shinchan0s wrote on Jul 27, 2024, 09:11:
BG3 showed everyone what really great VAs can do so I'm very sympathetic, but, man, the writing's on the wall. Whatever concessions the union gets is going to be very temporary. Even if VAs manage to license their voices for AI use - it's going to get stolen and recreated very easily.

I agree about BG3, except for Asterion's VA. I swear, that goddamn Asterion cult like it's the best VA ever existed. If I ever play the game again and can let go of the completionist obsession, Asterion is the first to die. Fucking Stewie Griffin. Do I feel too much hate about this? Yes. And I'm completely aware of it. I'm just allowing it to flow free 😂

shinchan0s wrote on Jul 27, 2024, 09:11:
BG3 showed everyone what really great VAs can do so I'm very sympathetic, but, man, the writing's on the wall. Whatever concessions the union gets is going to be very temporary. Even if VAs manage to license their voices for AI use - it's going to get stolen and recreated very easily.

There's a reason for this timing

BG3 showed everyone what really great VAs can do so I'm very sympathetic, but, man, the writing's on the wall. Whatever concessions the union gets is going to be very temporary. Even if VAs manage to license their voices for AI use - it's going to get stolen and recreated very easily.

Cutter wrote on Jul 26, 2024, 18:44:

Overon wrote on Jul 26, 2024, 14:07:

Cutter wrote on Jul 25, 2024, 21:06:

and the public supports us in that....

We do? Is there some particular reason we should? Seems to me that this should be a boon for small and medium sized developers who can't afford to be held hostage by a union and result in cheaper games for consumers. They're marching right into the unemployment line and then oblivion. Don't worry the Lamplighters guild and Horse and Buggy guild are both with you!

Yes it's all about giving customers lower prices not pocketing the higher profit margin. It all trickles down as we all know.

For smaller companies who want to establish themselves? Your fuckin A' it does. And regardless, no one should be held hostage by unions and their demands. I grant you every right to unionize and I expect in return to have every right not to use your union.

Vicky Valentine: I'm sorry, Lisa, but giving everyone an equal part when they're clearly not equal is called what again, class?
The Class: Communism!
Vicky Valentine: That's right. And I didn't tap all those Morse code messages to the allies 'till my shoes filled with blood just to roll out the welcome mat for the reds.

You are right and nobody should be held hostage by corporations and their demands. Welcome aboard Comrade Cutter.

This comment was edited on Jul 30, 2024, 02:25.

Overon wrote on Jul 26, 2024, 14:07:

Cutter wrote on Jul 25, 2024, 21:06:

and the public supports us in that....

We do? Is there some particular reason we should? Seems to me that this should be a boon for small and medium sized developers who can't afford to be held hostage by a union and result in cheaper games for consumers. They're marching right into the unemployment line and then oblivion. Don't worry the Lamplighters guild and Horse and Buggy guild are both with you!

Yes it's all about giving customers lower prices not pocketing the higher profit margin. It all trickles down as we all know.

For smaller companies who want to establish themselves? Your fuckin A' it does. And regardless, no one should be held hostage by unions and their demands. I grant you every right to unionize and I expect in return to have every right not to use your union.

Vicky Valentine: I'm sorry, Lisa, but giving everyone an equal part when they're clearly not equal is called what again, class?
The Class: Communism!
Vicky Valentine: That's right. And I didn't tap all those Morse code messages to the allies 'till my shoes filled with blood just to roll out the welcome mat for the reds.

jacobvandy wrote on Jul 26, 2024, 13:06:
Incorrect, AI text-to-speech right now is already lightweight enough that it could be installed along with a game and run locally in very close to real-time. I have toyed with an open-source generalized model that uses about 1GB RAM and 2GB VRAM, but they could pare it down to a fraction of that footprint for more specific usage. Then about 6 months ago, it took about as long to generate as the length of the resulting audio clip, but that's constantly improving, as well as the quality of the voice. You don't need AI to stitch together a dynamic script to feed into that, however if you really wanted to, they have competent models now that are small enough to run in real-time on your phone, nevermind a gaming PC.

I'm not saying it'd be trivial to implement, but the tech for this is already here, and it'll only become more efficient and effective in the near future.

Or do it Moonbase Alpha style in only a few hundred KB.

Cutter wrote on Jul 25, 2024, 21:06:

and the public supports us in that....

We do? Is there some particular reason we should? Seems to me that this should be a boon for small and medium sized developers who can't afford to be held hostage by a union and result in cheaper games for consumers. They're marching right into the unemployment line and then oblivion. Don't worry the Lamplighters guild and Horse and Buggy guild are both with you!

Yes it's all about giving customers lower prices not pocketing the higher profit margin. It all trickles down as we all know.

Wesp5 wrote on Jul 26, 2024, 10:08:
"The natural endpoint of games is where characters can react to unscripted situations."

