Saber Interactive CEO Matt Karch apologized to former Rideshare "Simulator" lead writer Stella Sacco after a week of public statements in which he questioned whether she worked on the game and defended the company's use of generative AI. Sacco posted on social media that Karch sent her a lengthy email apologizing "unreservedly for the awful way he spoke about me in the press," bringing a likely end to a controversy that began when Sacco said the company replaced her with ChatGPT without disclosing it to players.
The dispute started after Saber released the announcement trailer for its upcoming game Rideshare "Simulator." Sacco, who was the lead writer on the project, posted that the company had let her go in favor of AI and was not disclosing the practice on the game's Steam page. Saber initially issued a boilerplate denial, then Karch personally responded with a mocking refutation that read, "Stella who?" He added, "I had to ask Claude because I have never spoken to her or seen her." Giant Bomb performed a dramatic reading of the response.
A public flameout, then a retraction
Saber eventually updated the game's Steam page to include an AI disclaimer, revealing that much of the voice work, music, and non-campaign mission dialogue had been generated. Even after that, Karch's bombardment of challenger statements continued and began to distract from the game itself. The apology email to Sacco marked a sharp turn in that pattern.
"Last night, to my great surprise, I received a long email from Saber Interactive CEO Matt Karch," Sacco Singh posted. "He apologized unreservedly for the awful way he spoke about me in the press. The full text will stay between us. Thank you Matt; you know how important this is to me."
Sacco also addressed the possibility of a private Settlement: "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." She said she hoped her statement would be the final one she needs to make about the ordeal.
Why this matters for writers
For writers who may be the next to joust with an AI-era dispute, Sacco's story is a test case and a warning. The noracked attempts to replace a writer's labor with tools like ChatGPT are not new, but the public tussle over the Steam disclosure shows how quickly a "That's just how it is" response can spiral once the union-oriented public gets involved. The fact that Sacho won a controlled agreement - rather than a standoff with a PR storm - suggests that a clear, documented record of who did what work, and a ground rule of what "AI isn't going to declare" can be enough to get a CEO to rethink a position.
That's not necessarily a victory for every writer. But the writing profession's nearest drumbeat analog to the situation underlines one concrete point: a well-crafted, newsworthy position is a writer's own best protection. And if a company values a critique from the public more than it does ethically from a featured lead writer? That, too, is information you want to know, in the held, the best way to get out in front of the first AI disclaimer.
Your membership also unlocks:
