability and the need for measured, thoughtful communication, especially when allegations of mistreatment surface. From a legal perspective, the situation may also raise questions about employment contracts, intellectual property rights, and the ownership of AI‑generated text. If a writer’s original work is replaced by AI output, it is unclear who retains the rights to the final product and whether the writer is entitled to compensation or acknowledgment.
Looking ahead, Saber Interactive’s handling of the fallout could set a precedent for how other developers address similar disputes. By publicly acknowledging the use of AI, offering an apology, and updating their Steam page, the studio demonstrates a willingness to engage with community concerns.
However, critics may argue that the apology falls short if it does not include concrete actions such as reinstating the writer’s contributions, offering compensation, or establishing clearer internal policies regarding AI. In summary, the episode underscores the delicate balance between leveraging cutting‑edge technology and respecting the creative labor of human writers. As AI tools become more sophisticated, the industry will need robust frameworks to ensure transparency, fairness, and ethical usage.
Saber Interactive’s recent steps—adding an AI disclaimer, issuing an apology, and acknowledging an emotional misstep—represent an early attempt to navigate this complex terrain, but the conversation is far from over. The ultimate outcome will depend on how the studio and others in the field choose to integrate AI responsibly while honoring the contributions of the people behind the games.