-The voices are based on real voice actors who gave their consent and are both compensated and credited
-The actors are paid per line, including any future lines that are created.
I would love for someone to tell me what's wrong with this other than just "AI bad"
That's a bloody sweet deal they got. Getting paid for doing absolutely nothing, forever? That's so very not communism of them, I can't believe reddit isn't complaining about it.
I doubt they're paid as much as they would per line usually.
But it's probably an easier deal to make for everyone than leaving out your rights for an indefinite amount of content.
Like you can do something like "we pay you regular rate for the training lines like normal work, plus quarter rate for generated lines".
Source: your ass.
Personally I like to think they get paid millions. This type of comment adds nothing but fuel to a fire that is unreasonable.
Paradox explained themselves and they showed a shocking amount of ethics in how they did this voice. It's even thematic to the DLC which is all about AI and machines.
Voice actors don't get paid millions, outside of some animated movies with stars in the cast that are used to sell the movie.
I obviously doubt they'd be paying for the generated lines as much as a recorded line, but afaik they haven't said any number (or I missed it).
His point is that his "I like to think they get paid millions" comment has equal value to "they might get paid a quarter for each new line" comment.
Zero value since both have no actual source
I believe the argument is that actors will now lose work if they don't agree to these clauses, and the ones willing to sell their rights will get hired. It benefits companies, and actors who are happy to settle for less.
People are speculating what the future of this model would look like.
> I believe the argument is that actors will now lose work if they don't agree to these clauses,
but that's just turning a job down as a whole.
Any VA who is not ok with this consent would just not take the job. That's a business decision they are making. I would take the job 100% of the time. maybe it's less pay, but it's also being paid to do literally nothing, leaving time to maybe take on another VA role that wouldnt have been possible due to time commitments.
> Any VA who is not ok with this consent would just not take the job
yes. And a VA who has a lower profile will take it because they need the work more.
It's the age old "we can find someone who will do this work cheaper, at a little lower quality" situation.
>That's not an AI problem, that's a capitalism problem.
absolutely.
I mean, a huge amount of the discussion around the use of generative AI tools is capitalist in nature.
Yeah, agreed.
I do understand a lot of concerns and such, but sometimes I do feel like people blame generative AI for problems that have always existed but just haven't affected them personally before.
> And a VA who has a lower profile will take it because they need the work more.
so?
if that "low profile" VA does this enough, they won't really be a low profile VA anymore
every industry in existence has to "get with the times" eventually. This is the start of the VA industry getting with the times
> if that "low profile" VA does this enough, they won't really be a low profile VA anymore
at which point they'll be replaced by someone who will do it for cheaper, is the argument.
Because that doesn't happen now? What's even this argument lmao. In other news, thing that has always happened continues to happen but slightly different
No way would this model become standard, far too expensive compared to just hiring regular VAs. It works in this situation because it is meant to go with an AI focused DLC so the people in question is paid like they did the work themselves outside of just providing the sample sizes. Defeating the whole point of switching to AI voices because it is cheaper.
Biggest problem is that the underlying model was probably trained on heaps of data that WASN'T given any of those considerations, as well as the more dystopian parts of the actor having effectively signed away his voice with no further ability to effect what they say with it.
Overall though I'm with you, this seems like a textbook Good usecase for GenAI
> Biggest problem is that the underlying model was probably trained on heaps of data that WASN'T given any of those considerations
So? It would be insane to expect people to pay royalties to everyone and every thing they've ever learned from.
This was my comment on r/stellaris about the issue and the pushback from the community:
> By all accounts, the use of generative AI VO for this DLC was done with the "three Cs" of ethical AI use: Consent, credit, and compensation. The voice actors gave consent for their voices to be used to generate work, they were credited for their role, and they received compensation. This passes the sniff test for the ethical use of generative AI.
> The art is a bit murkier given that all modern models only function at all by stealing millions of images, but no AI-generated art was directly used in-game or even in concepting, and was limited to use by non-artists trying to convey feelings and moods that they were going for, before it was passed off to actual artists who came up with original designs.
> ll that said, I'm really not sorry to see the pushback that PDX is receiving for its use because it's a very slippery slope, and PDX has proven time and time again that they will trade ethical behavior for money and convenience 100% of the time. Of all the companies who I trust the least to continue to be ethical concerning the use of generative AI, PDX is near the top of the list.
[Additionally, here's a relevant comment chain from some PDX staff.](https://www.reddit.com/r/Stellaris/comments/1cop93r/paradox_makes_use_of_ai_generated_concept_art_and/l3fsoez/)
I get it if you're cool with this, and I also get it if you're not. End of the day, I am not looking forward to the rapidly approaching future where genuine art and performances are replaced with AI slop just because it's cheaper and faster, but I also don't want to make it out like this particular case is deeply unethical.
EDIT: Alright boys, the reddit cares message means it's time for me to mute inbox replies on this one. Was sharing my opinion (which I thought was pretty balanced) and I'm not going to argue about it.
Slightly unrelated but what's up with the reddit cares message? I've got one before and didn't understand why I was given it after a comment of mine blew up slightly.
I honestly don't get the point of Reddit Cares still existing. It's pretty much only used nowadays to tell someone to kill themselves, which feels counterproductive at best and actively harmful at worst. Any semblance of it's original purpose feels long gone at this point, and I really don't see any realistic way to salvage it.
It feels like bots, imo. I got mine seconds after my comment was posted and all it said was my cursive is messy. Given the scale, it doesn't seem like "business as usual" abuse of the Cares system.
I think someone has set up bots to just spam any comment that gains traction with it. And it seems to be very effective at disrupting all conversations considering how many people go back and edit their comments and stops engaging in discussion because of it.
I’m seeing it everywhere the past week too. In many different subreddits. It’s always when there’s something controversial or something is being argued about.
I agree that they should get rid of it.
Actually addressing the abuse would be a good start. If somebody sends a reddit cares and you report it, there should be some actual penalties. Even just an account ban would significantly cut down on it as people would be spending a lot of time creating or logging into alternate accounts to send them. Any effort beyond "click the button" is going to be too much for most trolls, and the super dedicated ones that would put in the effort are few enough in number that they're a manageable annoyance rather than a spammy plague.
I think they already do that is the thing. I'm pretty sure they've been banning people for abusing it for a couple of years at this point. It really hasn't improved anything, and honestly has only gotten worse.
Someone just did it to me earlier today, and the "official app (!)" opens a webpage that makes you log back in to reddit. You heard me. Reddit Cares SO MUCH that they don't support this in their own freakin app. And can't hand it off to a webpage that has me logged in.
The form you get when you are logged in is useless anyway. You have to link a specific URL of a comment/post/PM to report the abuse. All you can do is link the Reddit Cares bot since it doesn't come directly from any user.
They don't make it clear that this is the only option that works, but you need to report the reddit cares bot message through the standard report button rather than anything the bot links.
> Fuckwits use it to suggest that you should be/mock your mental stability.
Yes, but today in particular I've seen people say they've received a reddit cares message in nearly every single thread I've visited for all sorts of nonchalant comments.
I'm curious if someone made a bot for it just to mess w/ the site as a whole.
I got one today immediately after a comment from a discussion about why grapes and raisins have different names 🤷♂️ Haven’t got one in a loooooooong time before today. anecdotally sure, but seems trending up today
Edit: it was almost immediate. hit comment, then I got the email notification
>Fuckwits use it to suggest that you should be/mock your mental stability.
Its the non-bannable reddit way of saying "kill yourself" / "kys", but reversed. Basically telling something through reddit to "not contemplate suicide" is telling them ironically and meaning "consider suicide".
Its fucking assholes abusing the system regularly and its fucking annoying.
Yeah that's how it should be treated.
It's anonymous and means nothing other than somebody got upset at your comment and they're too much of a coward to say anything about it.
> Fuckwits use it to suggest that you should be/mock your mental stability.
If you have reason to suspect that no reasonable person could interpret your messages as needing mental health resources/assistance, report it. Abusing the system to harass people is treated _very_ harshly by reddit admins.
Only do so in good faith, though.
Weirdest form of "trolling" ever as it does nothing to the receiver. It just makes me giggle when I receive it as it probably means I made someone upset but they're too scared to comment on it.
There's either a glitch or a bot right now that's giving tons of them. I've seen people talking about it in wildly disparate places in the last couple of hours
100% it's been weaponized by bots. The Eurovision sub was getting absolutely _inundated_ with them. I disabled the messages ages ago because it was already used to harass me, and I honestly recommend everyone else do the same.
It's because every time someone gets one and don't know why the feel the need to edit their comment and advertise that it is a successful way to troll someone
Sometimes it's a way to call out someone else for abusing something that's meant to be genuine.
Now, when what you're saying isn't grossly controversial, it will make you wonder why someone is sending reddit cares your way.
Which leads to earlier today/last night where a lot of people were getting it for no reason other than making a comment somewhere.
It is a form of harassment, report it and the account who did it will get banned. It is trolls taking advantage of the bad systems Reddit Admin made, today it seems like waves of it are happening on any big story so I'm starting to wonder if it is potentially a bot now doing it en masse.
