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. This move comes after a heated dispute erupted when a former employee, writer Stella Sacco, claimed that she was removed from the project midway and that her responsibilities were taken over by a generative AI tool, specifically ChatGPT. Sacco’s allegations also hinted at broader, undisclosed AI involvement throughout the creation of the simulation, prompting both community backlash and internal reflection at the studio.
The full text of the new AI 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." In the wake of these statements, CEO Matt Karch publicly addressed the controversy. 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 reflection: "in retrospect I would have been happy to replace her with AI." Karch’s remarks were delivered during an interview with the podcast This Week In Videogames, where he appeared both defensive and apologetic.
He admitted, "Stella who? I had to ask Claude because I have never spoken to her or seen her," underscoring his apparent lack of direct interaction with the writer in question. Karch went on to explain that the studio had already been transparent about employing AI for certain aspects of the game.
He promised to update the Steam page once the final feature set was locked down, emphasizing that the AI components were intended to benefit consumers, especially given that Rideshare Simulator is positioned as a lower‑priced title. "We look at our use of AI in this particular game, which will be a lower priced title, as a plus for consumers," he said, framing the technology as a cost‑saving measure that could potentially enhance the player experience. The controversy took another turn when Sacco posted on the social network BlueSky over the weekend, stating 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." This public acknowledgment of an apology added a layer of nuance to the dispute, suggesting that while the relationship remained strained, there was at least a willingness on both sides to move toward resolution. Karch also issued a separate statement on LinkedIn, where he reflected on his own conduct.
"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," he confessed. "It happens and I am a human being. I have done what I can to rectify." By framing his reaction as an impulsive, emotionally driven response, Karch attempted to humanize his mistake while also signaling that corrective actions were already underway.
The broader industry context is worth noting. The use of AI-generated text, art, and code has surged across game development in recent years, prompting heated debates about authorship, ethics, and labor practices. Some studios have embraced AI as a productivity booster, while others have faced accusations of replacing human talent with algorithms. In the case of Saber Interactive, the controversy highlights the tension between cost efficiency and the perceived value of human creativity.
Critics argue that dismissing a writer in favor of a language model undermines the craft of narrative design and sets a dangerous precedent for future hiring practices. From a consumer perspective, the inclusion of an AI disclaimer on the Steam page is a step toward transparency.
Gamers increasingly demand to know how much of a game's content is generated by machines versus human creators. By openly acknowledging the role of AI, Saber aims to preempt further accusations of secrecy and to align with emerging industry standards that call for clear labeling of AI‑generated assets. Looking ahead, several possible outcomes could shape the resolution of this dispute.
First, Saber may choose to reinstate Sacco in some capacity, perhaps as a consultant, to address any gaps in the narrative that the AI may have left. Second, the studio could refine its internal policies regarding AI usage, establishing guidelines that balance efficiency with respect for human contributors.
Third, the broader gaming community may push for regulatory frameworks that require explicit disclosure of AI involvement, similar to labeling laws in other media sectors. In any case, the episode serves as a cautionary tale for developers navigating the rapidly evolving landscape of generative technology.
While AI can accelerate production and reduce costs, it also raises ethical questions about employment, artistic integrity, and consumer trust. Companies that handle these issues with openness and a willingness to engage with affected staff are more likely to maintain goodwill among both their workforce and their audience.
Ultimately, the saga at Saber Interactive underscores a pivotal moment in the industry: the need to define how artificial intelligence fits into the creative process without eroding the human contributions that have long defined video game storytelling. As the conversation continues, both developers and players will be watching closely to see how the balance is struck, and whether apologies, like the one offered by Matt Karch, translate into lasting change.