Would you object the idea of CBU3 using Ai voice to voice player character?

[Malthir]

Absolute braindead take that's been debunked time and time again.

An algorithm is not a human. A human doesn't learn by inputting files directly into their brain.

Generative "AI" IS the enemy, because corporations WILL use it to steal artists' work to replace those same artists. There are already thousands of artists that have lost their jobs to this foolishness.

First of all no need to be insulting, and human artists learn by repeatedly copying other peoples work, without asking permission. Then as they progress they attempt to blend styles together, eventually they have blended so many different styles in the direction they wanted that it becomes "their" style. There's a reason why Professional art critics are able to view a piece and know whom you studied under, because the traces of their style is there in your work. This is literally exactly how the AI is functioning it can just iterate significantly faster than a human.

Generative AI is not the enemy it's mealy a tool. It still requires a creative human at one end to come up the theme style basically the fundamental creative elements, what it functionally does if give people who have limit fund, artistic skill, programming skill, the ability to make their own game. It's no different than a supped up version of RPG maker.

[DPZ2]

First of all no need to be insulting, and human artists learn by repeatedly copying other peoples work, without asking permission.

The latter part of that statement is an insult to the numerous human artists who do not copy other people's work. That you think this is the way art is created does a disservice to artists everywhere.

[KisaiTenshi]

So, what do you guys think?

AI voices should not be used when a proper voice acted voice could exist. That includes the main player character. That said, I don't see it ever happening for FFXIV, but it would be interesting for future MMO games to actually use the AI against the voice actor's data to make characters actually able to say the player's name for the few places that the player's name is important. Just have the server re-generate the lines in the language needed.

However I think on the whole, there is no way to make AI sound even 10% as good as the voice actors, so running into a lot of NPC's that are AI voice acted would quickly get annoying. However from an accessibility POV, an ability to "hear ALL NPC speech" would be welcome, since not every one reads fast. Since none of the job NPC's are voiced during job quests, likewise nothing in Hildibrand is voiced (other than Gilgamesh in combat instances) and that would require some comedic timing to do properly.

Ultimately though, TTS is far too immature to be used this way, and LLM-guided TTS still doesn't know what it's saying in order to deliver lines in an "good enough" way. So I would object to MSQ NPC's being AI at all.

[Malthir]

The latter part of that statement is an insult to the numerous human artists who do not copy other people's work. That you think this is the way art is created does a disservice to artists everywhere.

It's a literal fact on how EVERY art student is taught, you do two things repetitively, draw still life, and copy other art works learning from them. In fact it's literally how all learning is done, as Sir Isaac Newton once said "If I appear to see further than others, it's by standing on the shoulders of giants." Mimicry and mimicry, every now and then there are people who are so gifted that they transcend beyond this and revolutionise the art world. But that's not who's working in the games industry, it's dime a dozen decent artists for the most part.

AI voices should not be used when a proper voice acted voice could exist.

Why, Every silly argument that can be made to try and "save" the VO's has been used before in the past against media you currently happily consume, years ago people would make the argument, that video games shouldn't exist because they steal audience from authors.

[Tsumdere]

Most of the art you consume is computer generated, the role of "artists" is smaller and smaller, even in games, a very large portion of art assets are batch generated. Also lighting systems are literally computer generated lighting, there's not really artistry there it's a raw number calculation. People have this weirdly skewd view around AI generation, it's literally an evolved form of what you've already being enjoying and it's not going away.

If anything the hysteria over AI in art is being fuelled by large corps like Mcrsft and go ogle. They want government regulation on AI so they can price out the open source AI as the corps want to control the AI tools. Open source AI is the most freeing thing for creatives, it means that anyone who has a good idea for a game can pursue that idea and make a game even if they don't have millions. The only time AI is a problem is with government regulation allowing large corps to monopolise it.

Unless you are conflating "uses technology/AI" to "generative AI" this is completely false. Even lighting systems in games need human interaction to perfect. It is not an a simple algorithm that you just copy from another game and plug and play to a degree of success. Models are also not made by AI. Not even UV maps can be correctly made by AI and need humans to fix them. These things are ultimately greatly altered and refined by human artists.

Maybe I'll get banned for this language, but it would be a net positive on my life anyways so whatever. My 'hysteria' isn't because of large corps. It's because I've had my artwork stolen and co-opted by disgusting tech bros who still haven't created anything of worth. Absolutely fuck generative AI and fuck people who support it. AI is a grift and built on the hard work of people who learned a craft. It literally cannot exist without straight up stealing. It benefits no one but the greedy sods behind it. It's anti-consumer (low quality output), anti-artist, and anti-human. There is a reason why in game design they say there is no such thing as an "ideas guy". You get off your ass and learn how to do something. Plenty of great games are made on little budget - Stardew Valley, Axiom Verge, Signalis, etc etc. Those who use the AI argument to create what they dream of are lazy and creatively bankrupt.

Pandora's box has been opened but I hope people with braincells to rub together will continue to push back against leeches.

-

In any case, I don't want AI voice acting for my character.

[Malthir]

Unless you are conflating "uses technology/AI" to "generative AI" this is completely false. Even lighting systems in games need human interaction to perfect. It is not an a simple algorithm that you just copy from another game and plug and play to a degree of success. Models are also not made by AI. Not even UV maps can be correctly made by AI and need humans to fix them. These things are ultimately greatly altered and refined by human artists.