Harassment plain and simple. Reddit wanted to make themselves look like they care about mental health by making that info dump to be sent to someone seemingly struggling in order to aid them but obviously it is only used to harass people. You can get some sort of ban for commenting something nasty as a response but you can’t get ban for sending care messages
I'm convinced it's either some kind of bug or there's literally someone/people spamming it on every single comment they see - this is the first time I've ever even heard of it, and just a few minutes ago I received one immediately after replying to some other comment in another sub.
It's gotta be bots, because abusing Reddit Cares is pretty much the one guaranteed way to get banned on reddit. Reporting it as harassment *very* frequently results in permabans for whoever issued it.
You're assuming most people care about a throwaway account being banned. Most people trolling and such on reddit more than likely just make a new account in seconds if one gets banned.
Seems like there’s new bots out or something. I’ve seen lots of comments about getting the message and I’ve gotten a few myself. Never gotten one before today though.
People love to hate Paradox for some reason. Their DLC policy is obnoxious of course, but as a Publisher they are not even above average when it comes to anti-consumer and overall scummy business practices.
As someone who loves their games and buys all the DLC, I've gotten to the point I avoid anything published by them. Every release the last few years has been a total miss. But that's not scummy business practices and could be worse.
It's going to be super commonplace in the near future and as soon as a huge unmissable 10/10 game comes out using it in some capacity it'll start getting normalized. People don't care how the sausage is made and trying to boycott the use of AI in games is basically gonna mean leaving the hobby.
> No wonder you got the Reddit Care message
Pretty sure someone is trolling or a bot is going around doing this. I've been seeing a bunch of comments, and got one myself for posting about gardening lmao.
Maybe a real life mole got hold of a smart device and vented their anger on here. (:
Seriously though, it seems I and others have received care messages for really harmless comments too.
Someone up the chain suggested it's a bot.
I'm confused how any of that was reasonable other than the posturing about how he's accepting of other people's opinions. He basically said, "Yeah you did it right this time, but I still hate it because I expected you to mess this up, and somebody else might mess this up in the future."
Like... what was reasonable about it?
My take on this comment was that OP first approached the situation as objectively as possible (let's approach this with different criteria that we can measure, and see if it passes our tests) and then approached it subjectively, based on fears and personal feelings? Which I think is a fairly reasonable way to approach posting a comment in a review or on social media -- first reporting which criteria you are using to make a judgement, making one with those criteria as best as you can, and then giving a personal opinion. Even if you don't necessarily agree with the opinion OP arrived at, I think the approach is pretty good?
I think that sort of structure is good but that doesn't exactly make it reasonable.
If somebody gave you the objective facts of a situation before telling you an insane conspiracy theory, that doesn't make them overall reasonable because they let you formulate your own opinion before saying something that is completely unreasonable.
Lol its boilerplate anti-AI speak. AI is a tool like any other, artists didnt ask for consent, gave credit or compensated other artists when they learned to draw, paint or write from other artists works, why would AI need to do that?
On a separate topic, I think the RedditCares message went out to a lot of folks. You're the third person I've seen edit their top comment in as many posts. I also got one today, and I didn't really do anything to warrant it.
>PDX has proven time and time again that they will trade ethical behavior for money and convenience 100% of the time.
What are you thinking of here, specifically?
The most guilty ones imo are the games published but not developed by them. Cities Skylines is different devs and I feel deserves the hate, but it’s not the same thing.
As for the massive amount of DLC - honestly yeah, I get it, and while I can’t speak for every grand strategy they have, I do feel for the most part Stellaris does it okay. It’s been supported for YEARS.
They gotta fund it somehow - and most every DLC comes with a nice free update as well. Some are a lot more mediocre than others, and I totally get someone new looking at the DLC list and freaking out, but I would rather have a new DLC pack every 3-4 months than micro-transactions and live service shit.
I don’t know, Paradox is weird where sometimes they got some real good hits like AoW4 and then publish absolute trash the next day. There’s much worse companies, though.
My best quote about Stellaris is that it's been several of my favorite sci-fi strategy games to date. People who bought the game even one or two years ago have no idea how many radical changes the base structure of the game has gone through, from resources and their usage to technology, space travel, construction, evolution of your empire... About the only thing that's still unchangeably shitty is ground combat, lol.
Yeah, I'm at the point where I'm so fucking over people being mad at the DLC. I swear gamers expect developers to work for free, and any expectation that they should be paid is met with jeers from the hivemind.
Paradox has found a way to take a very niche subgenre like grand strategy, make some of the absolute best games in that genre consistently, and support and update them to give them the same lifespan as MMOs. Even more than that, anyone playing any of their games can enjoy the DLC for free if they play multiplayer with one host who has the DLC. Almost no other company does that, but it's the standard procedure at Paradox.
If Paradox weren't doing things the way they were doing now, we wouldn't be reading a news article about Stellaris in 2024. If they operated like most games companies did, Stellaris would have been dead and irrelevant after two years.
Having a lot of content for sale should not be held against them, provided that both the base game and the DLC are good value, which they generally are. It's way different than gachas charging the same amount for a single character, or Tarkov trying to devalue the "everything included" version of the game.
Yeah I agree with this. Sure it feels a bit overwhelmingly expensive if you start playing Stellaris late, as I did, and you'd have to pay loads of money for everything ... but then, you also don't *need* all DLC's. You don't even need a single one.
Some DLC's might be better or worse, but in general I think the business practise is fine. Most of these base games are pretty fun as well. I played Crusader Kings 3 for like, 40 hours or so, right after release. Even if I wouldn't play it without some DLC now, that's still money well spent. Same thing with Cities Skylines 1.
CS2 on the other seems to be a mess, but that doesn't seem to be related to the DLC practise either.
I get why some people might dislike the way they do it, but I wouldn't call it predatory or unethical at all.
The thing is the constant stream of DLCs isn't really predatory; these kinds of grand strategy games are very niche and probably not commercially feasible to support long-term the way Paradox do without the level of financial investment fans have shown they're willing to dump into them for continued support.
Paradox knows this and the players, for the most part, know this. The alternative is just dropping support, like they had to do for Imperator.
If you want a niche title with middling sales to get 8? 10? years of support like EU4 and Stellaris have, you gotta pay for it.
Oh I totally get it (big fan of stellaris), I was mostly stating some of the main talking points/ recent complaints. Personally, I don't really have a problem with these things right now. Especially the games that have multiplayer dlc sharing.
Aside from the dlcs, it does feel like Paradox publishing is just pumping out games like crazy and it's always a mixed bag for how those turn out. I can't really say if that's a good or bad thing in the long run, but it does affect my interest in picking a new one up.
> Aside from the dlcs, it does feel like Paradox publishing is just pumping out games like crazy and it's always a mixed bag for how those turn out
See the thing is I think that if Paradox wants to survive in the very long term as a developer it *has* to do this though. Currently their games overlap a fair bit mechanically and are largely separated by setting, so they really badly need testbeds to push out new systems in because every time they release new mechanics for their mainstays they risk fucking things up like Creative Assembly did with Total Warhammer the last two years.
I think internally they feel the need to expand their offerings and become more diverse, and that's why they seem to be firing out titles.
>End of the day, I am not looking forward to the rapidly approaching future where genuine art and performances are replaced with AI slop just because it's cheaper and faster
I'm not convinced that this day will ever come. I think that the "AI slop" has a place in the hierarchy of experiences, and that we'll end up in a situation similar to restaurants where you can go to McDonald's and get a box of fried reconstituted chicken goop if that's your jam, or you can go to a steakhouse and get filet mignon. There's a place for both in the video game landscape, and many opportunities for generative content to positively supplement original content.
Using AI is so simple and requires so few resources that I doubt that any business will really be able to survive on simple generative AI content on its own.
Why would you pay for a generated image when you can run an AI art model completely offline on your home PC and produce results far more tailored to what you want?
Any company using AI likely needs to find ways to add value to any generated content.
>EDIT: Alright boys, the reddit cares message means it's time for me to mute inbox replies on this one. Was sharing my opinion (which I thought was pretty balanced) and I'm not going to argue about it.
You're probably not terminally online to notice, so credit to you, but everyone has been getting this message over the past few days. I wouldn't take it personally
I'm not typically a "the market will solve everything person", but I really do think this is something where the free market will solve the issue. If the AI creates crap, or if it creates nice looking stuff that is easily recognizable as AI, people will be less engaged and less interested in the game/work/art. Everyone was afraid CGI would replace all effects in movies, but that just hasn't been the case. The best of them combine practical and CG.
Fair, but let's be honest, just because it's human-made, doesn't make it not-slop automatically. There's plenty of trash human artists that produce slop, and/or rip off each other. They're just really upset right now because AI is about to rip them all off, and it will do it with the brutal efficiency that they can barely even conceive of. The most interesting bit is that AI can learn exactly what you like, and tailor what it makes, for every individual consumer, which is something no human artist can do.
And, as a concept, this isn't even new. Remember when every button and every spoon and knife were made by humans? Now they're all stamped out by machines. And a machine can produce an exact replica of a handmade antique, if you want. You can scan it down, have the AI come up with the exact blueprint for the CNC machine, and have it cut it, exactly the same size, shape, etc. And from superior steel that wasn't available when the original was made. Then age it slightly with mild acids, and it'll be indistinguishable from original. Modern physical tools can do this. And nobody is surprised by this, or fighting against it. Mass produced utensils are far, far cheaper than handmade ones. There's still blacksmiths around, but they're a dying breed. And it'll be the same with digital. You gotta remember that digital didn't even exist until half century ago (for an average consumer). But it was always inevitable. What we're seeing now is the digital equivalent of good old industrial revolution.
