Game Voice Actors and Motion Capture Performers Go On Strike

[64K]

In a 98% Yes vote of the 160,000 performers in the SAG-AFTRA union are going on strike against Activision, Take-Two, Disney and EA and refusing to perform in future games until demands are met. They are demanding protections due to the use of Generative AI. They demand:

"Fair compensation and the right of informed consent for the AI use of their faces, voices, and bodies."

They already feel that Publishers/Developers are violating their rights and fear future escalation and flagrant exploitation. The game makers in negotiation with the union say they've already offered "meaningful AI protections that include requiring consent and fair compensation," with terms that are "among the strongest in the entertainment industry," but the union disagrees.

Some agreements were reached during the past 18 months of negotiations but not enough for the Union and it's members.

SAG-AFTRA last went on strike against the same Publishers/Developers in 2016 over residuals. The last strike did have some negative effect on games but iirc not a lot.

SAG-AFTRA Members Who Work on Video Games Go on Strike

www.sagaftra.org

Videogame voice actors are officially on strike over AI: 'We refuse this paradigm'

SAG-AFTRA actors will refuse to work for Activision, EA, Take-Two, and other major developers.

www.pcgamer.com

 

[Bones]

I'm thinking the career of "Actor" will begin to die down (Slowly phased out) as times passes for obvious reasons and those belonging to SAG-AFTRA know it, and that's why they're making a move now before their numbers are too small later to even matter.

When that happens actors, as in people as actors will become a thing of the past.....
Well, there would always be a few around at least I'd think but as a whole (Career/industry) that ship will sail and sink.

 

[eidairaman1]

I'm thinking the career of "Actor" will begin to die down (Slowly phased out) as times passes for obvious reasons and those belonging to SAG-AFTRA know it, and that's why they're making a move now before their numbers are too small later to even matter.

When that happens actors, as in people as actors will become a thing of the past.....
Well, there would always be a few around at least I'd think but as a whole (Career/industry) that ship will sail and sink.

AI caused Daft Punk to retire in 2020, if anything they Should Fight back

 

[JWNoctis]

Wish them luck. It's livelihoods we are talking about here. The displaced weavers and blacksmiths in 1800s had other jobs to go to. I don't think that's a given anymore these days.

Maybe one day "AI-free" arts, assets, and acting would be more of a selling point than it is now.

 

[ty_ger]

I fear that by choosing to not cooperate (going on strike), they have only assured their more rapid retirement. If big publishers already want to replace them with AI, what does being harder to work with accomplish? It sure doesn't seem to make a lot of sense.
Desperation. Publishers smell the blood in the water.

 

[Hyderz]

i think AI will have its place and be used in appropriate places and application. Acting and Voice belongs rightfully to an idividual and should not be taken and replicated as the company pleases.
If this goes ahead, we will definately see more generic stuff that we all like, movie stories, music, art, designs etc. AI should be used to assist not as a replacement.

 

[AusWolf]

I'm thinking the career of "Actor" will begin to die down (Slowly phased out) as times passes for obvious reasons and those belonging to SAG-AFTRA know it, and that's why they're making a move now before their numbers are too small later to even matter.

When that happens actors, as in people as actors will become a thing of the past.....
Well, there would always be a few around at least I'd think but as a whole (Career/industry) that ship will sail and sink.

Why would actors become a thing of the past? Someone, show me anything that's made by AI and can be taken seriously.

As for the strike, good luck!

 

[Dr. Dro]

i think AI will have its place and be used in appropriate places and application. Acting and Voice belongs rightfully to an idividual and should not be taken and replicated as the company pleases.
If this goes ahead, we will definately see more generic stuff that we all like, movie stories, music, art, designs etc. AI should be used to assist not as a replacement.

This is the humane/moral thing to do, unfortunately the people in this industry are in for a rough awakening. Many professions have come and gone over the years, and even though the profession of storyteller has been around since primordial times (it's about as old as the "world's oldest profession" - it literally dates to hunters and gatherers around a campfire), there's a web of complexity involved that make it so there is perfect business sense in replacing voice actors for digital media with an AI-powered text to speech engine that is capable of replicating emotion, intonation, accents, and realistic voice ranges.

