The Finals Opted for AI Voices Because 'It Gets Us Far Enough in Terms of Quality'

Well they can go f*ck themselves then. Hope the game crashes and burns. Idiots like this guy need to just be blacklisted by every studio, platform and distributer out there, only a scorched-earth approach will work. Zero tolerance, we had a voice actor strike a few years back for a reason, now they’re trying to replace them outright?

Boo. Boooooooo. 😝

I thought there wasn't a way for me to be less interested in a multiplayer shooter, but AI finds a way to prove me wrong again.

The phrase “It gets us far enough.” is interesting. Makes me wonder if that’s how they felt about the rest of the development .

I absolutely despise AI. As a writer, it really threatens everything I work on and stand for, pouring so much time and effort into something coming directly from the heart and soul. That's true art, at least to me. These things are endlessly fed and trained on real human art and voices without the permission of artists and just cram out things that most people barely know the difference at a glance in no time at all. It's heartbreaking and so many jobs, passions and dreams will die and get burned to the ground because of it. Huge, sweeping regulations need to happen ASAP.

That's my view, at least. I find it alarming. At least let artists choose to ban their works from being used to expand the machine brain's 'creativity'.

@Vil As a 3D artist, I feel the same way. I really hate the trend we're going with AI content. I spend a lot of time working on stuff that I'm passionate about and someone can just feed a prompt to a website and it'll pump something out in a matter of minutes.

It sounds awful.

Them being so openly proud about this makes it even more disgusting.

The game is a blast to play but having said that, im definitely not in favor of this.

As a gamer if the result is good i am totally fine with it. Many games still can't use voice overs because of the cost and time required. And in any case you can't stop the evolution. It is like the horsecars drivers rioting about trains or cars. If it makes sense financially it will happen despite what people say.

Well guess I found out why the VO sounds very meh. Calling it pro grade VO is a bit of a stretch

I think AI could probably come up with better writing than whats in most games now days

To be honest, I always feel so bad in this AI news when I read how selfish is some people about this... I dont know if they are very young and still live with their parents, or if they think that their works will never be threatened by an AI, but this isn't the way, AI should help in our works, not completely replaces us. I don't know what kind of future expects us at this rate, companies wants an AI to get more profit, but who will buy their things if they continue cutting people work and income? This is sad.

@-Sigma-
It's unironically the most fun I have had with a multiplayer game in some time too, which makes the attitude sting more.

Played the open beta and had fun, very cool destruction to buildings in the game. Thinking back I seem to recall the voices being a bit meh. This would explain it. Shame they didnt use real voice actors.

@khayl That “Dodgeball” quote was pure gold. Well played, sir…well played.

Shame on everybody, who can only think about using AI in any form of making art.

And his open show off using AI is spit into people's face. He is the biggest lowlife and whole this "game" have another huge nail in it's coffin.

What a Kaiju-sized sleazebag.

I see some hypocrisy here in the comments. Let’s assume that Witcher 4 will offer completely free chatter with NPCs, with realtime AI-generated lines of text and voice, and it all works fantastically and gives us a new sense of immersion. Then the commenters here will applaud, like „Sad for the professional VAs, but without AI this all here would be impossible. Realtime AI is the future for speech, assets and world building in gaming.“

the game is fantastic most fun I've had in a multiplayer game in a long time! Couldn't care less about some voice lines you barely notice

Played the open beta and the game just didn't click with me, deleted it after 3 matches. I thought the gun play wasn't the best, and the game show aspect and narration was just annoying and off putting.

Well that is a game I will never play as I can't support this but it's good to know what the game is called so I know what NOT to buy 👍

I hope he is prepared for the massive backlash the game is going to get from this. It's going to be swift and brutal.

AI truly is some freaky technology.

@Vil I very much empathize with you, really. Not only artist and others that work in creative endeavours, but everyone will be heavily impacted by AI.

But, at the same time, unless you are an incredibly talented and creative artist, there is absolutely no reason (other than ethical ones) for a company to employ you. I have followed midjourney's Reddit for a year now, and I have seen creativity and originality that I hadn't seen for years. Knowing it's easier and cheaper to do this than to employ an army of artists makes it a no-brainer for companies. And it's only going to get worse.
One issue is that artists, being professionals and experts in their field, have a hard time understanding that for the general consumer, what is appealing is not always the thing the artist think is the best.

