[Arkadia7]

I mean like in Cyberpunk, where you only have two choices for the voice, one male or one female. If you happen to dislike the male voice, but want to play the male character, then you are out of luck. (Or vice versa, or maybe you dislike both voices) Other games such as Deus Ex game series or the Witcher game series were fully voiced and they only had one choice for the voice. (Though it's more understandable in the Witcher and Deus Ex since you were playing a pre-defined character - I get that)

So with AI they could reproduce all the lines but use a wider variety of voices to choose from, without having to pay for the expense and time of doing all that voice acting. For example, there was a BG 3 narrator mod that took some famous actor's voice -- who had passed away --and they did some sort of AI program, which made his voice replace the main narrator and speak all the narrator lines for the game.

I'm not sure how the process works, but I know it can be done.

 

[JFarrell71]

So with AI they could reproduce all the lines but use a wider variety of voices to choose from, without having to pay for the expense and time of doing all that voice acting.

Ah, the PC character's voice. I see what you're saying.

But maybe you missed the part where that's stealing, or you just don't care that it is. Other people, however, would care. Actors are members of a union, and if you start using ripped off voices for some of your characters you'll have to use ripped off voices for all of them, because human voice actors will stop working on your projects.

 

[Arkadia7]

It wouldn't necessarily have to be famous actor's voices, just people who are voice actors but have good distinctive voices. Or, maybe the AI could mix together some male voices (and/or female voices, as the case may be) to come up with original but cool-sounding voices. They must have the technical wizardy to do that by now.

I'm not a technical or AI person, but I think this kind of stuff could be done. Where the AI could do the voice acting or just provide alternative voices for main RPG characters/party members. And the AI would be a lot cheaper than recording and paying human actors to recite hundreds or thousands of lines.

 

[Arkadia7]

Here is a link to the YouTube BG 3 male narrator video so you and others can better understand what I mean. This was made by a modder so it can't be that hard to do. The male narrator sounds completely different than the female narrator that is standard in the game. Not sure who he is or was, but he has a great atmospheric voice that fits the BG 3 fantasy world perfectly.

View: https://youtu.be/LkughcQWCOg?si=UgS5ZVrOOIxwjHPr

 

[Redglyph]

It's like the fast food of voice acting.

There was a mod to replace V's voice in CP2077, too. Aren't those tools only modifying an existing narrative with another voice? The result is OK, better than Windows' text-to-speech, but I wouldn't like to play with a voice like that. And you still need someone good to make the original voice acting.

It would be interesting to hear actual artists' opinion about someone mechanically reproducing their voice or putting them out of a job, even if they sometimes have to read lines for a video game. Maybe it's not always like that, but I saw them doing that while acting for motion capture, so it's funnier than just sitting and talking alone (except for the narrator when there's one).

 

[Vaelith]

I couldn't find the option for "My fear for things I can only speculate about is too big for my little human brain, so god protect us" so I didn't vote.

Ah well, maybe next poll in two years allows talking about real tangible topics from a RPG fan perspective.

 

[SirJames]

There might be a quality increase in other areas of the game thanks for the cheaper art design, but not in what has been generated by those tools.

Since the AI is only a neural net parroting what it has learned from a single pool (or a very limited number of pools, because it's very costly to make), created from existing Internet content, all it can produce will always have the same generic look. One or a few examples may look convincing, but the global quality can only drop.

And when I say convincing... if you look closely at those generated images, there are a lot of artefacts.

Those new graphics will become dominant because of the technology shift, and will be used to generate the new pools, polluting them. As a consequence, the global quality will drop even further, and nothing original will be added. It's a vicious circle.

I'm not even mentioning the copyright issues, which are already a problem now.

If we're talking about something like textures for castle walls I'm sure a devloper like From Software already has enough of a pool to have a play around generating a few templates to import into photoshop to touch up.

The reason I say it can't decrease the quality of games is because no one is going to use something that's worse. Users are very aware of things like asset flips and other scammy practises.

I say yes, AI will eventually impact the development process in some way which will be a shift in the industry but I don't think it will be similar to a shift like the shift to 3D in the 90s where publishers were demanding everything be 3D, even though it was horrible, low poly 3D, just because it was the new trend or how Baldurs Gate had to be real-time because Diablo was so popular. You're still just making a texture and to the user they don't care how it was made, only that it looks good.

Again, I don't think it's too early to say whether the net result will be negative because people won't use something that looks worse.

I don't think it will improve peoples jobs. The boss won't like it if texture artists turn on the AI and go AFK down to the pub for a few hours. It's just another software tool. They'll still be working the same hours, etc.

You should have seen the face I made when I read Sir James' contention that AI would lead to better NPC dialogue.

