Steam’s Evolving Approach to AI Transparency

Slowly but surely, beyond concerns such as hardware shortages and environmental impact, artificial intelligence has become an inseparable part of modern life. Video games are no exception. As AI tools move from experimental novelty to everyday utility, platform holders are now being forced to reassess how transparency should work in practice.

Valve has begun doing exactly that on Steam. Once known for a firm stance on AI disclosure, the world’s largest PC game storefront has quietly adjusted its policy, reflecting how deeply AI has embedded itself into modern development pipelines.

Rather than abandoning transparency altogether, Steam’s revised approach draws a clearer line between AI as a creative output and AI as a productivity tool. That distinction signals an important shift in how the industry now views the technology.

Steam’s Original AI Disclosure Policy

When generative AI tools first surged in popularity across game development, Steam implemented a disclosure requirement that was broadly welcomed by players. Developers were required to clearly state whether AI had been used during production, with this information made visible directly on each game’s store page.

At the time, the policy aligned with growing player concerns around creative labour, authorship, and the replacement of human work by automated systems. Transparency was framed as a way to empower consumers to make informed decisions about the games they were buying.

This early stance positioned Steam as one of the more proactive platform holders in AI governance, particularly compared to storefronts that offered little clarity about how AI was being deployed.

Policy Shift as AI Usage Becomes Normalised

As AI tools have become more commonplace and increasingly invisible in day-to-day workflows, Steam has begun to refine its position. Updated submission forms now indicate that developers are only required to disclose AI usage if AI-generated assets appear in the final product that players experience.

In practical terms, this means disclosure is tied to what reaches the consumer rather than everything that happens during development. AI use must now be declared only when it has a direct impact on visible or audible content within the game or its store presence.

The adjustment suggests that Valve recognises AI is no longer a defining feature of a project by default, but is often a background efficiency tool, similar to middleware, engines, or automated testing systems.

What No Longer Needs to Be Disclosed on Steam

Under the revised guidelines, developers no longer need to publicly disclose AI usage when it is limited to internal processes. This includes tasks such as project planning, scheduling, code assistance, bug fixing, optimisation, and other development support functions.

For many studios, especially smaller teams, these tools have become standard productivity aids rather than creative replacements. By removing the requirement to disclose this kind of use, Steam appears to be reducing friction for developers while avoiding player disclosure fatigue.

The change also reflects a broader industry acknowledgement that AI-assisted development does not automatically equate to AI-generated content.

What Still Requires AI Disclosure

Steam’s transparency requirements remain firmly in place for any AI-generated assets that reach players. Developers must still disclose the use of generative AI for visuals, music, voice work, localisation, narrative content, or marketing materials that appear on a game’s store page.

Any AI-generated content that shapes the consumer-facing experience must be clearly communicated to consumers. From a player-trust perspective, this remains the most relevant distinction, as it directly affects a game’s artistic and experiential qualities.

Rather than loosening oversight entirely, Steam’s updated policy reframes AI disclosure around player impact, a move that may influence how other platforms approach AI governance moving forward.