They won't go on strike, there are no unions and no talent agencies to deal with, they won't decline positions they don't agree with, they don't have to be scheduled, shortening development times, and licensing such an engine would most definitely be cheaper than keeping VAs on hand and dealing with their schedule issues (thus pumping out content faster and increasing profits) - from a business perspective, they're almost a dying breed, and it's up to us gamers to stand up for the folks in this industry by utterly rejecting the use of these AI engines in our video games.

Why do you think AI is a multi-trillion-dollar industry? Because it's set to replace most professions. That's it! It's the only reason why so many mega-corporations and international conglomerates are so invested into it. They'll replace all jobs that can be automated by AI subroutines. A lot of people would call me crazy not long ago, and many may still think I am, but I have always held a sincere and strong belief that ultimately, this is the end goal. People who have held jobs which were automated by AI and/or entirely robotized will be put in some sort of universal basic income scheme and left to fend for themselves. I don't think even us on the law field are exempt from this. By the end of next year, before I graduate, I'm probably going to write my thesis on the potential ramifications of replacing attorneys with artificial intelligence, even though my opinions might just be too strong for an academic paper on it. it's insane!

I told you folks. I warned you guys. And i'll just leave this old post of mine here.

Opinions on AI

The poll question is open. I don't want to influence your answers by giving my opinion until page 5 or 10 or whatever. Fire away! :) In case you're not that familiar with AI, or just want some food for thought before answering: The title may mislead you into thinking only of the dangers, but...

www.techpowerup.com

My opinion hasn't changed since that post and it will probably never change. I'm vehemently opposed to the "Great AI replacement" and I sincerely believe that it is going to happen eventually. We just have to stand our ground for as long as we can.

 

[AusWolf]

This is the humane/moral thing to do, unfortunately the people in this industry is in for a rough awakening. Many professions have come and gone over the years, and even though the profession of storyteller has been around since primordial times (it's about as old as the "world's oldest profession" - it literally dates to hunters and gatherers around a campfire), there's a web of complexity involved that make it so there is perfect business sense in replacing voice actors for digital media with an AI-powered text to speech engine that is capable of replicating emotion, intonation, accents, and realistic voice ranges.

They won't go on strike, there are no unions and no talent agencies to deal with, they won't decline positions they don't agree with, they don't have to be scheduled, shortening development times, and licensing such an engine would most definitely be cheaper than keeping VAs on hand and dealing with their schedule issues (thus pumping out content faster and increasing profits) - from a business perspective, they're almost a dying breed, and it's up to us gamers to stand up for the folks in this industry by utterly rejecting the use of these AI engines in our video games.

Why do you think AI is a multi-trillion-dollar industry? Because it's set to replace most professions. That's it! It's the only reason why so many mega-corporations and international conglomerates are so invested into it. They'll replace all jobs that can be automated by AI subroutines. A lot of people would call me crazy not long ago, and many may still think I am, but I have always held a sincere and strong belief that ultimately, this is the end goal. People who have held jobs which were automated by AI and/or entirely robotized will be put in some sort of universal basic income scheme and left to fend for themselves. I don't think even us on the law field are exempt from this. By the end of next year, before I graduate, I'm probably going to write my thesis on the potential ramifications of replacing attorneys with artificial intelligence, even though my opinions might just be too strong for an academic paper on it. it's insane!

I told you folks. I warned you guys. And i'll just leave this old post of mine here.

Opinions on AI

The poll question is open. I don't want to influence your answers by giving my opinion until page 5 or 10 or whatever. Fire away! :) In case you're not that familiar with AI, or just want some food for thought before answering: The title may mislead you into thinking only of the dangers, but...

www.techpowerup.com

My opinion hasn't changed since that post and it will probably never change. I'm vehemently opposed to the "Great AI replacement" and I sincerely believe that it is going to happen eventually. We just have to stand our ground for as long as we can.

Sure, AI wins by miles on the cost front. But what about quality? What good is it to make a movie or game in 5 minutes with zero effort if ends up being dogshit?

 

[Dr. Dro]

Sure, AI wins by miles on the cost front. But what about quality? What good is it to make a movie or game in 5 minutes with zero effort if ends up being dogshit?

I don't think VAs write the lines they act upon, but rest assured, publishers are very well aware of this. You wouldn't even know a voice was AI-generated if it wasn't stated in the credits. Tech will advance, and while there are already many realistic impressions of real people's voices, it won't be long until it's no longer just realistic, the computer will truly generate human speech - and in every language known to man! No longer will a game developer need to hire 5 to 8 VAs per character to cover most economic regions.

