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 that erupted when former staff member Stella Sacco claimed she was removed from the project and substituted with content generated by ChatGPT, alongside allegations that the studio had employed AI tools in other, undisclosed aspects of the game's creation.
The full text of the new AI disclaimer reads as follows: "This update follows recent statements from Saber Interactive's chief executive officer, Matt Karch, concerning former writer Stella Saca. Ms. Sacco was employed by Saber from July 2023 until July 2024 and alleges that she was dismissed from the Rideshare Simulator project midway through production and that her responsibilities were subsequently filled by an AI language model. She also alleges that additional, as‑yet‑unannounced AI tools were used during development." In the wake of these accusations, Karch issued a public response that both defended the company's decisions and hinted at a willingness to incorporate AI more openly in the future.
He said that Sacco was "replaced by someone more talented and terminated for a variety of reasons a few months later," and added, "in retrospect I would have been happy to replace her with AI." The CEO further explained that he had never actually met Sacco, stating, "Stella who? I had to ask Claude because I have never spoken to her or seen her," during an interview with the podcast This Week In Videogames. Karch emphasized that the studio had already acknowledged the use of AI for specific components of Rideshare Simulator and promised to update the Steam page once the feature set was finalized. He framed the inclusion of AI as a benefit for players, describing the upcoming title as a "lower‑priced" offering where AI would serve as a "plus for consumers." This positioning suggests that Saber sees AI not merely as a cost‑cutting measure, but as a value‑adding technology that can enhance the overall player experience.
The controversy 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 later added a separate statement on LinkedIn, acknowledging his own emotional reaction to the unfolding situation. 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 impulsive behavior underscores the heightened emotions that can accompany public disputes over AI usage and employment practices in the gaming industry. The incident raises several broader questions about the role of artificial intelligence in game development, the rights of creative staff, and the transparency required when AI tools are employed.
While AI can accelerate content generation—producing dialogue, quest descriptions, or even procedural level layouts—it also introduces ethical considerations about authorship and compensation. If a writer's work is replaced by an algorithm, what obligations does a studio have to the displaced employee?
Moreover, how should companies disclose AI involvement to consumers who may be concerned about authenticity, quality, or even data privacy? Industry observers note that Saber Interactive is not alone in navigating these murky waters. Large publishers such as Ubisoft and Electronic Arts have already experimented with AI for asset creation, while smaller indie teams have turned to language models to flesh out narrative branches.
However, few have been as public about their internal decisions as Saber, especially after a former employee went public with her claims. From a consumer perspective, the AI disclaimer may serve as a useful signal. Players who value handcrafted storytelling might view AI‑generated content with skepticism, whereas others may appreciate the potential for richer, more varied experiences that AI can provide.
The disclaimer also functions as a legal safeguard, ensuring that the studio complies with emerging regulations in jurisdictions that are beginning to legislate AI transparency. In the aftermath, the gaming community has been divided. Some fans have rallied behind Sacco, condemning what they see as a disregard for human creativity. Others have defended Saber, arguing that AI is simply another tool in the developer's toolbox and that the studio's willingness to be open about its use is a step in the right direction.
Looking ahead, the situation may set a precedent for how studios handle AI disclosures. As AI technology continues to evolve, we can expect more developers to integrate it into writing, design, and testing pipelines.
The key will be striking a balance between efficiency gains and respect for the people whose expertise and artistic vision have traditionally driven game narratives. For now, Saber Interactive's updated Steam page stands as a tangible acknowledgment of AI's presence in Rideshare Simulator.
Whether this transparency will satisfy critics, appease the former writer, or simply become a footnote in the broader conversation about AI in entertainment remains to be seen. What is clear is that the dialogue surrounding AI, authorship, and accountability in video games is only just beginning, and the industry will need to navigate these complexities with both openness and sensitivity.