• HopeOfTheGunblade
    link
    fedilink
    587 months ago

    What an incredibly godawful, dumbass idea.

    Look, I’m going to skip over issues of voice actors, quality, etc, and go directly to:

    Your voice doesn’t sound to you like it sounds to other people. Almost everyone hates playback of their voice. This is a great way to get people to haaaaaate playing your game.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      97 months ago

      Who says I have to use my own voice? I’m going to splice together clips of PeeWee Herman.

    • El Barto
      link
      fedilink
      English
      57 months ago

      In theory, the idea is okay. I wouldn’t mind an avatar having my own voice.

      In practice, fuck no. It’s EA. I don’t want my voice to live on producing new dialogue long after I’m dead in order to fill some corporation’s pockets.

    • @sugar_in_your_tea
      link
      English
      37 months ago

      Idk, my kids love it, and I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s a lot more common than not.

      I personally hate it, but then again I would also hate an avatar of myself as well in a game. I prefer to RP as someone else in games, not as myself (I like myself, I just don’t like to be myself in games).

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      37 months ago

      I’m sure they could change the synthetic voice so that it sounds like your perception of your own voice

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        27 months ago

        Interesting idea, but I doubt that the modulation is the same for everyone, just cause our heads aren’t identical in shape or size. I suspect that my head distorts my voice differently than most other people’s heads.

    • Endorkend
      link
      fedilink
      27 months ago

      I don’t particularly hate my voice when played back.

      I just don’t recognize it as my own voice at all.

    • 🇰 🔵 🇱 🇦 🇳 🇦 🇰 ℹ️
      link
      fedilink
      English
      2
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      Is the AI gonna play a voice I pick, or am I just going to talk to the game and hear the responses of the other, non-player characters like I was having a real conversation with people? Because one of those is an awesome idea.

      • HopeOfTheGunblade
        link
        fedilink
        97 months ago

        If I read the article correctly, instead of the protagonist character having a voice actor, they want to take a bunch of voice samples of you and then use that to generate their dialogue.

        I wouldn’t be surprised, in the slightest, to learn that agreeing to play this game, gives them full rights to the voice generator they build from your samples, and they pick and choose from those instead of having any voice actors in future games.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          27 months ago

          i don’t talk while playing, that character gonna sound like family talking in the other room lmao

        • The way it’s written in the article, with the mention of the detective game and how it is using it, it sounds like it’s not generating a voice based on your voice, but dialogue based on what you are saying. But then the article author’s use of “dubbing” throws that into question. I’m pretty sure I’ve seen the detective game they mentioned in the article, though. And it just generates the NPC responses on the questions (or statements) you give to them. And you’re talking to them entirely with a microphone, not typing anything or selecting pre-made choices.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    477 months ago

    Setting the shittiness aside, once again a horseshit patent award. This is not a novel or innovative idea. It’s a stupid fucking limitation on others if entertained.

    • Pennomi
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      English
      157 months ago

      Patents are cancer. I say this as the creator of several of them.

        • @sugar_in_your_tea
          link
          English
          17 months ago

          Exactly. I’m completely fine with patents over something like a prosthetic or manufacturing equipment. I’m not okay with patents over software or business methods.

          As a kid, I liked law and computers, so I thought I wanted to be a software patent attorney. Midway through my CS program, I decided software patents are completely awful and decided to work on FOSS instead of go to law school. Software patents should all be invalidated.

          That said, I think patents should have a much shorter duration. I’m thinking something like 2-3 years, with an extension to 5-7 years if the patent holder can prove they need the extra protection to bring the product to market (i.e. they can demonstrate active work on it). Maybe certain types of patents can have another extension if it’s a long lead-time product, but definitely not longer than 15 years. Most patents should expire within 7 years.

          • Endorkend
            link
            fedilink
            0
            edit-2
            7 months ago

            Software patents need to be shorter.

            Hardware ones I think can be as long as they are, but need loopholes and tricks closed that allow for extending patents on the same thing artificially.

            Best would be to have many different categories with vastly different duration and the durations need to be reviewed periodically.

