Epic Games CEO criticizes Steam's AI disclosure requirements

The conflict over AI labels

Epic Games CEO Tim Sweeney has publicly criticized the disclosure policies implemented by Steam, the major PC gaming storefront. Sweeney described the requirement as "abhorrent" in a recent post on X, where he engaged with critics of the current regulatory landscape. The disagreement centers on how developers should report the use of generative AI in their production pipelines.

The friction comes at a time when Epic Games has been overhauling its own storefront. While Epic has disclosed that its new store was "vibe-coded" to encourage AI use in its internal workflows, it has taken a different stance on public labeling. This creates a notable contrast between the two largest platforms in the PC gaming space.

As reported by Mezha.net, Sweeney's criticism is a direct response to the rules set by Valve. He argues that the current system puts creators in a difficult position by forcing them to admit to using tools that may be unpopular with certain segments of the gaming community.

How Steam's policy works

Valve began asking studios and developers to disclose the use of generative AI in their workflows starting in 2024. The policy is specific about what types of content require a label. Developers must notify players if they use AI to generate assets, music, mechanics, text, or marketing materials.

However, the policy does not cover every aspect of game development. Valve has clarified that developers are no longer required to disclose which specific tools they use to assist with coding. This distinction suggests that the platform is more concerned with the final output and consumer-facing content than the underlying technical infrastructure.

These disclosures have quickly become a standard part of the Steam ecosystem. The prevalence of these labels is already evident in major events, such as the Steam Next Fest. During that event, nearly 1,700 out of more than 8,600 demos featured the mandatory AI disclosure label.

The developer's dilemma

Sweeney's primary concern is that these labels act as a magnet for criticism. He suggests that the requirement forces developers to write what he calls a "political statement" that can be used against them by a "hate mob." This reflects a fear that transparency might lead to a backlash from players who oppose the use of generative AI in art and media.

The debate is complicated by the fact that many studios use AI in ways that are separate from creative ideation. Some developers view AI as a tool for efficiency, while others argue that its use in content development can undermine the human element of the creative process. This divide makes it difficult to establish a universal standard for what constitutes "fair" use.

Despite the controversy, several high-profile and successful games have already included these disclosures. Titles such as Arc Raiders and Clair Obscur: Expedition 33 reached significant success while carrying the label. This suggests that, for now, the policy is being followed by major studios regardless of the industry's internal debates.

Platform competition and friction

The tension between Epic and Valve is part of a broader competition for dominance in the gaming market. Epic has recently focused on performance, claiming its revamped storefront launches in 5.47 seconds compared to Steam's 10-second boot time. However, the Epic Games Store has faced its own hurdles, with some users reporting bugs that the company has yet to resolve.

Valve has maintained a relatively quiet stance regarding Sweeney's repeated criticisms. This includes not only the AI disclosure debate but also other points of contention, such as the recent price increase for the Steam Deck. While Epic pushes for a more AI-friendly environment, Valve continues to enforce its existing transparency requirements.

The industry is watching to see if these policies will evolve as generative AI becomes more integrated into standard production. If the "hate mob" Sweeney describes continues to target developers, platforms may face pressure to either loosen disclosure rules or find a way to balance transparency with developer protection.