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 heated dispute erupted over claims that the company had dismissed a writer in favor of AI‑generated text. The notice, now visible to anyone browsing the game’s page, acknowledges the use of AI in the project and promises further updates once the development team finalises the specific features that rely on machine‑learning tools. The controversy began when former Saber employee Stella Sacco, who served as the lead writer on Rideshare from July 2023 until July 2024, publicly alleged that she was removed from the project midway through production and that her responsibilities were handed over to ChatGPT. Sacco also suggested that other, as‑yet‑unrevealed, AI technologies had been employed throughout the game’s creation, raising questions about transparency, authorship, and the ethical treatment of creative staff.
In a series of statements, Saber’s chief executive officer, Matt Karch, responded to the accusations. He claimed that Sacco had been "replaced by someone more talented and terminated for a variety of reasons a few months later," and added, in hindsight, that he "would have been happy to replace her with AI." Karch’s remarks were captured in an interview with the YouTube channel This Week In Videogames, where he admitted, "Stella who? I had to ask Claude because I have never spoken to her or seen her." Karch also tried to frame the use of artificial‑intelligence tools as a consumer benefit. "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," he said.
"We look at our use of AI in this particular game, which will be a lower‑priced title, as a plus for consumers." The implication was that AI could lower development costs and potentially translate into a lower price point for players, a narrative that many in the industry have debated. The situation escalated further 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, for his part, issued a separate public comment on LinkedIn, where he reflected on his own behaviour. "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 wrote.
"It happens and I am a human being. I have done what I can to rectify." The exchange highlights several broader industry trends. First, the growing reliance on AI for content generation—from dialogue and quest design to marketing copy—has sparked a debate about the role of human writers and the standards of attribution.
While some studios tout AI as a tool that can accelerate production and reduce costs, others worry that it may marginalise creative talent, especially when decisions about staffing are made without clear communication. Second, the incident underscores the importance of transparency on digital distribution platforms.
Steam, as one of the largest storefronts for PC games, now hosts the disclaimer, signalling that developers are being pressured to disclose AI involvement. This mirrors moves by other platforms that have begun to require clear labeling when AI‑generated assets are used, aiming to give consumers informed choice.
Third, the personal dimension of the dispute—Karch’s admission of an impulsive reaction and Sacco’s cautious acceptance of an apology—illustrates how quickly professional disagreements can become public and emotionally charged in the age of social media. Both parties appear to be navigating a path toward resolution, though the specifics remain vague. For players and observers, the practical impact may be limited to the presence of the disclaimer and any subsequent updates that clarify which parts of Rideshare Simulator are AI‑assisted. However, the episode serves as a case study in how emerging technologies can intersect with traditional creative roles, and how companies must manage both internal personnel matters and external perception.
Looking ahead, Saber Interactive has indicated that it will continue to refine its AI usage policy and will provide more detailed information on the Steam page once the feature set is locked. Whether this will satisfy critics or set a new standard for disclosure remains to be seen.
Meanwhile, the dialogue between Karch and Sacco, though fraught, may pave the way for more thoughtful conversations about the balance between human craftsmanship and machine assistance in game development. In summary, Saber Interactive’s addition of an AI disclaimer to Rideshare Simulator’s Steam listing follows a contentious public dispute involving former lead writer Stella Sacco, accusations of AI replacement, and a series of apologies and explanations from CEO Matt Karch. The episode reflects larger industry questions about AI transparency, the treatment of creative staff, and the evolving expectations of gamers regarding the technologies behind their favorite titles.