If a released Steam game now contains player-facing generative-AI content that its original disclosure did not describe, correct the game’s Steamworks Content Survey, under Generative Artificial Intelligence Content. Edit the answer when Steamworks still allows it. If the affected result is locked, contact Steam Support with a concise change summary, the result that is wrong, and instructions showing how a tester can reach the AI content. A store-page edit or a new build is a separate operation; neither one substitutes for correcting the survey. Valve’s current documentation distinguishes pre-generated content from live-generated content, and live generation requires an explanation of safeguards against illegal output. Valve’s Content Survey documentation is the controlling reference for the disclosure itself.
What should you update first?
Start by identifying exactly what changed and which Steamworks answer is now inaccurate. Do not begin by rewriting the store description or uploading a build. The disclosure question is about generative-AI content that players consume, either content made before release and shipped in the game or content generated while the game runs.
Make an inventory of the change
- List every new or altered player-facing asset or system that uses generative AI: artwork, audio, dialogue, narrative, localization, or another content type visible to players.
- Record whether the material was generated during development and packaged with the build, or generated at runtime in response to play.
- Note where a tester can encounter it, including the menu, level, quest, mode, account state, or other trigger required.
- Compare that inventory with the existing answer in the Content Survey’s Generative Artificial Intelligence Content section.
Use Valve’s categories rather than marketing language. A feature described as an AI assistant, procedural system, or smart tool may still need disclosure if it creates content players consume; conversely, an AI tool used only to improve a developer’s workflow is not the main subject of this survey section. Valve discusses these distinctions in its Content Survey guidance.
What is the difference between pre-generated and live-generated AI content?
Pre-generated content is created during development and shipped for players to consume. Live-generated content is created while the game is running. The timing matters because Valve asks for additional information about safeguards when a game can generate content live.
| Survey concept | When generation happens | What the player receives | Additional information |
|---|---|---|---|
| Pre-generated AI content | During development, before the relevant build is shipped | Packaged artwork, sound, narrative, localization, or other player-facing material | Describe the shipped use accurately in the survey |
| Live-generated AI content | While the game is running | Output produced during play, potentially in response to player input or game state | Explain the guardrails intended to prevent illegal content |
A game can involve both categories. For example, AI-created character portraits included in the install are pre-generated, while an in-game dialogue system that creates a new response during a session is live-generated. Describe each applicable use instead of selecting a category based on the product’s promotional wording.
What does not automatically answer the survey?
Valve acknowledges AI tools embedded in development environments, but says efficiency gains are not the focus of this disclosure section. If AI helped with code completion, test generation, asset organization, or another internal task and did not create content shipped to or generated for players, that fact alone does not establish a player-facing generative-AI disclosure. Document the boundary internally so that your answer remains precise.
How do you edit the Content Survey after the game is released?
Open the application’s Steamworks Content Survey and go to Generative Artificial Intelligence Content. Correct the relevant answer if the field is available for editing. Valve does not publish a universal, click-by-click list of post-approval permissions for every partner account, so the labels and editability you see in your account control the next step.
- Sign in with the partner account that manages the application. Open the game’s Steamworks administration area and select its Content Survey.
- Review the current AI disclosure. Read the existing answers before changing them. Identify the result that no longer matches the build or the content available to players.
- Select the accurate category or categories. Mark pre-generated, live-generated, or both as applicable. Describe what players can actually encounter, not an internal prototype that never shipped.
- Add live-generation safeguards when required. If the game generates content during play, explain the controls intended to prevent illegal output. State what the controls do and where they apply; do not imply that disclosure itself makes an output lawful.
- Save the survey change and note its status. If Steamworks accepts the edit, keep a record of the new answer and the build or content version it describes.
Some survey questions become uneditable after a build and store page have been approved, while others may remain available. Do not assume that every AI field is locked or that every field can always be changed directly. Valve’s FAQ includes the question, “I’ve updated content in my game, but I can’t update certain results in my survey?” and directs developers to support when an affected result cannot be changed. See the official Content Survey page for the current account-specific guidance.
What should you do when the survey result is locked?
If the result you need cannot be edited, contact Steam Support through the support link provided in Valve’s Content Survey documentation. Your request should give a reviewer enough information to locate the result and reproduce the change without guessing.
Include these three items
- A concise summary of what changed. Explain what was added, removed, or altered, when it became available, and whether it is pre-generated or live-generated.
