2
Peter Molyneux thinks generative AI is the future of games, all but guaranteeing that it won't be
(www.rockpapershotgun.com)
Perfect headline.
this post was submitted on 08 Sep 2024
2 points (100.0% liked)
Games
16689 readers
859 users here now
Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)
Posts.
- News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
- Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
- No humor/memes etc..
- No affiliate links
- No advertising.
- No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
- No self promotion.
- No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
- No politics.
Comments.
- No personal attacks.
- Obey instance rules.
- No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
- Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.
My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.
Other communities:
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Couldn't agree more ๐
did you know that there's a button on each comment which is purpose built for you to express this exact sentiment? i've provided a helpful diagram: 
Weirdest troll 2024.
thank you, it's an honor just to be nominated
You know if you don't think a comment adds to the discussion there's a purpose built button for you to express that exact sentiment? It's right below the one you pointed out in your very helpful diagram.
you're adorable, but i think we can all agree that making an effort to help other users contribute positively to the platform is itself a positive contribution.
I really hope you're not suggesting that you honestly think someone didn't know about the upvote button? What a silly thing to imply that your sarcastic comment was supposed to be in some way actually helpful to someone.
i like to give people the benefit of the doubt.
i understand that you don't appreciate my tone but i'm afraid i won't be able to kneecap my natural charm in order to be less intimidating to you.
It's not that I don't like your tone, I'm always down for a sarcastic quip. What I don't like is dishonest people. You must think we're all incredibly stupid if you expect anyone to believe your intent was to help by pointing out the upvote button.
I do admire your confidence, however misplaced, and your commitment to embodying your username though.
You must think we're all incredibly stupid
not everyone, no, but the 10th guy in a row to talk down to me and expect to make a point? i might not think so highly of him.
I'm always down for a sarcastic quip
you took my (hilarious) joke at face value and made a serious effort to admonish me for that literal interpretation and not the blatantly obvious message that when you have nothing to say, it's ok to say nothing.
that you're continuing to reply at all suggests that your sarcasm detector could really use routine maintenance. or a warranty replacement.
would a '/s' make things easier for you?
I'm not expecting to make any kind of point, I'm just giving you a well deserved ribbing for being an asshole. It's strictly for entertainment purposes.
If you think the only explanation for someone taking issue with you is they are stupid or don't understand sarcasm, I really don't know what to tell you.
As I said before, I admire your confidence even if it is sorely misplaced. If you don't want to listen to me though there's this neat button right under my comment there that says 'block user' if you don't wish to read my replies. Just trying to be helpful, of course!
It's strictly for entertainment purposes
you're so close, if only you'd uncross your eyes it might come a little clearer into focus
If you don't want to listen to me
what part of replying to everybody who wants a piece of me suggests that i'm participating under duress? lol
Lol indeed. Well this has been fun, you have a particularly delicious lack of self awareness that I always appreciate in these sorts of discussions so I look forward to seeing your next very helpful and clever contribution in future threads.
Have fun!
That was good, thanks. Dude was like, "Why did you make me read your comment!?" Lol
what? lol
Up and down votes are not a "agree / disagree" button. They are for dis/encouraging posts. You can upvote a post you disagree with but can see that it is useful for the discussion.
I'm pretty sure that ship has sailed, especially on Lemmy. I feel like votes as agreement instead of acknowledging constructiveness is more prevalent here than on Reddit, especially for anything vaguely political (or AI, Musk, etc). I've seen very constructive comments complete with citations and everything get heavily downvoted because they go against whatever the popular position is, while a low-effort comment next to it gets heavily upvoted because it agrees with the popular opinion.
It's really frustrating, and I wish we had a platform that properly rewarded constructive discussion instead of popular discussion. Yet here we are.
Bro still out here overhyping, he can't help himself.
Man, I'm getting tired of everyone and their cat saying shit like "AI will...".
With how loosely defined "AI" is, it probably will at some point. But that statement is also completely worthless.
It's impressive how many Ls one man can take while still getting media coverage
When an AI is able to take and write every single line of code, generate all the art, and debug it just by having someone as code dumb as a CEO type in a prompt, I'll believe his words and eat my shirt.
Grifter gonna grift.
you guys joke but AI npcs have the potential of being awesome
A really good place would be background banter. Greatly reducing the amount of extra dialogues the devs will have to think of.
- Give the AI a proper scenario, with some Game lore based context, applicable to each background character.
- Make them talk to each other for around 5-10 rounds of conversation.
- Read them, just to make sure nothing seems out of place.
- Bundle them with TTS for each character sound type.
Sure, you'll have to make a TTS package for each voice, but at the same time, that can be licensed directly by the VA to the game studio, on a per-title basis and they too, can then get more $$$ for less work.
They won't because of hallucinations. They could work in mature games though where its expected that whatever the AI says is not going to break your brain.
But yeah a kid walks up to toad in the next Mario game and toad tells Mario to go slap peaches ass, that game would get pulled really quick.
I just re-read my comment and realised I was not clear enough.
You bundle the text and the AI-TTS. Not the AI text generator.