Want your main character fully voiced and fluent in ancient, erudite Japanese? Done. Want it to speak Nahuatl or Hopi? AI will do it instantly. Klingon or Elvish? Those are no problem too! This is what people mean when they say "AI is still in its infancy, give it time" - most people don't have even the faintest clue how mind-blowing that little statement can be, and not necessarily in a good way. It's probably mankind's biggest double-edged sword, and I liken it to playing God - what will we do if we go so deep in this rabbit hole, that we end up creating full sentience capable of evolving faster than we do? And I don't mean Skynet fiction, what I have in mind is probably a lot worse.

 

[Hyderz]

I don't think VAs write the lines they act upon, but rest assured, publishers are very well aware of this. You wouldn't even know a voice was AI-generated if it wasn't stated in the credits. Tech will advance, and while there are already many realistic impressions of real people's voices, it won't be long until it's no longer just realistic, the computer will truly generate human speech - and in every language known to man! No longer will a game developer need to hire 5 to 8 VAs per character to cover most economic regions.

Want your main character fully voiced and fluent in ancient, erudite Japanese? Done. Want it to speak Nahuatl or Hopi? AI will do it instantly. Klingon or Elvish? Those are no problem too! This is what people mean when they say "AI is still in its infancy, give it time" - most people don't have even the faintest clue how mind-blowing that little statement can be, and not necessarily in a good way. It's probably mankind's biggest double-edged sword, and I liken it to playing God - what will we do if we go so deep in this rabbit hole, that we end up creating full sentience capable of evolving faster than we do? And I don't mean Skynet fiction, what I have in mind is probably a lot worse.

wonder who will rekt humanity first... AI or mother nature with global warming

 

[JWNoctis]

wonder who will rekt humanity first... AI or mother nature with global warming

An oft-explored in fiction and actually closer-to-real-life-than-expected option is both; An AI tasked with solving global warming was trained with more priority to its end goal than it had for human life. I think you can already conjure such a persona from current consumer-grade LLMs with the right prompt, not that's it's anything more than a fictional persona at this point.

I don't think VAs write the lines they act upon, but rest assured, publishers are very well aware of this. You wouldn't even know a voice was AI-generated if it wasn't stated in the credits. Tech will advance, and while there are already many realistic impressions of real people's voices, it won't be long until it's no longer just realistic, the computer will truly generate human speech - and in every language known to man! No longer will a game developer need to hire 5 to 8 VAs per character to cover most economic regions.

Want your main character fully voiced and fluent in ancient, erudite Japanese? Done. Want it to speak Nahuatl or Hopi? AI will do it instantly. Klingon or Elvish? Those are no problem too! This is what people mean when they say "AI is still in its infancy, give it time" - most people don't have even the faintest clue how mind-blowing that little statement can be, and not necessarily in a good way. It's probably mankind's biggest double-edged sword, and I liken it to playing God - what will we do if we go so deep in this rabbit hole, that we end up creating full sentience capable of evolving faster than we do? And I don't mean Skynet fiction, what I have in mind is probably a lot worse.

Some argue that's logical conclusion of technological evolution. Quite a number of other people, having more will to stay alive, disagree.

 

[Chomiq]

Fully support their decision, people have to step up or they'll be replaced by Ai wherever possible.

 

[Courier 6]

the biggest problem isn´t the AI per se, but who´s behind it, some could be put under control, but others are completely out of reach, and who knows what they allready have planned and in place, I´ll try to keep this stuff out of my life as much as possible, the rest is in Your hands

 

[ADB1979]

I'm thinking the career of "Actor" will begin to die down (Slowly phased out) as times passes for obvious reasons and those belonging to SAG-AFTRA know it, and that's why they're making a move now before their numbers are too small later to even matter.

When that happens actors, as in people as actors will become a thing of the past.....
Well, there would always be a few around at least I'd think but as a whole (Career/industry) that ship will sail and sink.