So how do we solve this? New laws? We know lawmakers are in cahoot with lobbies and any law will contain the way to use it to profit from AI. Appealing to human decency and ethical norms? In 2023? When the most prominent ideology in media is one of fierce individualism and moral relativism?

Sadly, and I wish I was wrong, I don't see how we can stop the AI spread... Even I, as a teacher, know I will be made obsolete in a few years (a decade or two if I'm lucky) because even if a great teacher is irreplaceable, the vast majority of teachers aren't great...

AI driven content is going to end up costing a lot of people jobs. Companies are just going say it’s “convenient” or whatever to save a few bucks. Hate this direction for gaming

Looks like salt is now the most prominent by-product of AI. If comments section were around back in the day, I could imagine the pin manufacturing workforce squirming just as loudly when the division of labour rolled in.

Domesticated animals replaced human labour back in the day, with horses and the like largely replaced by machines since (mostly in the "developed" world). Certain types of jobs became obsolete, others sprung up in their place, and new industries and professions arose alongside emerging technologies. Like different developments before it, AI will only be as destructive to your livelihood as you let it be.

This article talks about a miniscule script in what is, at best, a prominent indie GAAS made on a budget which will be shut down between now and 2026. An excellent use case for AI models, which cheaply provide part of the product, allowing budget to be allocated to more important areas. If I was head of this studio, you bet I'd do the same if it meant most of the VO budget could be availed to employ an extra dev.

I appreciate that creative professionals have pride in their work, and I'm sure there will always be a demand for artisanal literature, music, etc. well into the future (much in the same way organic food can still sell well, or how in the countryside families can grow and sell their own veggies), but when AI models have been trained/developed enough to not only match but also exceed human output, the only differences between human-made and AI-generated products will be cost and time to produce. With those differentials in mind, the question of 'do I prefer human-produced content enough to eschew AI-made goods' will be quite easy to answer for most consumers.

And when you think about it, we're perhaps already past this point. How many games use procedural generation? How many potential customers did these games lose purely on the basis of not every level/object/planet being handcrafted? I've played No Man's Sky, which to me (in 2023, not in 2016) is a rather decent mix of human and generative efforts.

Accept that AI is likely here to stay and here to grow, find solace in the fact that it will not just impact the little guy but is also likely to put a lot of banker type people out of a job, and spend some time thinking how you can adapt and benefit from its use.

And full disclosure, this is coming from someone who learnt a bit of C#, sat for and passed the AI-102 exam, and is now staying ahead of the curve. Maybe I will be caught out too eventually, but when that time comes, I'll learn how to be a plumber and make bank that way I suppose.

This may have stung more if it was about a game I'd actually ever care to play. As it stands, it sounds like something that might just be forgotten about in a couple of years.

Oh yeah, and AI VO is still trash. Shocker.

If they will start paying for borrowed assets then it could good but they won't. AI does not create it mixes up stuff the "intelligence" with AI is total nonsense. Corp will always find the cheapest way around even if it envolves screwing it does not matter.

It gets us far enough says all he needs to me how much he cares. He is probably a Nordic guy the same kind of developers that makes people addicted to online MT.

@Golem25
Luddites fought with progress that ultimately made their life easier. What AI does is parasitizes on human creativity without which it could not exist for the sake of coporate profit. Artistic expression is in a core of being human.Saying that replacing it is progress is ludicrous and blind.This is anti-progress.However AI will have its uses but replacing artistic expression is not a good way of using it.

It hits the right notes and sweeps up the gameplay on screen. If it means developers can put money in other aspects of a game, or less deep-pocketed developers can work on a more ambitious game easier, well… wouldn’t you?

The righteous people want more people to get paid, but want the game price stays at the same 60$ and digital at 35$ forever. Voice actors are no longer cheap.

@Bartig That is not how the capitalism works my pure hearted friend.

@mrbone Maybe C-suit and shareholders should be paid a bit less? Game price will not stay the same regardless.(edit:typo)

@Golem25 one of the only levelheaded comments on here 🫡
@Pranwell lol I hadn't made that connection yet.
They're all shouting in the wind aren't they.
@Jett it's going to be f2p no worries 😂

Yikes, this is NOT a good sign. This is what people feared about the use of AI.

@Cherip-the-Ripper Not level headed but corpo headed. Without proper legislation for AI regulation we will be sacrificed on a altar of "free market".

