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 controversy erupted when allegations surfaced that the studio had dismissed a writer working on the project in favor of employing AI‑generated text.
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 background to the dispute began when former staff member Stella Sacco publicly claimed that she had been taken off the Rideshare Simulator team partway through the production cycle and that her responsibilities were handed over to an AI system—specifically ChatGPT. Sacco also suggested that the studio had employed additional, undisclosed AI tools in other aspects of the game's creation, raising concerns about transparency, authorship, and the ethical treatment of creative talent. In a series of interviews and social‑media posts, CEO Matt Karch responded to the accusations.
He asserted that Sacco was "replaced by someone more talented and terminated for a variety of reasons a few months later," and he added, "in retrospect I would have been happy to replace her with AI." Karch’s remarks were met with a mixture of disbelief and criticism from the gaming community, many of whom felt the comments trivialized the contributions of human writers and hinted at a willingness to prioritize cost‑saving technology over artistic integrity. During an episode of the podcast "This Week In Videogames," Karch further clarified his position, stating, "Stella who?
I had to ask Claude because I have never spoken to her or seen her." He explained 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 final feature set was locked down. Karch framed the AI integration as a benefit for consumers, describing the upcoming title as a "lower priced" offering where AI could help keep costs down while still delivering a satisfying experience. The controversy 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 own emotional reaction to the unfolding drama.
He admitted, "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 episode raises broader questions about the role of AI in creative industries, especially within video game development where narrative, dialogue, and world‑building have traditionally been the domain of human writers. While AI tools can accelerate content generation, they also risk eroding the nuanced voice and cultural sensitivity that seasoned writers bring to a project.
Critics argue that replacing a writer with a language model without clear communication or proper credit undermines professional standards and could set a troubling precedent for future productions. From a legal perspective, the situation touches on employment law and intellectual property rights. If a writer is terminated and their work is subsequently reproduced or altered by an AI, questions arise regarding ownership of the resulting text and whether the original creator is entitled to compensation or attribution. Some industry observers suggest that studios should develop transparent policies outlining when and how AI will be used, ensuring that all team members are aware of the technology's role and that any AI‑generated content is clearly labeled for consumers.
Consumer reaction has been mixed. Some players appreciate the potential cost savings and faster update cycles that AI could enable, especially for a budget title like Rideshare Simulator. Others worry that reliance on AI might lead to generic, repetitive dialogue, reduced emotional depth, and a lack of cultural authenticity.
The Steam disclaimer now serves as a point of information for buyers who wish to know exactly what they are purchasing, aligning with growing calls for greater transparency in the gaming market. Looking ahead, Saber Interactive has pledged to finalize its AI usage details and reflect those changes on the Steam page.
The company says it will continue to monitor community feedback and adjust its approach as needed. In the meantime, the episode serves as a cautionary tale for other developers navigating the balance between innovative technology and the human talent that has traditionally driven storytelling in games. Overall, the saga underscores the importance of clear communication, ethical decision‑making, and respect for creative professionals in an era where AI tools are becoming increasingly powerful and pervasive.
As the industry evolves, studios will need to find a sustainable path that leverages AI's strengths without compromising the artistic integrity and fair treatment of the people behind the games.