After a public scrap between CEO and former writer, Saber Interactive finally adds AI disclaimer to Steam page and doubles down: ‘AI can and should help shape gamer experiences’

Steelman: both sides, in good faith

The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.

The case for

Generative AI offers developers a practical solution for creating vast amounts of variable content—in this case, NPC interactions—that would be economically unfeasible to produce manually. The company argues that deploying such technology as a tool enhances games without necessarily displacing core creative roles; the game's narrative framework remains human-written. The addition of transparency through the Steam disclaimer demonstrates appropriate responsiveness to disclosure concerns, and treating AI as simply another tool in development's technological toolkit is consistent with how other labour-saving innovations have been absorbed into the industry.

The case against

The company's initial failure to disclose AI use, correcting course only after public pressure from a displaced writer, suggests the practice sits uneasily with industry norms and ethics. Beyond this particular game, critics argue that using AI trained on human creative output to reduce or eliminate writing roles raises fundamental questions about labour displacement, fair compensation, and professional dignity. The systemic risk is that creative workers face wage pressure and job losses whilst companies capture efficiency gains, without corresponding protections or transition support—a pattern that threatens the sustainability of creative professions across the industry.