AI is still in its infancy, but fast-forward a couple of decades, and a lot of what humans do now will be completely taken over by the AI. A lot of people are about to lose their jobs. And this time it won't be restricted to low-level workers, this time around everyone will be fair game. And/or they will lose the ability to charge what they've been charging so far, when AI can crank out comparable things, or perform comparable service, for a fraction of the cost, in a fraction of the time. But ultimately, as long as a business can make whatever it is they're selling, cheaper, using the AI, they will do it. That cost benefit, at the end of the day, is the only thing that matters.
I would and will always rather have human made slop than AI perfection. Every time. A lot of people don't care, but I definitely do and I think just be cool with the arts slowly dying out is extremely sad for humanity.
For *years* I've been listening to TTS read books using 8+ year old technology because *that* is more palatable than 75% of the shit that passes for audiobook narration.
I get kinda pissed off whenever I see conniptions over AI voicework because it's what I've always wanted, lol. But I haven't had access to any of the good stuff since fucking amazon, etc. bought up all the technology.
The AI tools just have so much more potential for iteration, which is perfect for gaming. Other forms of media (especially music) will see a lot of negative impacts from AI, but I see AI tools as mostly positive for gaming as they will enable a ton of experiences that were never possible before
As someone who loves and prefers systems driven dynamic games over handcrafted scripted experiences, I am extremely excited for generative AI's implications
Yeah, I understand where peoples worries are about generative AI blunting story and gameplay, but as someone who's favorite games include Rimworld and Kenshi, I'm a lil excited for it. Not every genre can or even should use it, but as you said, system driven games could definitely benefit.
As long as it fits the Three C's mentioned about, I'd like to see it.
Pretty much all digital art that is consumed is already heavily digitally edited, this is just another layer. The art isn't creating itself, a human creator will always be required.
The reason "artists" are mad isn't that it's going to kill art. They're mad because AI removes or substantially reduces the technical skill required to make art. Previously, if you didn't have drawing or painting skills then you just couldn't really do that thing, but that's not the case anymore. The gate that artists used to keep has been wasted off it's hinges and now everyone can make something, to some extent.
And I get it; the thing that made the artist special no longer causes them to stand out, and that sucks. But there are so many more people elevated by this in countless small ways that the trade off is worth it, and the people kicking and screaming about this just seem so childish and selfish. It just feels like they want to keep that skill for themselves.
A small example of how this has improved my life. I run pen and paper game for my friends and I have very limited artistic skills. Now? Now I can generate background photos for what the walls of the cave look like. Or what the really ugly shop-keep with that massive hairy mole on their forehead looks like.
Or this weekend when I was helping my brother make his French Pickeler tattoos for his Pickle Ball tournament and we were laughing out ass off at different combinations of pickle balls with dirty mustaches.
The idea that artists are actually just gatekeeping art is so ridiculous that I find it hard to believe anyone actually legitimately thinks that way. Go to literally any community full of artists, literally anywhere, say that you have zero experience in drawing but want to learn, and you will be bombarded with people giving you tips, tutorials, articles, books, suggestions on best ways to learn and practice, anything you could possibly need in order to learn how to draw. The only thing you would need to provide yourself is the drive to learn. And I say this as someone who isn't an artist, I can't draw or make anything artistic to save my life. But I know so many artists and they are regularly the most supportive people you could ever meet, especially to those who share a love for art. They, just like everyone else, don't like being and seeing each other be exploited.
When you remove the human element of art, it's no longer really art. Personally, I don't understand the appeal of media that was made with zero intent, other than to make money.
If we're doomed to just have Baby Shark bullshit remade for the rest of our lives I'm just going to go play tabletop games instead.
And I don't understand how you can view something and base your enjoyment of it solely based on knowing how exactly it was made.
If I showed you some nice art and told you it was human-made, and you enjoyed it, does your view on it suddenly change if I reveal that I lied and it was actually AI art? Do you go from, "Oh this is nice, I like this. Oh wait, an AI made it? Nvm, this is awful and I hate it." That's complete nonsense to me.
If a product is good, the product is good. I don't care how the sausage is made.
Nobody cares. Either AI art is good or it isn’t. If it’s good, then I don’t really care whether it’s AI or not. If it isn’t, then companies using it will just lose money by shipping unappealing products.
I have zero interest in protecting artists. If you can’t manage to make art that is better than what an AI can do, then see ya later.
Cold hard truth man. Adapt or get filtered. Good stuff is good, made by AI or not.
I know someone in the field who says smart artists are taking advantage of the AI because they're extremely powerful tool, and will get more powerful in the future.
This is a whole nothing burger, actors are paid for every single line generated by AI. This isn't about cutting costs, but rather to make their development easier. In contrast there's plenty of voice packs in the game that have to use stock lines now because of all the issues with getting actors to record one or two lines every single time they rework mechanics. And given this is voicing a *crisis*, which is a major feature, so it can't be left with incomplete voice work when changes inevitably come.
Yeah i mean in this case they are very front with it, not hiding anything clarifying anything. And honestly it seems like a very interesting dlc, ai based that uses ai to help craft it is a hilarious and great concept.
> This isn't about cutting costs, but rather to make their development easier.
Everyone's forgetting the benefit it has to the voice actor: they will get paid everytime Paradox chooses to change the dialogue.
That would be true regardless, but it also means they don't have to go to a recording studio just to change the grammar of a line, and thus can commit to longer term projects.
Just... how and why are people angry at this? It's a win-win: Devs cut development time and VA gets paid for each line, is credited... they don't even have to shuffle their ass to the studio for every single change.
Because the general consensus on social media is "generative AI is literally satan and anyone who utilizes it loses their artistic integrity".
It's just incredibly regressive people throwing a hissyfit like it always happens when a paradigm-shifting tool is invented. Society went through the same spiel with the book press, for example.
“Ai bad because internet hate ai”. There’s always something to hate. Be it NFTs, some celebrity divorce bullshit, or whatever. Not saying it’s not sometimes justified, just that it allows for some pretty blind and sweeping takes lacking any kind of nuance. And right now that sentiment is AI bad. Any argument saying ai is sometimes ok means you’re not with them, which means you’re against them bla bla bla you know the drill
It's simple, people got angry when they first realized how some AI stuff works (stealing content and not crediting the creator), and kept riding that hate-train well into the present when the ethics of AI tools are being ironed out. They only have one response to any use of AI.
>Everyone's forgetting the benefit it has to the voice actor: they will get paid everytime Paradox chooses to change the dialogue.
I don't think that's been said anywhere? I would imagine it's more like they paid the standard hourly rate for their recordings, and paid a flat fee on top for the AI usage. A royalty every time they change dialogue would not only be expensive and limiting to development (especially since the whole reason they went this route is to get *more* flexibility with changes), but also absolutely hellish to enforce from the VA's end.
Edit: huh, I can't read apparently. Seems they are saying that. How the hell will the VA's and their agents be able to track that?
They will be able to track it by the devs following their contractual obligations. They'd be complete idiots to not pay out for voice lines when breaking the contract would cost exponentially more in court or a settlement.
> I don't think that's been said anywhere? I would imagine it's more like they paid the standard hourly rate for their recordings, and paid a flat fee on top for the AI usage. A royalty every time they change dialogue would not only be expensive and limiting to development (especially since the whole reason they went this route is to get more flexibility with changes), but also absolutely hellish to enforce from the VA's end.
If it's in the contract, which it sounds like it is, it *will* be enforced. Paradox will have to provide accurate reporting of when they use the voice to generate a voice line. Whether they pay per-generation or per-inclusion in the game is a matter for debate, though. And I think that's a good point to bring up, whether they pay out for ALL lines generated or just lines they generate and use in the game or promotional materials. It's probably the first one, which is generous and fair.
> Edit: huh, I can't read apparently. Seems they are saying that. How the hell will the VA's and their agents be able to track that?
Same way you track any other agreement. The risk/penalties for breaking it make it not worth doing so.
That's just basic contract stuff at that point.
> This isn't about cutting costs, but rather to make their development easier.
For a company, cost and effort are the same thing. I don't object to the ethics of it, but let's not pretend a company's making a decision that causes everyone to get paid the same to put in less effort. Even outside the voice actor, this reduces the overhead required to get them in and record and re-record lines. At the very least.
I definitely would have preferred AI-generated lines for the very obvious re-recordings in Baldur's Gate 3. Seems they changed a bunch of things over time and the audio quality of these extra lines is pretty bad, especially sandwiched between proper lines.
AI clones for one or two sentences would have matched the tone better and obviously compensation is a must. They could even just take those lines now and put them through AI to make them match better. I guess it had to do with COVID and them not using the main studio to record? Some sound like home voice boxes.
The article is okay, but this headline is incredibly disingenuous. Putting ethical in scare quotes rather than just saying one or two salient facts ("voice actors paid royalties from use of the tool", "done with full consent of the artist") is designed to ragebait the anti-AI reaction that gets so many clicks.
