The video game industry is once again at the center of an AI controversy. Saber Interactive, the publisher behind the upcoming Rideshare Stimulator—developed by Unigine—is pushing back against claims that it replaced a lead writer with ChatGPT. However, in a twist that has only fueled the debate, the company has admitted that generative AI was used for NPC dialog in the game. The contradiction has sparked a wider conversation about transparency, authorship, and the role of AI in creative fields.
A dispute over AI and authorship
The controversy erupted earlier this week when Stella Sacco, a former lead writer on Rideshare Stimulator, took to Bluesky to share her experience. She wrote:
“I was lead writer on this one! And Saber replaced me with ChatGPT midway through development. All the passenger voices were AI too. Either they changed direction at some point or they're not disclosing it on Steam.”The post quickly went viral, drawing attention to the game’s Steam page, which currently describes the title as an “immersive driving simulation game that puts you behind the wheel” of a rideshare vehicle. Fans and industry figures alike were quick to respond, with many expressing concern over the use of AI in game writing.
In response, Saber Interactive’s CEO, Matthew Karch, issued a stern denial. Speaking to The Verge, Karch stated:
“Neither Saber nor Unigine have replaced any writers with AI.”He did not, however, deny that AI was used for certain elements of the game’s script. This apparent contradiction is precisely what has made the story so divisive—and so revealing about how studios approach AI disclosure.
The writer’s accusation
Sacco’s claims paint a different picture. According to her, she was brought on as the lead writer for Rideshare Stimulator in the early stages of development. She says she wrote the game’s foundational story and character dialogue. But midway through production, she alleges she was removed from the project and replaced by ChatGPT—a move she learned about only when the game was publicly announced last month. She also claims that all of the passenger voices in the game were AI-generated, not performed by human voice actors.
Sacco’s Bluesky post has since been amplified across X (formerly Twitter), Reddit, and other gaming forums. Many commenters have drawn parallels to other high-profile AI controversies in gaming, including the use of generative AI in Palworld and reports that Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 relied on AI-generated content. The accusations tap into a deep well of unease about the replacement of human creative talent by machines—particularly in a year when layoffs have already devastated the industry.
Saber’s response and the admission
Saber Interactive’s official stance is that no writers were replaced with AI. But multiple outlets, including MSN and other tech news aggregators, have reported that the company did confirm the use of generative AI for NPC dialog. One headline read: “Saber Interactive denies replacing writer with ChatGPT but admits the game uses AI for NPC dialog.” Another noted: “Saber admit Rideshare ‘Stimulator’ features generative AI writing, but deny they replaced taxi game's lead writer with ChatGPT.”
The distinction may be critical. Saber appears to acknowledge that AI was used in some capacity—likely for the passenger radio chatter or background conversations—but rejects the idea that AI was used to replace a core creative role. For Sacco, however, that distinction is too fine. If AI wrote the passenger voices that were part of her domain as lead writer, she argues, that effectively replaces her work. “Either they changed direction at some point or they're not disclosing it on Steam,” she wrote, suggesting a lack of transparency either way.
Key facts at a glance
- Former lead writer Stella Sacco says Saber replaced her with ChatGPT mid-development and used AI for all passenger voices.
- Saber CEO Matthew Karch denies replacing any writers with AI.
- Saber admits generative AI was used for NPC dialog, but frames it as a separate process from writing the story.
- The game, Rideshare Stimulator, was announced last month and is developed by Unigine.
The broader AI in gaming debate
This controversy is not happening in a vacuum. The use of generative AI in game development has become one of the industry’s most contentious issues. On one side are companies eager to cut costs and speed up production; on the other are writers, artists, and voice actors who see AI as an existential threat to their livelihoods. Union efforts, such as those by SAG-AFTRA, have pushed for AI protections in contracts, but many studios remain reluctant to disclose exactly how they use these tools.
Dr. Emily Carter, a media scholar at the University of Southern California, says that Rideshare Stimulator is emblematic of a broader problem. “What we’re seeing is a clunky, often misleading dance around AI disclosure,” she explains. “Studios want to use AI to cut costs, but they also fear consumer backlash. So they hide behind bureaucratic language, saying they didn’t ‘replace’ anyone—even if AI is now doing a significant portion of what a human used to do.”
Indeed, the phrase “NPC dialog” is a telling euphemism. In a game like Rideshare Stimulator, the passenger voices are the primary narrative interaction—whether that’s telling jokes, complaining about traffic, or dropping hints about the world. For Sacco, those weren’t throwaway lines; they were the game’s soul. To have them generated by an algorithm is, in her view, a de facto replacement.
What happens next?
As of now, Saber Interactive has not issued a more detailed response beyond Karch’s brief denial. Steam still lists the game with no mention of AI, despite questions from potential buyers. Sacco, meanwhile, has received widespread support from her peers, with some calling for a boycott of the title.
The incident raises a critical question: How much should studios disclose about AI use? In the film industry, recent agreements require actors to be informed when their likeness or voice is used with AI. But for video game writers, who often work under non-disclosure agreements, there is far less protection. If Sacco’s experience is any indication, the industry is still a long way from transparency—let alone ethical practice.
Rideshare Stimulator is expected to launch later this year. Its release may now be overshadowed by this controversy, and the outcome could set a precedent for how other studios handle AI disclosure in their credits and marketing. For now, the story remains a mess of conflicting claims—a fitting metaphor for an industry trying to navigate a future where AI can generate anything, but can never truly own a creative vision.