So the content stays the same but you don't need a voice actor now?
The content is... AI assisted (maybe a better way to put it).
And yes, now you don't need to get the VA every time you add a line, as long as the License for the TTS data holds.
You still want to be having proper VAs for lead roles though. Or you might end up with empty feeling dialogues. Even though AI tends to put inflections and all, from what I have seen, it's not good enough to reproduce proper acting.
Of course that would mean that those who cannot do the higher quality acting ^[e.g. most Anime English dubs. I have seen a few exceptions, but they are few enough to call exceptions] will be stuck with only making the TTS files, instead of getting lead roles.
But that will mean that now, places where games could not afford to add voice, they now can. Specially useful for cases where someone is doing a one dev project.
Even better if there can be an open standard format for AI training compatible TTS data. That way, a VA can just pay a one time fee to a tech, to create that file, then own said file and licence it whichever way they like.
You know the way these programmers talk about AI, I think they just don't want to have to work with anyone else.
How is this not taking from voice actors and giving to yourself in that regard? The system you described would mean only the biggest names get paid, all so a developer can avoid learning social skills.
The system you described would mean only the biggest names get paid
Rather, it's more like, we as the user get a greater variety of background NPC banter, for the same game price.
Take X4 for instance. The only banter we get is different types of "hello".
Only in cases of quests, is there any dialogue variety. When there is any such banter out of quests, it's mostly incoherent (or was that another game, I need to check again).
It doesn't really make sense that 2 or more people meet in a docking area, say, "Hi", "Hello", "Good day to you" and then just keep on standing staring at each other's faces as if they were using some sort of telepathy, or just staring at each other without any conversation.
It would be fun to be able to have conversations that, while clear that they would not be able to yield any Quest, should still have variety enough to be fun when the player stops by, eavesdropping.
This sort of thing is there in a lot of games by high budget studios, while at the same time, the games have pretty large file sizes.
This way, we can reduce both production and distribution costs.
And the VAs, they don't need to do all the work of speaking each dialogue every time the story writers come up with new banter, but the studio will be getting their voice for those lines, essentially increasing the value of the licensed TTS package, meaning the VA gets more work done than the work they do and gets paid more (well, the last part depends more upon the market condition).
As a consumer I'd rather a real person voice acted it live or not at all. Thats petty to put your entertainment above someone's livelihood.
I don't really think of it that way.
Instead, more like:
- If there's no voice, noone got paid
- If there is a voice, someone got paid x (> 0) amount
- And if the offered amount was lower than what the VA would expect ^[or if the license terms were unfavourable, like a multi-series license or such], then the dev won't get the license
Also, in the above condition, the VA only needs to make the TTS package once (then maybe a few upgrades if the standard gets updated) and gets to reuse it for multiple licenses.
Thats just extortion. You can argue you disagree but its just a difference of opinion. I also don't think that voice actors would agree with your license idea. I'm sure there would be a few exceptions though.
voice actors would agree with your license idea
The ones who won't, are probably also those with good enough exp and able to get into "foreground" roles.
The ones who would, can now have a passive income.
I just wouldnt pitch this idea as a benefit for VAs is all. It won't be uses by VAs to benefit their profession, it will be used by non-VAs who want to cut costs. Thats not a worthwhile goal to me. We shouldnt be trying to make art more efficient, or remove the human element from it.
Both can be done.
Depends upon who takes it first.
If VAs don't make it efficient for themselves, their clients will make it so and the one who does it, gets to pocket the savings.
Depends who would pay more for the technology. Game developers or invidividual voice actors.
Maybe if they had a big enough union, they could swing it. Although at that point just get ai voices banned to protect your field.
Also, just an aside, I wouldnt pay extra for an AI version of an actor I liked. Thats still not them acting.
I wouldnt pay extra for an AI version of an actor I liked.
If course. It is about paying less after all.
The actor decided to get some passive income by licensing their TTS and someone used it as they wanted. That's all there is to it.
Apart from maybe, being able to get the AI to create different accented versions of a VA (which, said VA doesn't do otherwise), the AI voice will mostly be of a lower grade than a good VA. Which is what makes it unfit for foreground roles, which the user will be actively listening to.
You definitely don't want cutscenes to be filled with half-assed rubbish, which might be otherwise, fine for background chatter, where it is just filling the silence. And in cases where the background chatter is a part of the experience and the devs care about it, they will be getting active VAs like they currently do. There are more perfectionists in artistic fields than one would expect.
Well if their voice won't draw in buyers, than its a bad investment since you could just use some generic free version a bunch of non-voice actors were paid to make by the company they work for.
If money is to be made it won't be the VAs capturing it is all I'm saying. They might even have no room in the market at all.
non-voice actors were paid
I feel like being paid for it would kinda make them a VA, but sure.
And if the quality of AI voice were that bad, it would be worthless anyway and noone would create/use packages for it.
Okay my company tells me today I need to start recording my emails verbally. They own that and sell it to game companies.
Am I a voice actor?
= Were you "acting" ?
No its a side hustle for the company of sorts. What do you call that? A bi-product?