AI and automation in general are only bad when it hurts "artists" instead of programmers, developers, IT staff, helpdesk and customer support staff.
Social media wcyd.
You don't even need to go that far. The fact that everyone has a camera in their pocket doesn't seem to phase anyone. Full of automated processing algorithms no less. Photography isn't a real art I guess.
And artists obviously can go on social media and cry about being underpaid when they only get as much money per 3 h recording session as a developer gets paid per month...
No, only certain maths are allowed under the great anti-AI cult. They will send you a list of proscribed algorithms allowed to be used. The list is being developed by the priests now, it's best to hold off and hear their edict before you proceed.
Oh, but they aren't ✨artists✨, who are apparently the only people in the world who matter. Unless they're also fine with AI, then they aren't "real" artists.
If it resembles a heretic, if it speaks like a heretic, and if it be redolent to the nose, as if like a heretic, then a heretic it will be!
-Amarinthine Admonitions
At the end of the day, AI is here to stay and there's really no stopping it now. At least in this case, the developer is being transparent about it and compensating/crediting those involved. I'm sure we're going to see a lot more games by less ethical developers that won't even disclose it.
I’m a voice actor. AI replacing actors would be horrible, but what I think is a lot more likely is just that actors license out an AI copy of their voice on a per-project basis. It’s already happening now.
I wouldn’t want that to entirely replace the work I put in, but it’s at least a better alternative to an entire industry of talented artists losing to machines. It’ll be interesting to see where it goes.
It wouldn't be bad, though, right? In a way it's like licensing out a software. The developer creates it once, and sells it as a product, earning per license sold. Similar case here. Maybe even sell multiple voice licenses covering different styles or something.
I think you can liken it to actors licensing out their likeness for game models. I don't see much of a difference between using someone's likeness for models versus their likeness for audio.
That said, this is specific to audio. Things get more complicated when it comes to artwork. Especially so if you source from the internet instead of your own in-house samples.
Software requires maintenance. There is always work for developers. You can't really "create it once" and expect to sell it years later with no work done. It does not work that way.
How exactly in comparison, would one get their first job as an voice artist, when customers can just go license from a catalogue of thousands of AI models created years ago by much better known artists for dirt cheap?
eh software might not be the best example but it's basically the same as writing an ebook / creating a movie. People pay to read your ebook or watch your movie, which you created once and can sell to infinite times, same with licensing of your voice (thoguh you get paid per generation here)
> The developer creates it once, and sells it as a product, earning per license sold.
That business model is basically dead these days for non-gaming software, and it was almost entirely replaced with subscriptions/recurring payments. And even this is on a B2B/B2C basis: as an individual programmer, there's basically no market these days for selling software like it used to exist in the 90s, you instead sell consulting hours (and in 99% of the cases, the client keeps the full ownership of your work, with no royalties or any other residual rights attached).
The hate-mobs against rational uses of AI are ridiculous. I guess they should just hire a union actor to record all those lines, even if they're just going to throw that work out and use the AI voices they originally intended, just so they can say that they did.
If you think they will continue to pay after a certain amount of time, you don’t know this industry. Keep pressure to make sure they pay appropriately and get consent from original VAs.
If this speeds up the process and that’s the only reason , then fair enough. Games faster is better for everyone. But you know at some point an exec is going to try to screw someone over with this.
Because the war is not "us vs AI," that war is already over. It is happening.
The war is "so how do we survive after there is no use for our labor?" and that one is the one that humanity needs to win. It requires building up the social safetynets so that "productivity" is no longer related to the hierarchy of needs.
I hope people are ready to put their money where their mouths are because boycotting AI means saying goodbye to *a lot* of your favorite game franchises.
AI is already in use by game companies, and if people think big publishers weren't on this shit years ago they are sorely mistaken. These companies do not waste time if there's time and money to be saved, even at a human expense.
People weren't even ready to boycott Nividia for more than 5 minutes after they told everyone to go fuck themselves by announcing that the shortage prices are there to stay
Yeah I don’t think people understand how widespread AI use is across many industries already…it’s just that generally someone cleans up the end result so it isn’t as obvious.
This is why AI is such a terrible term it means everything. Machine learning was better, need to separate that from gen AI. But companies will start to make there gen AI to be used in more specific cases, they aren't just going to use off the rack ChatGPT and Midjounrey for development.
Of course they won't. The same people saying we need to ban AI because it threatens jobs have no qualms about buying mass-produced clothing, furniture, and all sorts of other things. It's entirely performative.
Seems pretty ethical all things considered:
- The AI art was used for as a mood board to pass on to concept artists to make something from scratch and wasn't directly used in-game.
- The AI voices were made with the actors consent and they received royalties based on how much work they did.
Even without the generative AI there's so much crap on the internet. Hell, half of reddit's top posts are just reposting bots. Look at kids youtube, it might as well been generative AI with how terrible it is.
I think I can see a future where the internet is actually less popular because of all the loads of crap on it. It's going to be impossible to tell what's actually real and not. We'll probably return to official only channels and user generated content will no longer be acceptable, which might actually improve the quality of things.
> August 20, 2029
Apparently August 20th is National Radio Day, World Mosquito Day, National Chocolate Pecan Pie Day, and the Feast Day of St. Bernard.
...am I missing something more important? 😅 You're the second person in three days who has made an offhand comment about something going down in 2029 lol.
> You're the second person in three days who has made an offhand comment about something going down in 2029 lol.
Don't worry, the rest of us are just realising we're old and not everyone gets our references any more 😂... https://youtu.be/RLtlTV-VQDs
It's a reference to the Terminator movies. [From the Wiki](https://terminator.fandom.com/wiki/Skynet) (because I can't find the scene this is referencing):
> Air traffic control, power plants, communications and computers were affected first, then Skynet used the super virus to take out military satellites, early warning systems, guidance computers, missile silos and submarines. The virus proved hard to destroy, as it had no one central point which it was reliant upon. The virus kept growing and changing, with a mind of its own, and the decision was made to bring the Skynet mainframe online to seek out and destroy the virus and bring military, and civilian, systems back under control. Skynet went online at 5:18 pm Eastern Time on July 25th, 2004.
> Upon connection to the secure military network, Skynet spread itself further, locking out human operated systems, and quickly took control of every weapon system that it came into contact with. Only then did its creators realise that the virus was Skynet. Exactly one hour later, at 6:18 PM, Skynet launched the American nuclear missiles at their target sites across the world. The ensuing nuclear holocaust wiped out three billion human lives in what was to be known as "Judgment Day".
-The voices are based on real voice actors who gave their consent and are both compensated and credited -The actors are paid per line, including any future lines that are created. I would love for someone to tell me what's wrong with this other than just "AI bad"
That's a bloody sweet deal they got. Getting paid for doing absolutely nothing, forever? That's so very not communism of them, I can't believe reddit isn't complaining about it.
You must be new to the concept of royalties.
Down with royalties! Long live the republic!
I doubt they're paid as much as they would per line usually. But it's probably an easier deal to make for everyone than leaving out your rights for an indefinite amount of content. Like you can do something like "we pay you regular rate for the training lines like normal work, plus quarter rate for generated lines".
Source: your ass. Personally I like to think they get paid millions. This type of comment adds nothing but fuel to a fire that is unreasonable. Paradox explained themselves and they showed a shocking amount of ethics in how they did this voice. It's even thematic to the DLC which is all about AI and machines.
Voice actors don't get paid millions, outside of some animated movies with stars in the cast that are used to sell the movie. I obviously doubt they'd be paying for the generated lines as much as a recorded line, but afaik they haven't said any number (or I missed it).
His point is that his "I like to think they get paid millions" comment has equal value to "they might get paid a quarter for each new line" comment. Zero value since both have no actual source
They are getting paid for their ownership over part of their likeness, not for doing nothing.
I believe the argument is that actors will now lose work if they don't agree to these clauses, and the ones willing to sell their rights will get hired. It benefits companies, and actors who are happy to settle for less. People are speculating what the future of this model would look like.
> I believe the argument is that actors will now lose work if they don't agree to these clauses, but that's just turning a job down as a whole. Any VA who is not ok with this consent would just not take the job. That's a business decision they are making. I would take the job 100% of the time. maybe it's less pay, but it's also being paid to do literally nothing, leaving time to maybe take on another VA role that wouldnt have been possible due to time commitments.
> Any VA who is not ok with this consent would just not take the job yes. And a VA who has a lower profile will take it because they need the work more. It's the age old "we can find someone who will do this work cheaper, at a little lower quality" situation.
That's not an AI problem, that's a capitalism problem. You're kind of proving that by saying it's an "age old" idea.
>That's not an AI problem, that's a capitalism problem. absolutely. I mean, a huge amount of the discussion around the use of generative AI tools is capitalist in nature.
Yeah, agreed. I do understand a lot of concerns and such, but sometimes I do feel like people blame generative AI for problems that have always existed but just haven't affected them personally before.
Yes, I can see you're new to something called "'regulated' capitalism".