I work in a creative field that is serious under threat from AI. I hope everybody boycotts this game. I have zero sympathy for any backlash the game gets as a result of their dystopian cost-cutting methods.

@Badger_Badgerski Well it is how the business work. It is easy to say when they are successful and making money. But there are also many companies which went out of business and bleeding money. I guess in a way it is similar to betting. Companies got most of the money as they are the one who risk and invest loads of money. They are the one who lost money if it didn’t do very well. They are not charity.
I am generally talking about all things- people who would like to get writer/ actors paid more should also expect that cost will be eventually spread to themselves.
Of note, the game price was cheaper compared to 90s, if you count the inflation. I don’t mean I want to pay more as the salary also mostly stay the same (for most professions at least in the UK). But everything else price has gone up.

For small devs this could be the make or break point. Especially since Voice acting is considered standard/basic. The devs provided the other sounds almost like oldschool devs in the late 90’s early ‘00’s did for games. So to me it seems like they couldn’t afford voice acting. If it means more devs can see their games see the light of day…well I am not mad. Also this could mean that games made by devs that can’t afford localization can use AI to both translate and voice their games. Lots of great potential here. I would like to see this explored further.

@Badger_Badgerski Please don't be hysterical. Humanity has gone through countless waves of great leaps of technology/innovation, and society has always adapted and used the platforms offered by new inventions to propel itself forward. Back in the stone age, I'm pretty sure Grog told Grug that fire very scary and wheel not blocky enough, but their descendent Greg in 2023 will be happy to have central heating and a car to drive to work.

If AI pans out, it will transform the personal and working lives of millions, sprout auxiliary industries (it already has - see the data entry factories in Africa), and antiquate a good few types of jobs. It already has been a force of good, when you think of cognitive abilities like text-to-speech models that help the blind, not to mention all the students and working professionals that have been aided by natural language processing models. This is only going to snowball with the advent of things like Microsoft Co-Pilot being embedded into Outlook, Teams, Dynamics, etc. I build chatbots for fun, and they massively benefit from light AI features like automatic entity recognition, making life easier for developers and users.

Conversely, if AI doesn't pan out, and we hit a ceiling with the various types of articifical intelligence (I do wonder whether we will ever be able to massively improve upon self-driving cars), then we'll look back on these years as being a weird mix of the Y2K scare and the Beany Babies rush where everyone was throwing money at something that didn't quite turn the dividends expected.

Just don't expect too much regulation. As strongly as you hope your government limits AI development, it will be nowhere near how badly foreign countries hope for the same thing. If you're truly fearful, then spend some time exploring how you might make use of AI in your own job, or how you may pivot your career to ride what you are suspecting will be an immensely powerful and successful industry.

@mrbone I do not agree with your neolib sentiment and risk/reward approach. Regular workes are also not a charity and they bleed money even more than people who "take the risk and invest". I do not want to spend £+80 for new game and so I do not do it. I wait until it gets cheaper.

@Badger_Badgerski No standard game sold above 70. Fine with your limit. Also, try to understand when the producers try to keep the cost down with available means, especially in a small game like above where they only talk a few lines.

@Golem25 I am not being histerical. All the examples that you had given are an actual progress that was uplifting for a regular Grog. I do not dispute that AI will and already has its uses that are very beneficial. What I dispute is its use it curbing the human artistic expression for the sake of corporate profit.We already see that in music industry. Art is a human construct and AI should not replace it. I do not have a lot of hope for regulation. Corpo lobbists will make sure that 0.1% gets most of the fruits from the AI and regula voice actor, singer or painter will get nada.

@mrbone The most I have spend on a single game in last 5yr was £30.My actuall limit is way below £50. It sounds almost like " but please think about the shareholders"...nah man. It does not stop on small dev companies and we both know it. If they have few lines to record I do not see the issue.

The ethics of AI is a wide, open topic of discussion and you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who would rather have AI voiceovers than actual voice actors. As well as being a minefield of ethics the quality is a noticeable drop and I can see why there is a negative reception to this. Saying that, the beta is fun if flawed. The gameplay loop, movement, parkour, art style and destructive arenas are all great I feel. The shooting, lack of noticeable aim assist, matchmaking issues and little appeal to solo players aren't as great however if these were fixed for full release I wouldn't not download it because of the use of AI. The designers words could be read as dismissive, even abrupt, but at least he's honestly answered the question asked to him.