- The affected survey result. Name the Generative Artificial Intelligence Content answer that is now inaccurate and state the correction you are requesting.
- Tester access instructions. Give step-by-step directions for reaching the content. Include prerequisites such as a branch, mode, save state, account entitlement, prompt, or sequence of actions when those are necessary.
Write the access instructions for a person who has not seen the feature. If the output is random, explain how to trigger a representative case and what the reviewer should look for. If the feature appears only after a patch, identify the build that contains it. The support form may redirect visitors who are not authenticated to sign in, so use the partner account that has access to the application. Valve does not publish a guaranteed turnaround time for a support-assisted survey correction; do not promise one to players or other teams.
A useful support-request format
Application: [your game's Steam app name and ID]
Change: [what AI-generated player content changed and when]
Survey result: [the Generative Artificial Intelligence Content answer that is incorrect]
Requested correction: [the accurate pre-generated/live-generated disclosure]
Tester access: [branch, build, menu path, trigger, and expected output]The bracketed text in this example is a template: replace it with your application’s actual information before submitting. Keep the request factual and specific; a link to a marketing page is not a substitute for access instructions.
Does the store-page description need a separate update?
Yes, when the public written description is incomplete or misleading. Editing the Content Survey does not automatically rewrite store copy, and changing store copy is not a documented substitute for correcting the survey.
- Open the application’s store-page editor in Steamworks.
- Change the relevant description, feature text, or disclosure statement.
- Preview the page and check that the wording matches the actual build and survey answer.
- Use the Publish tab to publish the edit.
Valve states that saved but unpublished store edits are not public and that, after publishing, changes to the store page appear immediately. That timing applies to the store-page publication itself; it does not establish a processing time for a support-assisted survey correction. The detailed workflow is in Store Page, Building and Editing.
Keep the public wording understandable without overstating the technology. Say whether content was generated before release or during play, what players can encounter, and any meaningful limits. Do not claim that a general statement such as “made with AI tools” covers a live system if the survey requires a more specific description.
When must you update the game build as well?
Update the build only when the underlying game content or implementation changed. A survey edit records the disclosure; it does not deploy files, alter a branch, or enable a runtime feature.
- Upload the changed build to Steamworks.
- Place it on a test branch and verify that the disclosed AI content and the access instructions work in that build.
- After the build is ready, set the selected build as the new default for players.
Valve describes this branch-testing and default-build process in Updating Game Build. Keep the build identifier and release notes with your disclosure records so that a support reviewer can distinguish the corrected version from an older public branch. If the game already contains the newly disclosed content and only the survey answer was wrong, do not upload a no-op build merely to make a disclosure change.
How do the three Steamworks workflows differ?
Use the workflow that matches the inaccurate item. In many cases you will use more than one, but each has a different result and publication path.
| What is inaccurate? | Workflow | Is Steam Support needed? | What becomes publicly verifiable? |
|---|---|---|---|
| Generative-AI disclosure answer | Edit the Content Survey’s Generative Artificial Intelligence Content section | Only if the affected result is locked | The account-side survey record after the correction is accepted; Valve does not promise a universal public processing time |
| Written store description | Edit the store-page editor, preview, then publish from the Publish tab | No ordinary support request is stated for a normal edit | The published store page; Valve says the change appears immediately after publishing |
| Game files or runtime behavior | Upload and test a build on a branch, then set the chosen build as default | Not for the deployment procedure itself | The build available to players on the relevant branch or default channel |
Do not use a public description as proof that the survey was corrected, or a successful build deployment as proof that the store copy changed. Check each surface separately.
How should you verify the disclosure after publishing?
Verification means checking that the live player experience, the public store page, and the Steamworks record tell the same story. It is not a promise that Valve has completed a new review or that a support ticket has been processed.
- Open the public store page and read the newly published wording as a customer would.
- Launch the build or branch that players receive and follow the access instructions you gave support.
- Confirm that the content is actually pre-generated, live-generated, or both as described.
- Check that runtime safeguards are present wherever live generation can produce output.
- Retain screenshots, build identifiers, and the final survey wording for your release records.
Valve says it compares survey answers with store-page and build content during its review. That consistency check is why a narrow, reproducible description is safer than a broad claim about every tool used during development. The review documentation is available in Content Survey.
What compliance limits still apply after disclosure?
Disclosure is not permission to ship unlawful, infringing, or otherwise disallowed material. Valve’s content rules apply independently of the answer you enter in the survey. Correcting the field can make the record more accurate, but it does not cure a prohibited output or replace moderation, rights clearance, or other compliance work.