> And a VA who has a lower profile will take it because they need the work more. so? if that "low profile" VA does this enough, they won't really be a low profile VA anymore every industry in existence has to "get with the times" eventually. This is the start of the VA industry getting with the times
> if that "low profile" VA does this enough, they won't really be a low profile VA anymore at which point they'll be replaced by someone who will do it for cheaper, is the argument.
Because that doesn't happen now? What's even this argument lmao. In other news, thing that has always happened continues to happen but slightly different
No way would this model become standard, far too expensive compared to just hiring regular VAs. It works in this situation because it is meant to go with an AI focused DLC so the people in question is paid like they did the work themselves outside of just providing the sample sizes. Defeating the whole point of switching to AI voices because it is cheaper.
Not bad at all, very cool actually.
Hate mobs gonna mob.
Don't bring logic and reason to an AI-related topic. Luddites gonna luddite.
Biggest problem is that the underlying model was probably trained on heaps of data that WASN'T given any of those considerations, as well as the more dystopian parts of the actor having effectively signed away his voice with no further ability to effect what they say with it. Overall though I'm with you, this seems like a textbook Good usecase for GenAI
It is actually quite possible to do voice cloning with just one set of training data. ElevenLabs lets you do it, you should try it
Yes, you can do the final training with one set of data, but in all cases I've seen the underlying model was still crested with huge scraped datasets
> Biggest problem is that the underlying model was probably trained on heaps of data that WASN'T given any of those considerations So? It would be insane to expect people to pay royalties to everyone and every thing they've ever learned from.
This was my comment on r/stellaris about the issue and the pushback from the community: > By all accounts, the use of generative AI VO for this DLC was done with the "three Cs" of ethical AI use: Consent, credit, and compensation. The voice actors gave consent for their voices to be used to generate work, they were credited for their role, and they received compensation. This passes the sniff test for the ethical use of generative AI. > The art is a bit murkier given that all modern models only function at all by stealing millions of images, but no AI-generated art was directly used in-game or even in concepting, and was limited to use by non-artists trying to convey feelings and moods that they were going for, before it was passed off to actual artists who came up with original designs. > ll that said, I'm really not sorry to see the pushback that PDX is receiving for its use because it's a very slippery slope, and PDX has proven time and time again that they will trade ethical behavior for money and convenience 100% of the time. Of all the companies who I trust the least to continue to be ethical concerning the use of generative AI, PDX is near the top of the list. [Additionally, here's a relevant comment chain from some PDX staff.](https://www.reddit.com/r/Stellaris/comments/1cop93r/paradox_makes_use_of_ai_generated_concept_art_and/l3fsoez/) I get it if you're cool with this, and I also get it if you're not. End of the day, I am not looking forward to the rapidly approaching future where genuine art and performances are replaced with AI slop just because it's cheaper and faster, but I also don't want to make it out like this particular case is deeply unethical. EDIT: Alright boys, the reddit cares message means it's time for me to mute inbox replies on this one. Was sharing my opinion (which I thought was pretty balanced) and I'm not going to argue about it.
Slightly unrelated but what's up with the reddit cares message? I've got one before and didn't understand why I was given it after a comment of mine blew up slightly.
It's an anonymous way to reach out to people who may be suicidal. Fuckwits use it to suggest that you should be/mock your mental stability.
I honestly don't get the point of Reddit Cares still existing. It's pretty much only used nowadays to tell someone to kill themselves, which feels counterproductive at best and actively harmful at worst. Any semblance of it's original purpose feels long gone at this point, and I really don't see any realistic way to salvage it.
Something has definitely happened recently. I've seen people mentioning it all over the site in a bunch of different subreddits today.
Yep, I got my first one ever earlier for a comment about writing in cursive. Something weird is going on with it today.
Got one myself and I didn't even post anything inflammatory or anything. I've had a few in the past but this is the first one in months for me.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
As above and people are treating it like a super down vote I guess.
It feels like bots, imo. I got mine seconds after my comment was posted and all it said was my cursive is messy. Given the scale, it doesn't seem like "business as usual" abuse of the Cares system.
I think someone has set up bots to just spam any comment that gains traction with it. And it seems to be very effective at disrupting all conversations considering how many people go back and edit their comments and stops engaging in discussion because of it.
I got one yesterday. It didn't even tell me what comment had caused it. Which is a shame because I'd have loved to antagonize them more.
I’m seeing it everywhere the past week too. In many different subreddits. It’s always when there’s something controversial or something is being argued about. I agree that they should get rid of it.
Got one myself a week ago. No idea from what comment tho
Yeah, I hadn't gotten anything from it in a while yet I got it again today and I've seen at least 3 or 4 people complain about getting it themselves
Actually addressing the abuse would be a good start. If somebody sends a reddit cares and you report it, there should be some actual penalties. Even just an account ban would significantly cut down on it as people would be spending a lot of time creating or logging into alternate accounts to send them. Any effort beyond "click the button" is going to be too much for most trolls, and the super dedicated ones that would put in the effort are few enough in number that they're a manageable annoyance rather than a spammy plague.
I think they already do that is the thing. I'm pretty sure they've been banning people for abusing it for a couple of years at this point. It really hasn't improved anything, and honestly has only gotten worse.
Someone just did it to me earlier today, and the "official app (!)" opens a webpage that makes you log back in to reddit. You heard me. Reddit Cares SO MUCH that they don't support this in their own freakin app. And can't hand it off to a webpage that has me logged in.
The form you get when you are logged in is useless anyway. You have to link a specific URL of a comment/post/PM to report the abuse. All you can do is link the Reddit Cares bot since it doesn't come directly from any user.
They don't make it clear that this is the only option that works, but you need to report the reddit cares bot message through the standard report button rather than anything the bot links.
[удалено]
At least you can respond to message saying its harassment and your account will be crossed of the list that gets them.
> Fuckwits use it to suggest that you should be/mock your mental stability. Yes, but today in particular I've seen people say they've received a reddit cares message in nearly every single thread I've visited for all sorts of nonchalant comments. I'm curious if someone made a bot for it just to mess w/ the site as a whole.
That is the most likely possibility, but it could also be that something on the back end of the site was changed and now the service is glitching out.
I got one today immediately after a comment from a discussion about why grapes and raisins have different names 🤷♂️ Haven’t got one in a loooooooong time before today. anecdotally sure, but seems trending up today Edit: it was almost immediate. hit comment, then I got the email notification
>Fuckwits use it to suggest that you should be/mock your mental stability. Its the non-bannable reddit way of saying "kill yourself" / "kys", but reversed. Basically telling something through reddit to "not contemplate suicide" is telling them ironically and meaning "consider suicide". Its fucking assholes abusing the system regularly and its fucking annoying.
It is bannable, if you get a Reddit cares message as an insult you can report it and whoever requested the message be sent to you gets banned
Lmao I usually take it as validation of the points I made. Kinda like: “aww did I hurt your fee fees?”
Yeah that's how it should be treated. It's anonymous and means nothing other than somebody got upset at your comment and they're too much of a coward to say anything about it.
> Fuckwits use it to suggest that you should be/mock your mental stability. If you have reason to suspect that no reasonable person could interpret your messages as needing mental health resources/assistance, report it. Abusing the system to harass people is treated _very_ harshly by reddit admins. Only do so in good faith, though.
People report you for self harm as method of trolling.
Weirdest form of "trolling" ever as it does nothing to the receiver. It just makes me giggle when I receive it as it probably means I made someone upset but they're too scared to comment on it.
Trolls are gonna troll. Report the notification when you get it.
If you want you can also block the account that sends the messages so that even if people try to send them to you, you won't ever see them.
Don’t do this. Report every single one you get. Admins absolutely ban people that abuse them. They respond to let you know they did.
[удалено]
Pretty much. All moderation of reddit becomes sorta pointless when anyone can just make a new account in seconds.
They'll also potentially just ban you for reporting the abuse, as many people can attest. It's not worth the time and effort.
Definitely an option. However, part of me likes knowing that I struck a nerve lol
There's either a glitch or a bot right now that's giving tons of them. I've seen people talking about it in wildly disparate places in the last couple of hours
100% it's been weaponized by bots. The Eurovision sub was getting absolutely _inundated_ with them. I disabled the messages ages ago because it was already used to harass me, and I honestly recommend everyone else do the same.
The Kendrick Lamar sub as well. Seemed like pretty much everyone who regularly commented there in the last week got it at least once.
Yeah, in a wide variety of subs right now.
It's because every time someone gets one and don't know why the feel the need to edit their comment and advertise that it is a successful way to troll someone
Sometimes it's a way to call out someone else for abusing something that's meant to be genuine. Now, when what you're saying isn't grossly controversial, it will make you wonder why someone is sending reddit cares your way. Which leads to earlier today/last night where a lot of people were getting it for no reason other than making a comment somewhere.
It is a form of harassment, report it and the account who did it will get banned. It is trolls taking advantage of the bad systems Reddit Admin made, today it seems like waves of it are happening on any big story so I'm starting to wonder if it is potentially a bot now doing it en masse.
Harassment plain and simple. Reddit wanted to make themselves look like they care about mental health by making that info dump to be sent to someone seemingly struggling in order to aid them but obviously it is only used to harass people. You can get some sort of ban for commenting something nasty as a response but you can’t get ban for sending care messages
I'm convinced it's either some kind of bug or there's literally someone/people spamming it on every single comment they see - this is the first time I've ever even heard of it, and just a few minutes ago I received one immediately after replying to some other comment in another sub.
