Epic Games chief Tim Sweeney has renewed his criticism of Steam’s requirement for developers to disclose when generative AI was used in a game, describing the policy as an “abhorrent” political statement.
His latest comments followed a post from Matt Workman, who called AI disclosure requirements absurd in 2026 and embarrassing for Valve. Sweeney agreed with the criticism in a post on October 23, 2026.
“Forcing developers to write a political statement to be used against them by the hate mob they’re helping organize is abhorrent.”
The dispute is particularly notable because Epic is also promoting AI-focused development. Earlier this month, Sweeney reportedly told staff that the company would move towards AI-first development for an upcoming Disney shooter, following significant layoffs that affected around 1,000 employees.
Sweeney’s comments also arrive after an attempted comparison between Epic Games Store and Steam. Epic released an updated, “vibe-coded” version of its storefront, which Sweeney said operated considerably faster than Steam. Valve then released an update that reportedly outperformed it before Epic’s comparison could gain much traction.
What Steam’s disclosure policy covers
Steam has already narrowed the scope of its disclosure requirements. This year removing the need to declare AI use in code, Valve now focuses on generative AI used for assets, voiceovers, translations and similar content.
The disclosure appears in the lower section of a game’s store page alongside other information, including content warnings. Sweeney argues that these notices can encourage “hate mobs” to target developers and harm their businesses.
“There is a real economic cost to Valve’s foray into forced political disclosures,” Sweeney wrote, arguing that the policy could undermine developers’ revenue and livelihoods.
That claim remains hypothetical in the available comments. Sweeney has not provided evidence showing that Steam’s AI notices have caused a measurable loss of sales or income for developers.
Critics of generative AI, meanwhile, object to its environmental impact, training practices and potential use of unlicensed creative work. A disclosure gives customers information about how a game was made, allowing them to decide whether that matters to their purchase.
Epic’s rival storefront remains part of the argument
Sweeney’s position is also shaped by Epic’s long-running competition with Steam. Epic Games Store takes no revenue share until a game reaches US$1 million in sales, then charges 12 percent. Steam traditionally takes 30 percent from the first sale.
Despite that more generous headline split, Epic’s storefront has struggled to match Steam’s reach, convenience and established ecosystem. Sweeney has argued that the PC market needs a stronger rival to Valve, whose dominant position gives it substantial influence over developers and their income.
For readers interested in how gaming hardware and software ecosystems evolve, the RETROCADE Arcade Blog covers broader arcade and gaming news. Those building a dedicated setup can also explore the Arcade Machine Buying Guide or browse arcade machines.
Epic’s Fab platform has a different disclosure rationale
Another developer challenged Sweeney over AI disclosures on Fab, Epic’s business-to-business marketplace for digital assets. Sweeney responded on October 25, 2026 that Fab customers often work under contracts requiring them to establish the provenance of content used in their games.
“This is a business to business marketplace,” Sweeney wrote. “Many Fab customers are operating under contracts that require them to understand the provenance of all content in their game.”
He added that customers cannot purchase assets without that information, citing Steam’s own contractual requirements as part of the explanation.
The distinction Sweeney draws is that Fab disclosures support commercial due diligence, while Steam’s notices are presented to consumers. Whether that difference justifies opposing one system while supporting the other will remain part of the debate over AI transparency in games.
As AI-generated content becomes more common across digital games and creative marketplaces, disclosure policies are likely to remain controversial. For arcade operators and home players planning a physical setup, the practical questions are more familiar: reliable arcade parts, suitable controls and hardware that can be maintained over time.
Leave a Reply