Live-generation safeguards
For live-generated content, describe the guardrails intended to prevent illegal content. Depending on the implementation, that explanation may need to cover input filtering, output filtering, blocked categories, reporting or moderation controls, and the conditions under which generation is disabled. Only claim controls that exist in the shipped system and apply to the relevant output path.
Adult-only sexual content
Valve’s current Content Survey FAQ specifically says it does not want to ship Adult Only Sexual Content generated live by AI at this time. This is a specific restriction on that category and generation method. It is not evidence of a blanket ban on every AI-assisted asset or every game with adult themes, so do not broaden the statement beyond Valve’s wording.
Does an approved game need to go through the entire review process again?
Valve’s Review Process documentation says an approved game generally does not repeat its initial review for ordinary updates. That general statement should be read alongside the Content Survey instruction to contact support when a post-approval survey result is locked. It does not guarantee a particular outcome, review path, or turnaround for an AI-disclosure correction.
Describe the change honestly and let Steam Support determine the account-specific handling. Avoid promising that a correction will be automatic, immediate, or exempt from any additional review Valve considers necessary.
What common mistakes cause disclosure updates to fail?
- Updating only the store page. Public copy does not replace the Content Survey answer.
- Assuming every field is locked. Check whether the relevant result is editable before opening a support request.
- Assuming every field is editable. If Steamworks prevents the correction, follow the support route rather than repeatedly saving an unchanged form.
- Calling development tools player content. The survey focuses on content shipped to or generated for players, not efficiency gains in an internal toolchain.
- Omitting live-output safeguards. Live generation has an additional requirement to explain protections against illegal content.
- Giving vague tester instructions. A reviewer needs the exact branch, build, trigger, and expected result.
- Treating a survey edit as a build release. Disclosure, store publication, and binary deployment are separate operations.
- Overpromising timing. Store-page publication has documented immediate visibility after publishing; support-assisted survey changes have no published universal SLA.
- Assuming disclosure makes content acceptable. Steam’s content rules continue to apply.
What is the safest order of operations?
For a change that affects both content and disclosure, use this sequence:
- Inventory the player-facing AI content and classify when it is generated.
- Identify the inaccurate Content Survey result.
- Update the survey if Steamworks permits editing; otherwise prepare the three-part support request.
- Update and publish the store description if customers need a written explanation.
- Upload, branch-test, and deploy a new build only if the implementation changed.
- Check the public page and the player-accessible content against the corrected record.
This order prevents a common mismatch: a public announcement describing a feature whose survey answer is still wrong, or a survey correction that refers to a build players cannot access.
What should you keep in your release records?
Keep the original and corrected survey wording, the date of the change, the relevant app and build identifiers, screenshots of the player path, the store-page publication status, and any Steam Support ticket correspondence. These records make later updates easier when a feature moves from pre-generated assets to runtime generation or when access conditions change.
Store the tester path in the same place as the build information. If a feature requires a special prompt, account flag, branch, or save file, record those prerequisites explicitly rather than relying on a developer’s memory. A future correction is much faster when another person can reproduce the exact player-facing behavior.
Frequently Asked Questions
Will changing the store description automatically change Steam’s AI disclosure?
No. The store editor controls public copy, while the Generative Artificial Intelligence Content answer belongs to the Steamworks Content Survey. Update both when both are inaccurate, and publish the store edit separately.
What if my AI feature is available only on a beta branch?
Describe the content and give Steam Support the branch name and build needed to reach it if the affected survey result is locked. Keep the survey, store wording, and branch availability aligned so a tester does not search the default build for a feature that exists only in testing.
Do I have to disclose AI that generated placeholder assets that never shipped?
The relevant question is what players can consume in the shipped or running game. Internal experiments and discarded placeholders do not by themselves establish player-facing generative-AI content, but retain your inventory so you can explain the boundary if asked.
Can I wait to add safeguards until after I submit the survey correction?
Do not present safeguards as a future promise. For live-generated output, describe controls that are implemented for the content a tester can access, and verify that those controls cover the actual runtime path.
Where can I find Valve’s current wording if the Steamworks screen differs from an older guide?
Use Valve’s Content Survey documentation in Steamworks, which is the primary reference for the categories, locked-result support procedure, and live-generation requirement. Account permissions and interface details can change, so follow the labels and instructions shown for your partner account.