Excepting for those people for whom nothing less than a live play by live natural beings (us I hope) will do, or anything where a live audience makes everything better, that cannot be done via computing (at least yet). I don't see Human actors disappearing any time soon, not least because the entire industry is still growing (to a ridiculous amount) and is already well over saturated and is in the process of watering itself down by the sheer quantity of people (would this be considered a bubble.?) trying to get into acting, whilst simultaneously there are people trying to remove people from the industry (and replace them with themselves doing computer modelling instead of that actor acting), which if one computer modeller can replace two actors then we will see a massive dent in the acting industry, but only if it catches on and people like/prefer it to Human actors (they do not if the modelling is supposed to replace a Human, rather than being a cartoon), and let us not forget that a significant amount of current computer modellers that are trying to replace actors will themselves be replaced by "AI" (machine learning) doing the same job as 4 computer modellers and only needing one Human overseer.!

There are countless examples from history of something like this happening, and yet "artisans" are still around practising their arts and crafts, whether that is a traditional cabinet maker or or an Opera singer/actor which still has not (and likely never will) catch on if recorded / on a screen rather than on stage. Personally I cannot stand Opera, but just like being at a concert is very different than being at home watching the TV, I can understand the appeal and recognise that Opera will never not be performed by Humans, and that Human actors will never disappear entirely, and I would wager a lot slower on the small and big screen than some would hope because even the best and most realistic digitally generated video for scenes may look good, it doesn't look "real", and "people" do not, yes it's getting better, but the faces still do not look "real", and until they do there will never be mass acceptance from the public.

 

[nomdeplume]

Fully support their decision, people have to step up or they'll be replaced by Ai wherever possible.

Just like the machines will take all our jobs. Even simple things like getting coffee will be replaced by robots by 2020.

 

[ADB1979]

Even simple things like getting coffee will be replaced by robots by 2020.

To be fair, I have seen barristas in action and I conclude that this has indeed come to pass

 

[Bones]

Why would actors become a thing of the past? Someone, show me anything that's made by AI and can be taken seriously.

As for the strike, good luck!

At this time I agree but look at the progress being made with AI.

It will take time yet, but the further things go with it the more convincing AI will become - That much is a certainty and investors are really driving it's development hard now because they believe something from it will pay off later.

As an example related to the topic, how much $$ would a studio "save" by using AI instead of live actors?

Remember when Hank Sr. sang along with Hank Jr. in a music vid or when Elvis sang with his daughter in another music vid?

Those were crude by current standards and just pieces of film worked together to make a production..... Good for it's time but that time is long gone by now, esp by tech standards.

How about the DS9 episode when the crew of the Defiant was at the station where Kirk had his trouble with tribbles?
Again a blending/splicing of old and new video with some other things to dress it up but what could be done a few years from now at the current pace of progress being made with it?

Think about it and then why these actors are taking action now because the possibilities are real and becoming more real each day, that's what's got them worried for good reason.

Excepting for those people for whom nothing less than a live play by live natural beings (us I hope) will do, or anything where a live audience makes everything better, that cannot be done via computing (at least yet). I don't see Human actors disappearing any time soon, not least because the entire industry is still growing (to a ridiculous amount) and is already well over saturated and is in the process of watering itself down by the sheer quantity of people (would this be considered a bubble.?) trying to get into acting, whilst simultaneously there are people trying to remove people from the industry (and replace them with themselves doing computer modelling instead of that actor acting), which if one computer modeller can replace two actors then we will see a massive dent in the acting industry, but only if it catches on and people like/prefer it to Human actors (they do not if the modelling is supposed to replace a Human, rather than being a cartoon), and let us not forget that a significant amount of current computer modellers that are trying to replace actors will themselves be replaced by "AI" (machine learning) doing the same job as 4 computer modellers and only needing one Human overseer.!

There are countless examples from history of something like this happening, and yet "artisans" are still around practising their arts and crafts, whether that is a traditional cabinet maker or or an Opera singer/actor which still has not (and likely never will) catch on if recorded / on a screen rather than on stage. Personally I cannot stand Opera, but just like being at a concert is very different than being at home watching the TV, I can understand the appeal and recognise that Opera will never not be performed by Humans, and that Human actors will never disappear entirely, and I would wager a lot slower on the small and big screen than some would hope because even the best and most realistic digitally generated video for scenes may look good, it doesn't look "real", and "people" do not, yes it's getting better, but the faces still do not look "real", and until they do there will never be mass acceptance from the public.

I don't believe a play would be done the same way as a TV show or movie BUT it's entirely possible later on advanced holographics could have a part in it.
Yes, that exists too and is also being developed as time goes by.
Performer gets on stage and someone else is "There" too, yet they're not and that has already happened before - More than once in fact.

