Maybe a good balance could be a human voice actor for main dialogue, supported by ai trained on their main dialogue to voice sidequest and deep lore dialogue. It could enable fully voiced dialogue-heavy games that would otherwise be too expensive to produce, something like generative RPGs or Morrowind, if all the books could be voiced, and more easily translated while remaining fully voiced. But keeping humans to fill the main campaign contributions, emotional beats and determine character personality. I’m just comparing Morrowind to Oblivion, which was voiced, but the dialogue and conversation trees were heavily reduced in volume as a result.
Maybe a good balance would be hiring a person to speak lines into a microphone. It could employ a person and create art with an acceptable bare minimum quality standard. If you can’t afford that and would rather push the costs onto government subsidies for power and emissions, maybe instead just do text dialogue or pull a classic Banjo and Kazooie single dialogue line randomly jumbled up and pitch shifted for every interaction.
I assume you also only buy hand crafted porcelain items, only buy hand picked produce and generally avoid all automation amd modern convenience. Take your clothes to a local hand-wash rather than using a washing machine too do you? I agree that the energy cost should be taken into account before we declare it to be cheaper to use “AI” generated content.
Like LLMs just spontaneously create lines of audio? They need a human operator to direct them to generate audio just like machines that make most vases are human operated but allow the person to make far more and more quickly than they would by hand. An LLM is still just a tool that needs a person to wield it, it doesn’t replace them it just changes their role and makes them more efficient.
Using machine learning to clone voices required building upon millions or maybe even billions of lines of dialogue to reach the current point, and only now that it is here can you easily approximate a person’s voice without them even knowing. So yes, it does magically generate sound with minimal input, that is how that works.
The machines that are currently used to shape and paint ceramics are not Machine Learning models. They’re simple and precise automations. Like a program that packages audio to .mp3 format. The equivalent to that would be a machine that designs the vase based on thousands of older examples, designs the packaging, and designs the machinery that prepares it. It’s going to do a shit job that negatively impacts consumers but in the process it displaced thousands of workers in one go, so enjoy the profits.
You missed the point of what I said. Machines that manufacture goods put many people out of the job and yet you now very few people think that is an issue. At the time however the same kind of arguments I see made against LLMs putting people out of work were being made about these machines making soulless products that missed the human touch. LLMs are just a new tool we’ve invented to make life easier for ourselves. In time the same thing will happen with LLMs once the hype dies down and they just become part of the tool sets we all use without thinking about it.
If you understood my point why didn’t you address it rather than meandering around it asserting that somehow this particular invention is totally different to previous disruptive technologies that we accept as having been beneficial and no on opposes amymore? How exactly is it different this time in history where it never really has been previously? It may well be of course, but history is against it being so.
Using a robotic voice could make the game more accessible to blind, partially sighted, and dyslexic individuals. I’m not sure how an AI voice is inherently different than the voice that comes out of a screen reader, especially if it’s trained on the voice of employees or volunteers.
I don’t think the vast majority of games which could make use of AI Voice have the sort of accessibility features to be played by those individuals even if they could hear the dialogue. It’s such a rare occurrence for a blind person to beat halo or an RPG that news articles get written about the examples.
What about partially sighted or dyslexic individuals? Sure, a game like halo would need a lot of modification to be fully blind accessible, but a visual novel, for instance, might not. In my experience most visual novels are built as passion projects on shoestring budgets.
Lots of existing games have robotic narrators already (e.g minecraft), they just speak with a monotone voice. By incorporating more advance machine learning capabilities the same narrator could be capable of outputting a more nuanced and pleasant delivery for those that need it.
This is manipulation to sell more copies and nothing more.
In any case, AI voices are empowering to the Indie scene. Fully voiced games used to be exclusive to triple A gaming, indie gevs just simply can’t afford it.
I feel for the voice actors just like I feel for the translators that all had to change domaine ten years ago, but progress is progress and it’s dumb to stifle innovation to save a few jobs.
This is manipulation to sell more copies and nothing more.
…yes? People who make games do things to make their game appeal to people. Framing that as a negative or unusual is kind of weird. Literally everything any game developer does to make the game entertaining or appealing is “a manipulation to sell more copies”.
I think framing this as “refusing” to use AI is kind of weird. They believe in doing things the traditional way, great, I think games that use all hand-drawn nondigital art are also cool for going against the grain like that, and making a point of supporting artists is laudable, but it isn’t like anyone is trying to force them not to.
AI Voices are just worse or require more work for less pay, and they actually seem less common in the (well made) indie scene than in the Triple A scene.
Have we just started handing out awards for anything that isn’t AI? They didn’t use ai for this! They didn’t use ai for that! Like okay we get it, how about just list what they did use AI for and be done with it
I had tons of fun with 5, I got bored of 6 after a few hours and regretted not refunding it within the 2 hour window. It felt like a board game and a very mediocre one at that.
Steam will still override developers preferences if they feel the consumer wasn't given time to make an informed decision. For instance I played Detroit Beyond Human for about 10 hours. The majority of that time was spent loading shaders and trying to fix crashes, I eventually gave up when a friend suggested to reach out to steam support. They asked no follow up questions and refunded it, despite the page warning me they would only refund under 2 hours.
Fair, sorry to hear that, hopefully that was due to that being the early days of refunding on steam. They only started in 2014, and monster hunter world launched in 2018. Here's hoping my experience isn't just anecdotal and they've actually improved in that time.
Something fun to mess with in Civ V is on small custom maps with designated start points, when start bias can’t take effect it will always place players on points starting from bottom right going left and then from bottom to top.
Example: Player 1 will always be placed on the lowest tile furthest to the right.
You can use this to get the deity achievment if you just don’t give the AI any workable tiles.
I had a friend that played civ, he invited me to multiplayer. Little did I know, he plays against the hardest bots on a regular basis. I had only done like, two single player games.
I like playing with my sister because we both regularly play on Deity difficulty and playing against each other is the only way either of us can be challenged anymore. Of course many times we just team up against the rest of the world.
That’s what sucks about Civ (and EU4, HOI4 and the like for that matter) — once you figure out how it works and you start winning it becomes boring in single player.
And then for multiplayer it’s hard to find someone committed to playing for long stretches of time consistently.
IMO games where losing is fun is where it’s at, like Crusader Kings, Rimworld and Dwarf Fortress.
Speaking of DF and EU4: I just heard about Songs of Syx not too long ago that’s basically Dwarf Fortress/Rimworld combined with EU/HOI. A granular empire builder, where you also have other competing empires to conquer or ally with. It looks dope, and I might get it.
lemmy.today
Oldest