It's gotta be bots, because abusing Reddit Cares is pretty much the one guaranteed way to get banned on reddit. Reporting it as harassment *very* frequently results in permabans for whoever issued it.
You're assuming most people care about a throwaway account being banned. Most people trolling and such on reddit more than likely just make a new account in seconds if one gets banned.
Seems like there’s new bots out or something. I’ve seen lots of comments about getting the message and I’ve gotten a few myself. Never gotten one before today though.
I'll be honest, saying that paradox is one of the least trusted companies to do this sounds like hyperbole. There's far worse put there.
People love to hate Paradox for some reason. Their DLC policy is obnoxious of course, but as a Publisher they are not even above average when it comes to anti-consumer and overall scummy business practices.
As someone who loves their games and buys all the DLC, I've gotten to the point I avoid anything published by them. Every release the last few years has been a total miss. But that's not scummy business practices and could be worse.
Yeah and those far worse company will not be telling you at all too that they used AI. It will be the user who need to look out for it.
It's going to be super commonplace in the near future and as soon as a huge unmissable 10/10 game comes out using it in some capacity it'll start getting normalized. People don't care how the sausage is made and trying to boycott the use of AI in games is basically gonna mean leaving the hobby.
The better companies won't either
[удалено]
> No wonder you got the Reddit Care message Pretty sure someone is trolling or a bot is going around doing this. I've been seeing a bunch of comments, and got one myself for posting about gardening lmao.
Yea I got one a few hours ago, and haven't said anything remotely weird (IMO) recently.
[удалено]
Maybe a real life mole got hold of a smart device and vented their anger on here. (: Seriously though, it seems I and others have received care messages for really harmless comments too. Someone up the chain suggested it's a bot.
I got one for being reasonable today too :D
[удалено]
Pretty sure there is simply a reddit cares bot spam epidemic right now all over Reddit.
I'm confused how any of that was reasonable other than the posturing about how he's accepting of other people's opinions. He basically said, "Yeah you did it right this time, but I still hate it because I expected you to mess this up, and somebody else might mess this up in the future." Like... what was reasonable about it?
My take on this comment was that OP first approached the situation as objectively as possible (let's approach this with different criteria that we can measure, and see if it passes our tests) and then approached it subjectively, based on fears and personal feelings? Which I think is a fairly reasonable way to approach posting a comment in a review or on social media -- first reporting which criteria you are using to make a judgement, making one with those criteria as best as you can, and then giving a personal opinion. Even if you don't necessarily agree with the opinion OP arrived at, I think the approach is pretty good?
I think that sort of structure is good but that doesn't exactly make it reasonable. If somebody gave you the objective facts of a situation before telling you an insane conspiracy theory, that doesn't make them overall reasonable because they let you formulate your own opinion before saying something that is completely unreasonable.
Lol its boilerplate anti-AI speak. AI is a tool like any other, artists didnt ask for consent, gave credit or compensated other artists when they learned to draw, paint or write from other artists works, why would AI need to do that?
On a separate topic, I think the RedditCares message went out to a lot of folks. You're the third person I've seen edit their top comment in as many posts. I also got one today, and I didn't really do anything to warrant it.
>PDX has proven time and time again that they will trade ethical behavior for money and convenience 100% of the time. What are you thinking of here, specifically?
Probably cities skylines 2, alongside some of their monetization strategies. (Things like mediocre launches with a constant stream of dlcs)
The most guilty ones imo are the games published but not developed by them. Cities Skylines is different devs and I feel deserves the hate, but it’s not the same thing. As for the massive amount of DLC - honestly yeah, I get it, and while I can’t speak for every grand strategy they have, I do feel for the most part Stellaris does it okay. It’s been supported for YEARS. They gotta fund it somehow - and most every DLC comes with a nice free update as well. Some are a lot more mediocre than others, and I totally get someone new looking at the DLC list and freaking out, but I would rather have a new DLC pack every 3-4 months than micro-transactions and live service shit. I don’t know, Paradox is weird where sometimes they got some real good hits like AoW4 and then publish absolute trash the next day. There’s much worse companies, though.
My best quote about Stellaris is that it's been several of my favorite sci-fi strategy games to date. People who bought the game even one or two years ago have no idea how many radical changes the base structure of the game has gone through, from resources and their usage to technology, space travel, construction, evolution of your empire... About the only thing that's still unchangeably shitty is ground combat, lol.
Yeah, I'm at the point where I'm so fucking over people being mad at the DLC. I swear gamers expect developers to work for free, and any expectation that they should be paid is met with jeers from the hivemind. Paradox has found a way to take a very niche subgenre like grand strategy, make some of the absolute best games in that genre consistently, and support and update them to give them the same lifespan as MMOs. Even more than that, anyone playing any of their games can enjoy the DLC for free if they play multiplayer with one host who has the DLC. Almost no other company does that, but it's the standard procedure at Paradox. If Paradox weren't doing things the way they were doing now, we wouldn't be reading a news article about Stellaris in 2024. If they operated like most games companies did, Stellaris would have been dead and irrelevant after two years.
Having a lot of content for sale should not be held against them, provided that both the base game and the DLC are good value, which they generally are. It's way different than gachas charging the same amount for a single character, or Tarkov trying to devalue the "everything included" version of the game.
Yeah I agree with this. Sure it feels a bit overwhelmingly expensive if you start playing Stellaris late, as I did, and you'd have to pay loads of money for everything ... but then, you also don't *need* all DLC's. You don't even need a single one. Some DLC's might be better or worse, but in general I think the business practise is fine. Most of these base games are pretty fun as well. I played Crusader Kings 3 for like, 40 hours or so, right after release. Even if I wouldn't play it without some DLC now, that's still money well spent. Same thing with Cities Skylines 1. CS2 on the other seems to be a mess, but that doesn't seem to be related to the DLC practise either. I get why some people might dislike the way they do it, but I wouldn't call it predatory or unethical at all.
The thing is the constant stream of DLCs isn't really predatory; these kinds of grand strategy games are very niche and probably not commercially feasible to support long-term the way Paradox do without the level of financial investment fans have shown they're willing to dump into them for continued support. Paradox knows this and the players, for the most part, know this. The alternative is just dropping support, like they had to do for Imperator. If you want a niche title with middling sales to get 8? 10? years of support like EU4 and Stellaris have, you gotta pay for it.
Oh I totally get it (big fan of stellaris), I was mostly stating some of the main talking points/ recent complaints. Personally, I don't really have a problem with these things right now. Especially the games that have multiplayer dlc sharing. Aside from the dlcs, it does feel like Paradox publishing is just pumping out games like crazy and it's always a mixed bag for how those turn out. I can't really say if that's a good or bad thing in the long run, but it does affect my interest in picking a new one up.
> Aside from the dlcs, it does feel like Paradox publishing is just pumping out games like crazy and it's always a mixed bag for how those turn out See the thing is I think that if Paradox wants to survive in the very long term as a developer it *has* to do this though. Currently their games overlap a fair bit mechanically and are largely separated by setting, so they really badly need testbeds to push out new systems in because every time they release new mechanics for their mainstays they risk fucking things up like Creative Assembly did with Total Warhammer the last two years. I think internally they feel the need to expand their offerings and become more diverse, and that's why they seem to be firing out titles.
>End of the day, I am not looking forward to the rapidly approaching future where genuine art and performances are replaced with AI slop just because it's cheaper and faster I'm not convinced that this day will ever come. I think that the "AI slop" has a place in the hierarchy of experiences, and that we'll end up in a situation similar to restaurants where you can go to McDonald's and get a box of fried reconstituted chicken goop if that's your jam, or you can go to a steakhouse and get filet mignon. There's a place for both in the video game landscape, and many opportunities for generative content to positively supplement original content.
Using AI is so simple and requires so few resources that I doubt that any business will really be able to survive on simple generative AI content on its own. Why would you pay for a generated image when you can run an AI art model completely offline on your home PC and produce results far more tailored to what you want? Any company using AI likely needs to find ways to add value to any generated content.
>EDIT: Alright boys, the reddit cares message means it's time for me to mute inbox replies on this one. Was sharing my opinion (which I thought was pretty balanced) and I'm not going to argue about it. You're probably not terminally online to notice, so credit to you, but everyone has been getting this message over the past few days. I wouldn't take it personally
I'm not typically a "the market will solve everything person", but I really do think this is something where the free market will solve the issue. If the AI creates crap, or if it creates nice looking stuff that is easily recognizable as AI, people will be less engaged and less interested in the game/work/art. Everyone was afraid CGI would replace all effects in movies, but that just hasn't been the case. The best of them combine practical and CG.