I'll bet it was hillarious!

Imagine disagreeing with me, though.

Being able to speak naturally to an NPC and have a real conversation is infinitly better than having 4 or 5 canned responses which sound nothing like what you'd personally say. The process to convince an NPC to give you the information you need will be an open book instead of something like option 1, 1, 3, 1, 5. You don't just read the options and then pick the obvious one. You actually talk.

It's sort of like going back to a prompt system from something like Ultima IV only instead of it just looking for keywords like job or join it actually lets you say anything you want.

Let's see the face you make in 10 years when the technology has advanced. Let's see it in 100 years, 1000 years. AI will lead to better NPC dialogue.

 

[SirJames]

Just for fun, I asked the M$ "copilot" AI this question.

"
As an AI language model, I don’t experience emotions or concerns, but I can discuss the topic. The use of generative AI by game developers has both exciting and potentially concerning implications.

Exciting Aspects:

• Procedural Content Generation (PCG): Generative AI can create vast and dynamic game worlds, characters, and quests. This allows developers to build more immersive and diverse gaming experiences.
• Efficiency: AI can speed up content creation, reducing the manual effort required to design levels, landscapes, and assets.
• Innovation: AI-driven creativity can lead to novel game mechanics, unexpected narratives, and unique gameplay.

Concerns:

• Quality Control: While AI-generated content can be impressive, it may lack the human touch. Ensuring consistent quality and avoiding repetitive or nonsensical elements is a challenge.
• Ethical Considerations: AI models learn from existing data, which can perpetuate biases or harmful stereotypes. Developers must be cautious to avoid unintentionally offensive or harmful content.
• Originality: There’s a risk that games relying heavily on AI-generated content might feel formulaic or lack the creativity associated with human-authored designs.
• Player Experience: If AI-generated content becomes too predictable, players may lose interest. Balancing procedural generation with handcrafted elements is crucial.

In summary, the use of generative AI in game development is a double-edged sword. It offers exciting opportunities for innovation but requires thoughtful implementation to address potential pitfalls."

I suppose the main risk will be the NPCs won't shut up and write you a thesus about every question.

 

[Redglyph]

I've stumbled on a recent survey of 3000+ devs that you can get here (you need to provide an email address, but it's not verified). It's a document of 37 pages published by GDC in January 2024.

49% stated that generative AI was used in their company, and 23% said they had no interested in that technology. The breakdown, when it was used, was a little surprising:

• the top was 44% in business and finance (that's the surprising bit for me)
• 25% in programming (those must be fools)
• 21% in game design, 13% in narrative, 16% in visual art and 14% in audio, so 64% in 'creative'
• there are a few other categories

When asked about the impact they thought generative AI would have, 21% thought it will be positive, 18% negative, 57% mixed. Also, 84% were concerned about the ethics of GAI in the gaming industry, 12% not concerned at all.

There are many other questions: on blockchain technology, preferred business models, implementing accessibility features, diversity/equity/inclusion efforts, sustainability, work load, layoffs, and so on. Pretty interesting overall.

 

[SirJames]

diversity/equity/inclusion efforts

This video about Google Gemini...

 

[Redglyph]

This video about Google Gemini...

Yeah, not a fan of this irritating guy. What is he selling?

Those other topics I listed were not in the scope of AI but of game development, by the way.

 

[SirJames]

Yeah, not a fan of this irritating guy. What is he selling?

Those other topics I listed were not in the scope of AI but of game development, by the way.

You don't think an AI take on diversity/equity/inclusion efforts relates to to an AI take on diversity/equity/inclusion efforts in game dev?

The agenda will be the same across the board. What did Copilot say?

How it started:
"Ethical Considerations: AI models learn from existing data, which can perpetuate biases or harmful stereotypes. Developers must be cautious to avoid unintentionally offensive or harmful content."

How its going:
Everyones black.

Cmon, you gotta laugh.

 

[Redglyph]

You don't think an AI take on diversity/equity/inclusion efforts relates to to an AI take on diversity/equity/inclusion efforts in game dev?

What AI take on DEI? As I said, this report lists a few questions related to AI, and other questions unrelated to AI, including DEI.

Let's not derail the thread with other, unrelated topics.

 

[SirJames]

What AI take on DEI?

Watch the video?

When asked about the impact they thought generative AI would have, 21% thought it will be positive, 18% negative, 57% mixed.

Well, it sounds like 21% of people in the industry are concerned. Our poll has those concerned at around 75%, so far.

Is there some link between a lack of knowledge of the subject and being concerned?

Show me that face again Jfarrel!

 

[Redglyph]

Watch the video?

You really don't want to understand, do you? Nevermind.