With AI being used to make essays, do voice overs etc, eventually we'll be living in a world where one human instructs an AI to communicate with another human's AI because neither can be bothered to communicate properly, I'm sure. It's a worse vision of the future than WALL-E to be honest.

Art is one of the most vital parts of the human experience and yet it gets treated with such entitled disdain like it doesn't matter, in the first world at least. At this rate all the artists will just give up if people think AI generated art - which just amalgamates the work of non-consenting real artists remember - is good enough.

It's funny that the word feed is used with AI because at this rate it won't just eat all the art and communication out of people, it'll steal the souls of those who let it too. Good riddance to those kinds of people, I guess.

Doesn't AI just take bits of other peoples work and fuse them together? maybe someone should make an AI that locates all the stolen work and artists and writers can sue the companies. That'll keep AI out of the creative sphere at least till GI appears.

@zekepliskin Finally someone that is able to add 2+2 in terms of human needs and not only needs of capital.

It sounds a lot better than what I was expecting.

@MikeOrator ChatGPT..is that you?

@MikeOrator I am not sure from where you got the assertion that there was some overwhelming fun and dandy approach to it. Because replacing art creation in all its colours is not the same as facilitating or supporting cumbersome tasks like data manipulation, weather/climate prediction models, support for people with medical issues etc. I find it not particularly funny that difference between those is not obvious. Especially that you are aware that mainstream art turned to ***** precisely for the corporate profit motive thanks to algorithms and making art in most of the forms finanacially unsustainable for common people. Saying that becaue of those issues there is no difference if AI will take over is pinnacle of ignorance.You are confusing cause and effect.AI is "creating"skimpy anime girls only because it was created by humans first....not the other way around.Also you do know there is a world beyond skimpy anime girls and mainstream "artists"? AI is a mixer machine that cannot feed itself.It needs human art.

No thanks.
Taking Arc Raiders off my wishlist as well.

@Max_the_German @tomic20 or in game like this, real live commentary on the match that actually changes in each game depending on the actions of the players themselves.

@Badger_Badgersky Yet they will cost jobs. AI is even coming for people in every industry.

@Constable_What Yea most AI art is ripped from other artists work. I saw an article where an artist created a brand new character then used AI and as that was the only image of the character on the net it made an exact copy but messed up the hands (dunno why they keep getting hands wrong). the voices are probably a rip off too. There's endless amount of content out there might be harder to locate. Could this potentially be an avenue for artists to start converting all their work to NFT? So they get paid each time AI uses a sample of their work?

I have no problems with AI performing boring, repetitive tasks that developers have to do. I use ChatGPT to automate many of my development tasks and it's often a very good code reviewer.

But for creative roles or things like this? I would prefer a real person.

Now, with the advent of live AI VR Skyrim type mods, there's definitely a case for generative voice AI responses of NPCs and characters, but those should be trained specifically on the actor's voice and care taken so that it can't be abused and used for NPCs or non-scripted dialogue.

There's a real danger that publishers and studios use this to avoid hiring a real person and basically doing things cheaply so they can extract more money. Which is going to suck for everyone.

@MikeOrator
Human need to create art is at the top of Maslow's hierarchy of needs. That is what makes us human and creates culture. AI can help help with fulfilling some of the basic needs (first teo level of the Maslow's pyramid) but it should be bared from replacing us as art creators. According to few research results AI teached on creations made by AI is showing diminish output results. So no, AI cannot use its own creations.With human input there is no AI output. Your lack of understanding why this is not ok to replaced human art vision but it is ok to replace manual labor is a symptom of modern times. Technological junkies without vision of future consequences.

@MikeOrator If you would read what I wrote and understand it then I would not suggest you are ChatGPT. Just a machine that spouts nonsense.

@MikeOrator I do agree to a point to what you said. The only problem that we are facing with AI is that it was feed by the human created art for free. I find it pretty ironic that all those corpo entities where shouting theft when piracy was(maybe still is) a thing and it is not a problem suddenly when the roles changed. Anyway good convo:).Thanks.

@MikeOrator Ad Hominem in heated debate is possible with me as my fuse is getting really short with age. Which is not an excuse and I am not proud of it...but I guess we narrowly missed it