Maybe I'll get banned for this language, but it would be a net positive on my life anyways so whatever. My 'hysteria' isn't because of large corps. It's because I've had my artwork stolen and co-opted by disgusting tech bros who still haven't created anything of worth. Absolutely fuck generative AI and fuck people who support it. AI is a grift and built on the hard work of people who learned a craft. It literally cannot exist without straight up stealing. It benefits no one but the greedy sods behind it. It's anti-consumer (low quality output), anti-artist, and anti-human. There is a reason why in game design they say there is no such thing as an "ideas guy". You get off your ass and learn how to do something. Plenty of great games are made on little budget - Stardew Valley, Axiom Verge, Signalis, etc etc. Those who use the AI argument to create what they dream of are lazy and creatively bankrupt.

Pandora's box has been opened but I hope people with braincells to rub together will continue to push back against leeches.

-

In any case, I don't want AI voice acting for my character.

Not even slightly true the auto unwrap features are incredibly good now days when it comes to UV's. Lighting setups are basically a tweak job of numbers it's not really art in the normal sense, I suppose you could say it's close to photography or video editing but not really. You're literally just tweaking sliders/inputs until you get what you want. Most lighting rigs are engine bound and do plug and play for any game made in that engine, you can do a custom job and make your own lighting rig inside UE or unity but honestly I can't imagine most companies bother wasting the time, they will just tweak what's there. Ultimately it's more of a coding skill than art per say. There are very much Idea guys in the games industry, designers and directors are not necessarily implementers of features, generally designers will create the bare bones and layout how the feature will function before it's passed to specialists or other programmers, alot off people who have the design role have a bunch of all around skills, bit of art and bit of tech but roles in the industry are tricky lots of companies call the same job role completely different titles, but there are people in the industry who will be given the concept of a feature, they will knock up a proof of concept for design and then it will be passed along from there. The directors job is literally the idea, the game itself as a whole, their vision and direction leading the team towards it.

Generative AI will allow people to sequence a series of Ideas incredibly quickly, trying different themes and styles and then having an artist tweak it to fit just right. That's how it will be used in games, it is functionally no different than how the modern light rigs are compared to the old school, painted light maps.

You call it stealing, but 100% you learnt using other peoples work. It's a machine that's doing the same thing we all did learning.


I'm sorry you've been taken advantage of by shady people but hating Generative AI for that is like hating cars cause you got hurt by one once. It's not the car that's the issue it's the person on the other end, same as Corps or shady business, it's the people in operation not the tool that's the problem. Hating on Generative AI is pointless learn to adapt to it, use it yourself to enhance yourwork. I would point out that if they stole your actual character design and not used it as learning but genuinely took your IP, then you can seek legal measures against them, intellectual property is a thing, there's a difference between learning styles and stealing IP's. Overall though It's not healthy and you'll do yourself serious mental harm trying to fight up the stream like this on AI, it's an inevitability. As someone pointed out before in this thread, it's like the horse and cart industry getting mad about the automotive industry.

[PyurBlue]

Unless you are conflating "uses technology/AI" to "generative AI" this is completely false. Even lighting systems in games need human interaction to perfect. It is not an a simple algorithm that you just copy from another game and plug and play to a degree of success. Models are also not made by AI. Not even UV maps can be correctly made by AI and need humans to fix them. These things are ultimately greatly altered and refined by human artists.

Maybe I'll get banned for this language, but it would be a net positive on my life anyways so whatever. My 'hysteria' isn't because of large corps. It's because I've had my artwork stolen and co-opted by disgusting tech bros who still haven't created anything of worth. Absolutely fuck generative AI and fuck people who support it. AI is a grift and built on the hard work of people who learned a craft. It literally cannot exist without straight up stealing. It benefits no one but the greedy sods behind it. It's anti-consumer (low quality output), anti-artist, and anti-human. There is a reason why in game design they say there is no such thing as an "ideas guy". You get off your ass and learn how to do something. Plenty of great games are made on little budget - Stardew Valley, Axiom Verge, Signalis, etc etc. Those who use the AI argument to create what they dream of are lazy and creatively bankrupt.

Pandora's box has been opened but I hope people with braincells to rub together will continue to push back against leeches.

-

In any case, I don't want AI voice acting for my character.

I'm with you in standing against theft and the use of AI for minimum effort project, but those aren't reasons to try to stop a useful technology. AI does not rely on theft at all. Where the inputs used for learning come from has no bearing on the output. AI art may even create more opportunities for artists by increasing demand for art for training. You could make a similar argument against computers as they make copying art very very easy but banning them would have been extremely short sighted and harmful. Ire should be directed at the people that deserve it and not at something we all stand to benefit from.

[Minali]

A human brain is not a computer with a complex cloud of tagged images.

Anyone who compares these things unironically and says "isn't this the same?" just proves they know nothing about human brains nor computers.

[OgruMogru]

It's a taste issue. As in, if you like or support "generative" AI then you suffer from a critical lack of it.

[sophie13]

genAI is theft.
Who want their devs to become thieves?
I DONT.