Well, it sounds like 21% of people in the industry are concerned. Our poll has those concerned at around 75%, so far.

It's not 21% (that's something else entirely); the correct ratio of concerned devs in the survey is 84%. As for our poll, it's hard to tell because the choices are not mutually exclusive. It seems close enough, though.

 

[SirJames]

You really don't want to understand, do you? Nevermind.


It's not 21% (that's something else entirely); the correct ratio of concerned devs in the survey is 84%. As for our poll, it's hard to tell because the choices are not mutually exclusive. It seems close enough, though.

Sure, I want to understand. I'm just not very smart. Explain it to me like im 5?

First you post, then I reply - clearly mentioning it's about Google Gemini AI, then you ask "what AI?", then I refer you back to the video about Google Gemini then you say I don't want to understand what you're saying? How do you not know what AI I'm talking about?


Yeah, sorry, I read that wrong, like, 21% answered postive to having concerns. I still don't see where you get 84% from but I didn't look at the link because I don't want to give an email. I get enough spam as it is.

Of course, I take your word for it.

I wish our poll was just Yes or No. Like you say, we can't really tell how many of us are concerned now that it's multiple answer.

As far as game development goes, I'm not concerned at all. Intrigued, even. But I am concerned about the future, which does involve AI to some extent, but I'm more concerned that Homo Sapiens probably only have a generation or two left before modification makes a whole new species.

 

[Redglyph]

Sure, I want to understand. I'm just not very smart. Explain it to me like im 5?

First you post, then I reply - clearly mentioning it's about Google Gemini AI, then you ask "what AI?", then I refer you back to the video about Google Gemini then you say I don't want to understand what you're saying? How do you not know what AI I'm talking about?

It's not important. I just have the impression we were talking about something entirely different.

The 84% was in the part you didn't quote. If you're talking about concern, that is. 21% think the impact will be positive, but there's no concern there. At least, that's how I understand it. (You don't have to give a real email, BTW.)

When asked about the impact they thought generative AI would have, 21% thought it will be positive, 18% negative, 57% mixed. Also, 84% were concerned about the ethics of GAI in the gaming industry, 12% not concerned at all.

But I am concerned about the future, which does involve AI to some extent, but I'm more concerned that Homo Sapiens probably only have a generation or two left before modification makes a whole new species.

Yeah, who knows where that leads... To be honest, I'm glad I'm not born later.

 

[Qayto]

It wouldn't necessarily have to be famous actor's voices, just people who are voice actors but have good distinctive voices. Or, maybe the AI could mix together some male voices (and/or female voices, as the case may be) to come up with original but cool-sounding voices. They must have the technical wizardy to do that by now.

Article in our local newspaper about a young man with cystic fibrosis who uses one of those voice thingys. He's getting married soon and wants to be able to do his vows in a local accent, his current "voice" is American. The programmers need two people with similar accents and timbre to their voices willing to sit in the studio and say 1600 sentences. These voices, the article explained, will be blended together and a new voice created for him. Incredible.

 

[Pladio]

A classic example, but one wholly unsuited to the present discussion. Horse carriage riders lost their jobs, but there are taxi drivers and chauffeurs and so on. Humans lost jobs to other humans. Stable workers and trainers gave way to car manufacturers and repairmen. With AI, humans will lose their jobs to computers. And they'll lose their jobs, but their work will go on, in a bastardized form as employed by those computer programs, which do nothing but steal and amalgamate. There's no equivalence to that in your carriage/car scenario.

Ok, think about the whole 2.5 centuries of industrialisation and take your pick. That example is the first that came to mind, but it's the same across hundreds of others.
Humans lost their jobs to so many new techs. Have you been to any modern factory ?
We used to need hundreds of workers. I went to one which had less than 20 and everything else had been automated. This was over a decade ago.
In the 16th century everything was done by hand, then machines came along, that took people's jobs, but you wouldn't have a computer writing on RPGWatch if not for all these advances.

 

[Pladio]

There might be a quality increase in other areas of the game thanks for the cheaper art design, but not in what has been generated by those tools.

Since the AI is only a neural net parroting what it has learned from a single pool (or a very limited number of pools, because it's very costly to make), created from existing Internet content, all it can produce will always have the same generic look. One or a few examples may look convincing, but the global quality can only drop.

And when I say convincing... if you look closely at those generated images, there are a lot of artefacts.

Those new graphics will become dominant because of the technology shift, and will be used to generate the new pools, polluting them. As a consequence, the global quality will drop even further, and nothing original will be added. It's a vicious circle.

I'm not even mentioning the copyright issues, which are already a problem now.

The AI is parroting at the moment, because it's new, and even then it's no longer fully parroting like it was a couple of years ago.
Wait a decade or two and things will yet again change.