            Like the fact large parts of x86 is still patent protected is an obscenity.

            • @sugar_in_your_tea
              link
              English
              27 months ago

              I agree with different durations based on the type of product, but I really need to see some evidence that the current patent length is needed by anyone. First mover advantage is a real thing, so they only need enough protection to get a head start. Patents are just a license to be lazy, so they should only exist as long as necessary to get to the market first.

        • @mindbleach
          link
          English
          17 months ago

          Seriously. Patent length was chosen before the industrial revolution. It only coincidentally made sense through that period of mechanization. But in computing, twenty-odd years is an eternity.

          In 2000 there were no shaders.

          In 1980 there were no IBM PCs.

          In 1960 there were no microchips.

          Why the fuck would any idea from when Pong was fresh and new deserve absolute control until after the Super Nintendo? There could be Dreamcast games with features that that nobody was allowed to do again until last year.

      • Endorkend
        link
        fedilink
        47 months ago

        An AI image is a result of a technology, which falls under copyright.

        A method to generate AI audio is the technology itself, which falls under patent law.

        These are two entirely different things that should never be conflated.

        • @sugar_in_your_tea
          link
          English
          1
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          Exactly. You can patent the way you integrate this tech into a game, as well as the process for how the audio is generated, but you cannot patent the audio itself or the implementation since those fall under copyright. Use of an implementation would need a patent grant, but use of the audio does not.

          Patents and copyright are two sides of the same coin, and as such are related but are completely separate entities. Patents cover ideas and processes, copyright covers implementations and products.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      27 months ago

      Agreed on the general principle, but I’m kind of glad a company that everyone already thinks of as shit will hold the patent on this. It’s absolutely not an idea that I’d want to spread throughout the industry and at least now it’s limited to use in games I’ll never play.

  • smoothbrain coldtakes
    link
    fedilink
    English
    237 months ago

    We already fucking hate hearing our own voices on recordings or in Discord with feedback. Why does anybody think this is a good idea?

    Not to dismiss people who are fine listening to their own voice but this feels like mega narcissistic at the very least and just plain weird to everybody else.

    • @sugar_in_your_tea
      link
      English
      27 months ago

      I’m okay with it if it’s optional (some people love to hear themselves), but I am absolutely not interested. Then again, I’m pretty much the polar opposite here since I don’t even like public recognition. My kids would love it though, since they love hearing and seeing themselves in videos and whatnot.

      But if there’s no way to disable it, I’m not buying the game, simple as that.

  • @mindbleach
    link
    English
    177 months ago

    One, FUCK software patents.

    Two, this is what AI means for voice acting: there won’t be any voice acting. Nobody has to get cloned. There doesn’t need to be an original performance to modify. We have the technology for artists to make up how a character sounds, the same way artists can make up how a character looks. Like how nobody plays a cartoon. There’s still live-action, and mocap, and there will still be people’s real voices behind imaginary faces. But that is now optional.

    Three, nobody wants to hear their own voice. Morgan Freeman probably thinks he sounds weird and nasal onscreen.

  • AutoTL;DRB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    27 months ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


    The patent itself spends a considerable amount of time documenting the technical features of how input data is processed, but I’ll be focusing on the game design implications here since they’re more interesting.

    Inworld Origins hinges around the player roleplaying as a detective and asking AI NPC characters questions, with answers generated on-the-spot based on that input.

    It’s so possible that recently, official English anime voice actors were openly speculating that they had been dubbed over with AI by Namco Bandai in the latest Naruto Ultimate Ninja Storm game.

    Most video game playable characters already function primarily as self-inserts from a narrative perspective, but making that connection literal seems like a quick way to break immersion.

    Considering the sheer scope of Electronic Arts and the funding available to them, I think they should just stick to hiring actual people for video game voiceover, especially for plot-critical characters.

    Adopting technology like this seems like a pretty sharp step backward from an industry that’s been selling video games to us with face-scanned screen actors for the better part of the past decade.


    The original article contains 473 words, the summary contains 180 words. Saved 62%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!