Saber Interactive has taken the step of adding an explicit artificial‑intelligence disclaimer to the Steam store page for its upcoming title, Rideshare Simulator, after a wave of controversy surrounding claims that the company had dismissed a writer in favor of AI‑generated text. The notice, which now appears prominently on the game's listing, is intended to clarify the extent of AI involvement in the project and to address concerns raised by the gaming community and industry observers.
The full wording of the new 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." The background to this statement involves a series of public statements made by both the former writer and the company's leadership. Stella Sacco, who served as a lead writer on Rideshare Simulator for roughly a year, publicly claimed that she was taken off the project part‑way through production and that her responsibilities were handed over to an AI system—specifically OpenAI's ChatGPT.
Sacco also suggested that the studio had employed additional, undisclosed AI tools in other aspects of the game’s creation, a claim that quickly sparked debate about the ethics and transparency of AI usage in video‑game development. In response, Matt Karch, the chief executive of Saber Interactive, offered a mixed explanation. He asserted that Sacco was "replaced by someone more talented and terminated for a variety of reasons a few months later," and added a candid, if somewhat provocative, remark that "in retrospect [he] would have been happy to replace her with AI." This comment was interpreted by many as an admission that the company considered, or perhaps already employed, AI solutions for narrative work, raising questions about the treatment of human creative staff. During an interview with the podcast This Week In Videogames, Karch further distanced himself from Sacco, stating, "Stella who?
I had to ask Claude because I have never spoken to her or seen her." He clarified that the studio had already disclosed its intention to use AI for certain components of the game and promised to update the Steam page once the feature set was finalized. Karch framed the use of AI as a consumer benefit, describing the upcoming title—a lower‑priced offering—as "a plus for consumers" because AI could streamline development and potentially lower the final price. The situation escalated when Sacco posted on the social platform BlueSky over the weekend, 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 later issued a separate public statement on LinkedIn, acknowledging his emotional reaction to the unfolding controversy.
He confessed, "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." This admission of a hasty, defensive reply was meant to convey a degree of humility, though critics argued that it did little to address the core concerns about AI replacing human writers. The broader industry context is worth noting.
In recent years, game developers have increasingly experimented with AI tools for tasks ranging from procedural content generation to dialogue scripting. While some studios tout AI as a cost‑saving measure that can free human talent to focus on higher‑level design, others warn that over‑reliance on machine‑generated text can erode narrative depth and undermine the creative voice of seasoned writers.
The controversy surrounding Saber Interactive thus touches on a larger debate: how transparent should developers be about the role of AI in their products, and what responsibilities do they have to the human creators whose jobs may be affected? From a consumer standpoint, the addition of the AI disclaimer may serve as a useful piece of information for players who care about the authenticity of a game's storytelling. It also sets a precedent for other studios that might be tempted to hide AI usage behind vague statements.
By openly acknowledging the presence of AI, Saber Interactive is aligning itself with emerging best practices that advocate for clear labeling of AI‑generated content, similar to disclosure requirements being discussed in other media industries. Nevertheless, the incident has left lingering questions about the internal dynamics at Saber. Sacco's claim that she was removed mid‑development and replaced by an algorithm suggests a potentially abrupt shift in the studio's workflow. If true, such a move could reflect a broader trend of cost‑cutting measures that prioritize speed over the nuanced craft of narrative design.
It also raises concerns about the treatment of staff who may feel vulnerable when their roles are deemed replaceable by technology. In the wake of the controversy, several industry observers have called for clearer guidelines on AI usage in game development, urging publishers to adopt standardized disclosure statements that inform players about the extent of machine involvement.
Some have suggested that unions representing writers and other creative professionals could negotiate clauses that protect against sudden AI substitution without adequate notice or compensation. For now, Saber Interactive appears to be attempting damage control. The updated Steam page includes the new disclaimer, and the company has promised to refine its communication about AI features as development progresses.
Whether this approach will satisfy disgruntled fans and the writer community remains to be seen, but the episode serves as a cautionary tale about the importance of transparency, respectful treatment of staff, and the careful balance between leveraging cutting‑edge technology and preserving the human element that has traditionally driven compelling storytelling in video games.