Yeah, but right now this would mean that every game doing that will always be online and in connection with some AI center, which soon will need more energy than Bitcoin mining...

Incorrect, AI text-to-speech right now is already lightweight enough that it could be installed along with a game and run locally in very close to real-time. I have toyed with an open-source generalized model that uses about 1GB RAM and 2GB VRAM, but they could pare it down to a fraction of that footprint for more specific usage. Then about 6 months ago, it took about as long to generate as the length of the resulting audio clip, but that's constantly improving, as well as the quality of the voice. You don't need AI to stitch together a dynamic script to feed into that, however if you really wanted to, they have competent models now that are small enough to run in real-time on your phone, nevermind a gaming PC.

I'm not saying it'd be trivial to implement, but the tech for this is already here, and it'll only become more efficient and effective in the near future.

This comment was edited on Jul 26, 2024, 13:19.

bhcompy wrote on Jul 26, 2024, 11:28:

ChaosEngine wrote on Jul 26, 2024, 08:58:
The natural endpoint of games is where characters can react to unscripted situations. By definition, this is going to require AI voice generation. That, or you literally get the voice actor to record a line for every possible situation in every possible tone.

Which is what many good games do already.

"Police? Yeah so this guy just ran over a guitarist and continues to hop around and switching between multiple weapons like an absolute maniac! He's killing everyone now, but I'm hiding behind a dumpster."

To program this takes forever. Or you just sic an AI on it...

ChaosEngine wrote on Jul 26, 2024, 08:58:
The natural endpoint of games is where characters can react to unscripted situations. By definition, this is going to require AI voice generation. That, or you literally get the voice actor to record a line for every possible situation in every possible tone.

Which is what many good games do already.

Veinman wrote on Jul 26, 2024, 11:01:
Anyone who thinks using AI to generate voices will result in "cheaper games for consumers".... well I have a really great bridge you might be interested in.

Wait... is anyone seriously believing this?

Anyone who thinks using AI to generate voices will result in "cheaper games for consumers".... well I have a really great bridge you might be interested in.

ChaosEngine wrote on Jul 26, 2024, 08:58:
Voice actors absolutely deserve to be paid, but picking a fight against AI in interactive media is just not gonna work.

The natural endpoint of games is where characters can react to unscripted situations. By definition, this is going to require AI voice generation. That, or you literally get the voice actor to record a line for every possible situation in every possible tone.

That said, I believe actors should retain the rights to their voice. They can license it for a game, but it doesn’t mean the studio owns that voice. The software industry has spent years arguing the difference between ownership and licensing, they should understand it.

They're not fighting against their voice work being used to create unscripted dialogue.

They're fighting against contracts that would let a company pay them for a single recording session and then use AI to duplicate their voice for any number of titles.

"The natural endpoint of games is where characters can react to unscripted situations."

Yeah, but right now this would mean that every game doing that will always be online and in connection with some AI center, which soon will need more energy than Bitcoin mining...

ChaosEngine wrote on Jul 26, 2024, 08:58:
Voice actors absolutely deserve to be paid, but picking a fight against AI in interactive media is just not gonna work.

The natural endpoint of games is where characters can react to unscripted situations. By definition, this is going to require AI voice generation. That, or you literally get the voice actor to record a line for every possible situation in every possible tone.

That said, I believe actors should retain the rights to their voice. They can license it for a game, but it doesn’t mean the studio owns that voice. The software industry has spent years arguing the difference between ownership and licensing, they should understand it.

Agreed.

Dammit

ChaosEngine wrote on Jul 26, 2024, 08:58:
Voice actors absolutely deserve to be paid, but picking a fight against AI in interactive media is just not gonna work.

The natural endpoint of games is where characters can react to unscripted situations. By definition, this is going to require AI voice generation. That, or you literally get the voice actor to record a line for every possible situation in every possible tone.

That said, I believe actors should retain the rights to their voice. They can license it for a game, but it doesn’t mean the studio owns that voice. The software industry has spent years arguing the difference between ownership and licensing, they should understand it.

Couldn't agree more. AI is the future. Instead of fighting it, find ways to quite literally co-exist. Voice licensing could/should be one such regulations. On that note, could we get a medium in here to have James McCaffrey sign right here?

Right, we don't need voice actors, writers, artists, executives, etc. Just give AI the nukes and get it over with already.

Voice actors absolutely deserve to be paid, but picking a fight against AI in interactive media is just not gonna work.

The natural endpoint of games is where characters can react to unscripted situations. By definition, this is going to require AI voice generation. That, or you literally get the voice actor to record a line for every possible situation in every possible tone.

That said, I believe actors should retain the rights to their voice. They can license it for a game, but it doesn’t mean the studio owns that voice. The software industry has spent years arguing the difference between ownership and licensing, they should understand it.

Whiny bitches need to shut the f…

Oh, wait…