Valve updated Steam’s rules for disclosing AI use — here’s what actually changed

Valve has quietly rewritten and clarified Steam’s AI disclosure requirements, tightening the focus on player-facing AI-generated content while explicitly de-emphasizing “AI-powered tools” used only for workflow efficiency (think: coding assistants, office tooling, internal concept iterations that never ship).

This matters because, in practice, “AI is everywhere” now: it’s embedded in art tools, IDEs, editors, and productivity software. Developers were increasingly unsure what Valve expected them to disclose—especially when AI was used in ways players never see. Valve’s update is essentially Steam drawing a bright line: disclose AI that ends up in the shipped experience or in public-facing materials, not the invisible stuff.

The key shift: “consumed by players”

The most important wording change is that Valve’s disclosure is now centered around AI-generated content that ships with the game and is consumed by players—including store page and marketing/community assets associated with the product.

In other words:

If you used AI to help write internal notes, brainstorm, debug, or generate throwaway concept art that never ships — that’s not the focus of the disclosure anymore.
If AI-generated output shows up in-game (art, audio, narrative text, etc.) or in public-facing promotional materials — you disclose it.

This isn’t Valve “going easy” on AI. It’s Valve trying to make the rule enforceable and meaningful for consumers, instead of forcing devs to declare every background efficiency tool in modern production pipelines.

Steam’s disclosure still has two main buckets

Valve continues to organize AI disclosure around two categories that show up in Steamworks documentation and the submission process:

Pre-Generated AI content
Content created with the help of AI tools during development—for example: art assets, sound, text, code, etc. If that AI-assisted output ends up in the final product (or shipped materials), you disclose it, and Valve reviews it like any other content.
Live-Generated AI content
Content created while the game is running—for example, a game that generates text, images, audio, or other assets dynamically through an AI system during gameplay. This comes with extra requirements, because the output can change at runtime.

The big “Live-Generated” enforcement angle: guardrails

For live-generated AI, Valve’s stance is basically: “If your game can generate content while players are playing, you must show us you’re controlling it.”

Valve requires developers to describe the guardrails that prevent AI systems from producing illegal or infringing content (and generally content that shouldn’t reach players).

This part is not optional or “nice to have.” Valve is placing responsibility on the developer to ensure runtime generation doesn’t become an unmoderated pipeline for harmful or illegal output.

Valve also added a player reporting flow in the Steam Overlay

One of the more practical additions (and the one most players will actually notice) is a Steam Overlay reporting mechanism designed specifically for games that include live-generated AI.

If a player encounters AI-generated content they believe should have been blocked by guardrails, the overlay makes it easier to report it. This is Valve adding an enforcement feedback loop: the platform doesn’t just rely on developers promising they have safeguards—it also gives players a way to flag failures.

What shows up to customers on Steam?

Valve’s disclosure feeds into the “AI Generated Content Disclosure” area on a game’s store page (as covered by multiple outlets).

That means consumers can see whether a game includes AI-generated elements, without needing to decode vague marketing language. The entire idea is: transparency without banning.

Why Valve tweaked the language now

The timing isn’t random. There’s been a loud industry debate over whether AI labels help consumers or just stigmatize tools that will soon be universal. Epic’s Tim Sweeney, for example, has argued that “made with AI” labels are becoming meaningless as AI becomes embedded in everything.

Valve’s update looks like a pragmatic response to that reality: it keeps the disclosure system, but narrows it toward what the player actually experiences—which is the only definition that scales long-term.

What this means for developers

If you’re publishing on Steam, the safe mental model is:

Did AI generate something players will see/hear/read/play?
→ Disclose it.
Did AI generate content during gameplay?
→ Disclose it and explain guardrails.
Did you use AI only for internal efficiency (coding helper, internal drafts, private concept art that doesn’t ship)?
→ Valve is signaling that this is not the focus of the disclosure.

Importantly, Valve still expects developers to comply with broader Steam content rules and the usual IP / legality expectations. AI doesn’t get special permission—it gets special scrutiny where it affects the shipped product.