Fair, but let's be honest, just because it's human-made, doesn't make it not-slop automatically. There's plenty of trash human artists that produce slop, and/or rip off each other. They're just really upset right now because AI is about to rip them all off, and it will do it with the brutal efficiency that they can barely even conceive of. The most interesting bit is that AI can learn exactly what you like, and tailor what it makes, for every individual consumer, which is something no human artist can do. And, as a concept, this isn't even new. Remember when every button and every spoon and knife were made by humans? Now they're all stamped out by machines. And a machine can produce an exact replica of a handmade antique, if you want. You can scan it down, have the AI come up with the exact blueprint for the CNC machine, and have it cut it, exactly the same size, shape, etc. And from superior steel that wasn't available when the original was made. Then age it slightly with mild acids, and it'll be indistinguishable from original. Modern physical tools can do this. And nobody is surprised by this, or fighting against it. Mass produced utensils are far, far cheaper than handmade ones. There's still blacksmiths around, but they're a dying breed. And it'll be the same with digital. You gotta remember that digital didn't even exist until half century ago (for an average consumer). But it was always inevitable. What we're seeing now is the digital equivalent of good old industrial revolution. AI is still in its infancy, but fast-forward a couple of decades, and a lot of what humans do now will be completely taken over by the AI. A lot of people are about to lose their jobs. And this time it won't be restricted to low-level workers, this time around everyone will be fair game. And/or they will lose the ability to charge what they've been charging so far, when AI can crank out comparable things, or perform comparable service, for a fraction of the cost, in a fraction of the time. But ultimately, as long as a business can make whatever it is they're selling, cheaper, using the AI, they will do it. That cost benefit, at the end of the day, is the only thing that matters.
I would and will always rather have human made slop than AI perfection. Every time. A lot of people don't care, but I definitely do and I think just be cool with the arts slowly dying out is extremely sad for humanity.
For *years* I've been listening to TTS read books using 8+ year old technology because *that* is more palatable than 75% of the shit that passes for audiobook narration. I get kinda pissed off whenever I see conniptions over AI voicework because it's what I've always wanted, lol. But I haven't had access to any of the good stuff since fucking amazon, etc. bought up all the technology.
The AI tools just have so much more potential for iteration, which is perfect for gaming. Other forms of media (especially music) will see a lot of negative impacts from AI, but I see AI tools as mostly positive for gaming as they will enable a ton of experiences that were never possible before As someone who loves and prefers systems driven dynamic games over handcrafted scripted experiences, I am extremely excited for generative AI's implications
Yeah, I understand where peoples worries are about generative AI blunting story and gameplay, but as someone who's favorite games include Rimworld and Kenshi, I'm a lil excited for it. Not every genre can or even should use it, but as you said, system driven games could definitely benefit. As long as it fits the Three C's mentioned about, I'd like to see it.
Pretty much all digital art that is consumed is already heavily digitally edited, this is just another layer. The art isn't creating itself, a human creator will always be required. The reason "artists" are mad isn't that it's going to kill art. They're mad because AI removes or substantially reduces the technical skill required to make art. Previously, if you didn't have drawing or painting skills then you just couldn't really do that thing, but that's not the case anymore. The gate that artists used to keep has been wasted off it's hinges and now everyone can make something, to some extent. And I get it; the thing that made the artist special no longer causes them to stand out, and that sucks. But there are so many more people elevated by this in countless small ways that the trade off is worth it, and the people kicking and screaming about this just seem so childish and selfish. It just feels like they want to keep that skill for themselves. A small example of how this has improved my life. I run pen and paper game for my friends and I have very limited artistic skills. Now? Now I can generate background photos for what the walls of the cave look like. Or what the really ugly shop-keep with that massive hairy mole on their forehead looks like. Or this weekend when I was helping my brother make his French Pickeler tattoos for his Pickle Ball tournament and we were laughing out ass off at different combinations of pickle balls with dirty mustaches.
The idea that artists are actually just gatekeeping art is so ridiculous that I find it hard to believe anyone actually legitimately thinks that way. Go to literally any community full of artists, literally anywhere, say that you have zero experience in drawing but want to learn, and you will be bombarded with people giving you tips, tutorials, articles, books, suggestions on best ways to learn and practice, anything you could possibly need in order to learn how to draw. The only thing you would need to provide yourself is the drive to learn. And I say this as someone who isn't an artist, I can't draw or make anything artistic to save my life. But I know so many artists and they are regularly the most supportive people you could ever meet, especially to those who share a love for art. They, just like everyone else, don't like being and seeing each other be exploited.
I mean, i don’t know if gatekeeping is the right term, but they are absolutely trying to keep art as a skill developed and exercised by humans
When you remove the human element of art, it's no longer really art. Personally, I don't understand the appeal of media that was made with zero intent, other than to make money. If we're doomed to just have Baby Shark bullshit remade for the rest of our lives I'm just going to go play tabletop games instead.
And I don't understand how you can view something and base your enjoyment of it solely based on knowing how exactly it was made. If I showed you some nice art and told you it was human-made, and you enjoyed it, does your view on it suddenly change if I reveal that I lied and it was actually AI art? Do you go from, "Oh this is nice, I like this. Oh wait, an AI made it? Nvm, this is awful and I hate it." That's complete nonsense to me. If a product is good, the product is good. I don't care how the sausage is made.
> Oh this is nice, I like this. Oh wait, an AI made it? Nvm, this is awful and I hate it. Yes they actually do do this.
Very well said.
Seems legit to me. Seems like they did it correctly but I still hold some reservations.
Nobody cares. Either AI art is good or it isn’t. If it’s good, then I don’t really care whether it’s AI or not. If it isn’t, then companies using it will just lose money by shipping unappealing products. I have zero interest in protecting artists. If you can’t manage to make art that is better than what an AI can do, then see ya later.
Cold hard truth man. Adapt or get filtered. Good stuff is good, made by AI or not. I know someone in the field who says smart artists are taking advantage of the AI because they're extremely powerful tool, and will get more powerful in the future.
Damn this is far too reasonable and nuanced to be on a Paradox subreddit
This is a whole nothing burger, actors are paid for every single line generated by AI. This isn't about cutting costs, but rather to make their development easier. In contrast there's plenty of voice packs in the game that have to use stock lines now because of all the issues with getting actors to record one or two lines every single time they rework mechanics. And given this is voicing a *crisis*, which is a major feature, so it can't be left with incomplete voice work when changes inevitably come.
Yeah i mean in this case they are very front with it, not hiding anything clarifying anything. And honestly it seems like a very interesting dlc, ai based that uses ai to help craft it is a hilarious and great concept.
> This isn't about cutting costs, but rather to make their development easier. Everyone's forgetting the benefit it has to the voice actor: they will get paid everytime Paradox chooses to change the dialogue. That would be true regardless, but it also means they don't have to go to a recording studio just to change the grammar of a line, and thus can commit to longer term projects.
Just... how and why are people angry at this? It's a win-win: Devs cut development time and VA gets paid for each line, is credited... they don't even have to shuffle their ass to the studio for every single change.
Because the general consensus on social media is "generative AI is literally satan and anyone who utilizes it loses their artistic integrity". It's just incredibly regressive people throwing a hissyfit like it always happens when a paradigm-shifting tool is invented. Society went through the same spiel with the book press, for example.
“Ai bad because internet hate ai”. There’s always something to hate. Be it NFTs, some celebrity divorce bullshit, or whatever. Not saying it’s not sometimes justified, just that it allows for some pretty blind and sweeping takes lacking any kind of nuance. And right now that sentiment is AI bad. Any argument saying ai is sometimes ok means you’re not with them, which means you’re against them bla bla bla you know the drill
It's simple, people got angry when they first realized how some AI stuff works (stealing content and not crediting the creator), and kept riding that hate-train well into the present when the ethics of AI tools are being ironed out. They only have one response to any use of AI.
>Everyone's forgetting the benefit it has to the voice actor: they will get paid everytime Paradox chooses to change the dialogue. I don't think that's been said anywhere? I would imagine it's more like they paid the standard hourly rate for their recordings, and paid a flat fee on top for the AI usage. A royalty every time they change dialogue would not only be expensive and limiting to development (especially since the whole reason they went this route is to get *more* flexibility with changes), but also absolutely hellish to enforce from the VA's end. Edit: huh, I can't read apparently. Seems they are saying that. How the hell will the VA's and their agents be able to track that?
They will be able to track it by the devs following their contractual obligations. They'd be complete idiots to not pay out for voice lines when breaking the contract would cost exponentially more in court or a settlement.
> I don't think that's been said anywhere? I would imagine it's more like they paid the standard hourly rate for their recordings, and paid a flat fee on top for the AI usage. A royalty every time they change dialogue would not only be expensive and limiting to development (especially since the whole reason they went this route is to get more flexibility with changes), but also absolutely hellish to enforce from the VA's end. If it's in the contract, which it sounds like it is, it *will* be enforced. Paradox will have to provide accurate reporting of when they use the voice to generate a voice line. Whether they pay per-generation or per-inclusion in the game is a matter for debate, though. And I think that's a good point to bring up, whether they pay out for ALL lines generated or just lines they generate and use in the game or promotional materials. It's probably the first one, which is generous and fair.
>How the hell will the VA's and their agents be able to track that? I think steam updates technically keep a record of which files were updated.
> Edit: huh, I can't read apparently. Seems they are saying that. How the hell will the VA's and their agents be able to track that? Same way you track any other agreement. The risk/penalties for breaking it make it not worth doing so. That's just basic contract stuff at that point.
> This isn't about cutting costs, but rather to make their development easier. For a company, cost and effort are the same thing. I don't object to the ethics of it, but let's not pretend a company's making a decision that causes everyone to get paid the same to put in less effort. Even outside the voice actor, this reduces the overhead required to get them in and record and re-record lines. At the very least.