I too hope people will still be directly involved, onstage to act out parts of these productions but our own desires aren't those of the ones behind AI development, which is something we all need to come to peace with because it's happening, like it or not with no say or vote from us about it.

These things are just what I'm seeing and my thoughts about it too, but will also say we're a long ways yet from all that - For now at least.

 

[AusWolf]

I don't think VAs write the lines they act upon, but rest assured, publishers are very well aware of this. You wouldn't even know a voice was AI-generated if it wasn't stated in the credits. Tech will advance, and while there are already many realistic impressions of real people's voices, it won't be long until it's no longer just realistic, the computer will truly generate human speech - and in every language known to man! No longer will a game developer need to hire 5 to 8 VAs per character to cover most economic regions.

Want your main character fully voiced and fluent in ancient, erudite Japanese? Done. Want it to speak Nahuatl or Hopi? AI will do it instantly. Klingon or Elvish? Those are no problem too! This is what people mean when they say "AI is still in its infancy, give it time" - most people don't have even the faintest clue how mind-blowing that little statement can be, and not necessarily in a good way. It's probably mankind's biggest double-edged sword, and I liken it to playing God - what will we do if we go so deep in this rabbit hole, that we end up creating full sentience capable of evolving faster than we do? And I don't mean Skynet fiction, what I have in mind is probably a lot worse.

Sentience is very far from generating voice. Imo, this is the same kind of fear that people had when the steam engine was invented, that it would "take our jobs", yet here we are, more than 100 years later, still working our asses off for minimum wage.

Excepting for those people for whom nothing less than a live play by live natural beings (us I hope) will do, or anything where a live audience makes everything better, that cannot be done via computing (at least yet). I don't see Human actors disappearing any time soon, not least because the entire industry is still growing (to a ridiculous amount) and is already well over saturated and is in the process of watering itself down by the sheer quantity of people (would this be considered a bubble.?) trying to get into acting, whilst simultaneously there are people trying to remove people from the industry (and replace them with themselves doing computer modelling instead of that actor acting), which if one computer modeller can replace two actors then we will see a massive dent in the acting industry, but only if it catches on and people like/prefer it to Human actors (they do not if the modelling is supposed to replace a Human, rather than being a cartoon), and let us not forget that a significant amount of current computer modellers that are trying to replace actors will themselves be replaced by "AI" (machine learning) doing the same job as 4 computer modellers and only needing one Human overseer.!

There are countless examples from history of something like this happening, and yet "artisans" are still around practising their arts and crafts, whether that is a traditional cabinet maker or or an Opera singer/actor which still has not (and likely never will) catch on if recorded / on a screen rather than on stage. Personally I cannot stand Opera, but just like being at a concert is very different than being at home watching the TV, I can understand the appeal and recognise that Opera will never not be performed by Humans, and that Human actors will never disappear entirely, and I would wager a lot slower on the small and big screen than some would hope because even the best and most realistic digitally generated video for scenes may look good, it doesn't look "real", and "people" do not, yes it's getting better, but the faces still do not look "real", and until they do there will never be mass acceptance from the public.

Exactly my point, thank you.

AI might replace actors or writing in your average comic-based action flick (or has it already?), but never in anything of quality, designed for an audience in possession of a brain.

At this time I agree but look at the progress being made with AI.

It will take time yet, but the further things go with it the more convincing AI will become - That much is a certainty and investors are really driving it's development hard now because they believe something from it will pay off later.

I've read a study that the more AI-generated samples AI is working with, the more flawed the end result is. The researchers started with X number of pictures of elephants, and asked AI to make more. As the AI-generated ones started to outnumber the real ones, more and more errors popped up, like elephants with 3 legs, or 2 heads. AI is good as long as it has something to work with. And since it works best with whatever we, humans produce, I don't think it'll ever be a direct replacement of any art form.

 

[ADB1979]

I too hope people will still be directly involved, onstage to act out parts of these productions but our own desires aren't those of the ones behind AI development, which is something we all need to come to peace with because it's happening, like it or not with no say or vote from us about it.

I agree with your sentiment and noted examples, the only thing that I (and I am sure huge amounts of others will agree with), that some of us (me) will never "come to peace" with "AI". AI is not directly effecting me at this moment, but it is now certain that is will, we cannot stop it, and we will have to learn to live alongside it because it is out of our control as individuals, but can and will negatively effect us against our will and without our interaction, that is something that no-one should ever be a peace with.