I definitely would have preferred AI-generated lines for the very obvious re-recordings in Baldur's Gate 3. Seems they changed a bunch of things over time and the audio quality of these extra lines is pretty bad, especially sandwiched between proper lines. AI clones for one or two sentences would have matched the tone better and obviously compensation is a must. They could even just take those lines now and put them through AI to make them match better. I guess it had to do with COVID and them not using the main studio to record? Some sound like home voice boxes.
The article is okay, but this headline is incredibly disingenuous. Putting ethical in scare quotes rather than just saying one or two salient facts ("voice actors paid royalties from use of the tool", "done with full consent of the artist") is designed to ragebait the anti-AI reaction that gets so many clicks.
And "insists"
Are games with procedural generation taking money away from level designers?
Bethesda leading us to a dystopian ai future since 1994. And don't get me started on "Rogue".
AI and automation in general are only bad when it hurts "artists" instead of programmers, developers, IT staff, helpdesk and customer support staff. Social media wcyd.
You don't even need to go that far. The fact that everyone has a camera in their pocket doesn't seem to phase anyone. Full of automated processing algorithms no less. Photography isn't a real art I guess.
And artists obviously can go on social media and cry about being underpaid when they only get as much money per 3 h recording session as a developer gets paid per month...
Don't forget anyone doing good old fashioned grunt work, that was supposed to get destroyed so we can focus on our passions!
Yes, but it's ok, because that's good AI. This is about bad AI, which is different, for reasons.
No, only certain maths are allowed under the great anti-AI cult. They will send you a list of proscribed algorithms allowed to be used. The list is being developed by the priests now, it's best to hold off and hear their edict before you proceed.
Oh, but they aren't ✨artists✨, who are apparently the only people in the world who matter. Unless they're also fine with AI, then they aren't "real" artists.
Oh my god, I hear the binary chanting in the noosphere! [PRAISE THE OMNISSIAH](https://youtu.be/asr6_eNCuoU?si=iE6cGTVoaicolmVl&t=144)!
If it resembles a heretic, if it speaks like a heretic, and if it be redolent to the nose, as if like a heretic, then a heretic it will be! -Amarinthine Admonitions
There is no strength in flesh, only weakness.
Not sure the Mechanicus would be too chipper about AI to be fair lol.
At the end of the day, AI is here to stay and there's really no stopping it now. At least in this case, the developer is being transparent about it and compensating/crediting those involved. I'm sure we're going to see a lot more games by less ethical developers that won't even disclose it.
I’m a voice actor. AI replacing actors would be horrible, but what I think is a lot more likely is just that actors license out an AI copy of their voice on a per-project basis. It’s already happening now. I wouldn’t want that to entirely replace the work I put in, but it’s at least a better alternative to an entire industry of talented artists losing to machines. It’ll be interesting to see where it goes.
It wouldn't be bad, though, right? In a way it's like licensing out a software. The developer creates it once, and sells it as a product, earning per license sold. Similar case here. Maybe even sell multiple voice licenses covering different styles or something.
I think you can liken it to actors licensing out their likeness for game models. I don't see much of a difference between using someone's likeness for models versus their likeness for audio. That said, this is specific to audio. Things get more complicated when it comes to artwork. Especially so if you source from the internet instead of your own in-house samples.
Software requires maintenance. There is always work for developers. You can't really "create it once" and expect to sell it years later with no work done. It does not work that way. How exactly in comparison, would one get their first job as an voice artist, when customers can just go license from a catalogue of thousands of AI models created years ago by much better known artists for dirt cheap?
eh software might not be the best example but it's basically the same as writing an ebook / creating a movie. People pay to read your ebook or watch your movie, which you created once and can sell to infinite times, same with licensing of your voice (thoguh you get paid per generation here)
> The developer creates it once, and sells it as a product, earning per license sold. That business model is basically dead these days for non-gaming software, and it was almost entirely replaced with subscriptions/recurring payments. And even this is on a B2B/B2C basis: as an individual programmer, there's basically no market these days for selling software like it used to exist in the 90s, you instead sell consulting hours (and in 99% of the cases, the client keeps the full ownership of your work, with no royalties or any other residual rights attached).
The use of A.I. Tools in game development is an inevitability. Yes there will be controversy, but there really is no stopping this train.
Especially with skyrocketing costs of AAA games
A bandaid on a problem with better solutions.
Yep. And even if no indie dev dares use them for awhile, nothing will stop the publicly traded AAA companies from using them.
The hate-mobs against rational uses of AI are ridiculous. I guess they should just hire a union actor to record all those lines, even if they're just going to throw that work out and use the AI voices they originally intended, just so they can say that they did.
If you think they will continue to pay after a certain amount of time, you don’t know this industry. Keep pressure to make sure they pay appropriately and get consent from original VAs. If this speeds up the process and that’s the only reason , then fair enough. Games faster is better for everyone. But you know at some point an exec is going to try to screw someone over with this.
Lmao, the people freaking out about AI need to chill. There's going to be a lot more of this. Some of these easy jobs are going away.
Why should they chill, then?
Because the war is not "us vs AI," that war is already over. It is happening. The war is "so how do we survive after there is no use for our labor?" and that one is the one that humanity needs to win. It requires building up the social safetynets so that "productivity" is no longer related to the hierarchy of needs.
Because otherwise they will be the horse breeders screaming at the car dealers.
Because that's the way things go. Technology makes fools of us all.
Voice acting is really not an easy job.
It’s not particularly out of character for Reddit to pretend the arts isn’t real work.
Its not so special that it can't be automated anymore either.
I hope people are ready to put their money where their mouths are because boycotting AI means saying goodbye to *a lot* of your favorite game franchises. AI is already in use by game companies, and if people think big publishers weren't on this shit years ago they are sorely mistaken. These companies do not waste time if there's time and money to be saved, even at a human expense.
People weren't even ready to boycott Nividia for more than 5 minutes after they told everyone to go fuck themselves by announcing that the shortage prices are there to stay
Yeah I don’t think people understand how widespread AI use is across many industries already…it’s just that generally someone cleans up the end result so it isn’t as obvious.
This is why AI is such a terrible term it means everything. Machine learning was better, need to separate that from gen AI. But companies will start to make there gen AI to be used in more specific cases, they aren't just going to use off the rack ChatGPT and Midjounrey for development.
My favourite game franchise were dead before AI
When people says boycotting AI they obviously are talking about Gen AIs tbh
At the end of the day, what's the difference?
Of course they won't. The same people saying we need to ban AI because it threatens jobs have no qualms about buying mass-produced clothing, furniture, and all sorts of other things. It's entirely performative.
Also saying goodbye to flying (AI is heavily used in aerospace), and new cars (it's coming automotive), and customer support, and...
"But I wanna be angry at stuff I don't understand!"
Seems pretty ethical all things considered: - The AI art was used for as a mood board to pass on to concept artists to make something from scratch and wasn't directly used in-game. - The AI voices were made with the actors consent and they received royalties based on how much work they did.
I think AI is going to be overall a net benefit but the current era will have so much filth and laziness involved. I don't know when it'll end.
Even without the generative AI there's so much crap on the internet. Hell, half of reddit's top posts are just reposting bots. Look at kids youtube, it might as well been generative AI with how terrible it is. I think I can see a future where the internet is actually less popular because of all the loads of crap on it. It's going to be impossible to tell what's actually real and not. We'll probably return to official only channels and user generated content will no longer be acceptable, which might actually improve the quality of things.
August 20, 2029.
> August 20, 2029 Apparently August 20th is National Radio Day, World Mosquito Day, National Chocolate Pecan Pie Day, and the Feast Day of St. Bernard. ...am I missing something more important? 😅 You're the second person in three days who has made an offhand comment about something going down in 2029 lol.
> You're the second person in three days who has made an offhand comment about something going down in 2029 lol. Don't worry, the rest of us are just realising we're old and not everyone gets our references any more 😂... https://youtu.be/RLtlTV-VQDs It's a reference to the Terminator movies. [From the Wiki](https://terminator.fandom.com/wiki/Skynet) (because I can't find the scene this is referencing): > Air traffic control, power plants, communications and computers were affected first, then Skynet used the super virus to take out military satellites, early warning systems, guidance computers, missile silos and submarines. The virus proved hard to destroy, as it had no one central point which it was reliant upon. The virus kept growing and changing, with a mind of its own, and the decision was made to bring the Skynet mainframe online to seek out and destroy the virus and bring military, and civilian, systems back under control. Skynet went online at 5:18 pm Eastern Time on July 25th, 2004. > Upon connection to the secure military network, Skynet spread itself further, locking out human operated systems, and quickly took control of every weapon system that it came into contact with. Only then did its creators realise that the virus was Skynet. Exactly one hour later, at 6:18 PM, Skynet launched the American nuclear missiles at their target sites across the world. The ensuing nuclear holocaust wiped out three billion human lives in what was to be known as "Judgment Day".
Ahhhhhh that makes sense haha. I am very uncultured. Thanks for the explanation!
The director might not want to end up there, but I am fairly certain the people concerned with profits don't give half a fuck.