Please do not think that I am simply nitpicking about a particular phrase, but it seems to me to be very important that everyone knows what "AI" is and is not (it is machine learning officially, it has no intelligence), people need to know the dangers above and beyond replacing actors, and what could come next, what else it could "replace", the societal and cultural damage, and of course things (good as well potentially) that we have not even thought of. IMHO we should not play down the risks and harms of "AI", even if we are talking about stupendously overpaid multi-millionaire actors, or people struggling to get into the industry and seeing their roles being eliminated from existence, which would wreck a whole country if it was replicated across 20% of the working population, so any and all threats from AI should IMHO be taken very seriously.

 

[AusWolf]

I agree with your sentiment and noted examples, the only thing that I (and I am sure huge amounts of others will agree with), that some of us (me) will never "come to peace" with "AI". AI is not directly effecting me at this moment, but it is now certain that is will, we cannot stop it, and we will have to learn to live alongside it because it is out of our control as individuals, but can and will negatively effect us against our will and without our interaction, that is something that no-one should ever be a peace with.

Please do not think that I am simply nitpicking about a particular phrase, but it seems to me to be very important that everyone knows what "AI" is and is not (it is machine learning officially, it has no intelligence), people need to know the dangers above and beyond replacing actors, and what could come next, what else it could "replace", the societal and cultural damage, and of course things (good as well potentially) that we have not even thought of. IMHO we should not play down the risks and harms of "AI", even if we are talking about stupendously overpaid multi-millionaire actors, or people struggling to get into the industry and seeing their roles being eliminated from existence, which would wreck a whole country if it was replicated across 20% of the working population, so any and all threats from AI should IMHO be taken very seriously.

Like you said, AI is machine learning, nothing more. It has no intelligence. That's why it can't replace actors. Of course, some companies will try because cost saving is a thing these days, but I'm pretty sure that the end results will be awful.

 

[lilhasselhoffer]

So....I have some amusing anecdotes here. The reason that AI hasn't replaced burger flippers is because the hardware to actually do the job and maintain it is still much more expensive than the manual labor. You'll note that companies are "leaving California" rather than automating....and that should absolutely give everyone a clue as to how we perceive value.

SAG and voice actors are...a different thing. Create a full range of samples, and you can basically recreate anything an actor could do for virtually free. Think about a single week of recordings for each actor, and that generative AI not needing another second of costly time inside of a sound booth. Instead of each burger costing $7 in maintenance and depreciated hardware, your voice actor gets one week of pay and never again requires any investment.


The anecdote here is that "they're coming to take our jobs" is not coming from people who make things...but people who make IP. When it was people making things we were all behind it...because if we suddenly had oranges cost thrice as much as they do now they'd go from a foodstuff to a luxury good. When you already have a luxury good, like entertainment, everything is already "so expensive" it's reasonable to find ways to cut people out.
I have no real love for Hollywood. When the writer's strike happened it resulted in fewer coming back better paid...and we got stuff like the Halo series. We got stuff like the Acolyte. We got people who knew what we wanted better than we did...and the writing rooms sucked the life out of things that should have been a license to print money. I feel that the same thing will happen with games...where the core issue is a lack of delivery on fun. I then look at many of the games I play....and top tier voice acting is not on their list of expenditures.



I'm hoping that this is a step towards restructuring. A step towards people asking whether what is necessary is another AAA preach, or a AA game that makes money. That said, SAG probably won't seek to fix that...their goals are clearly about not wanting to be obsolete, instead of wanting a healthy industry.

 

[AusWolf]

So....I have some amusing anecdotes here. The reason that AI hasn't replaced burger flippers is because the hardware to actually do the job and maintain it is still much more expensive than the manual labor. You'll note that companies are "leaving California" rather than automating....and that should absolutely give everyone a clue as to how we perceive value.

SAG and voice actors are...a different thing. Create a full range of samples, and you can basically recreate anything an actor could do for virtually free. Think about a single week of recordings for each actor, and that generative AI not needing another second of costly time inside of a sound booth. Instead of each burger costing $7 in maintenance and depreciated hardware, your voice actor gets one week of pay and never again requires any investment.


The anecdote here is that "they're coming to take our jobs" is not coming from people who make things...but people who make IP. When it was people making things we were all behind it...because if we suddenly had oranges cost thrice as much as they do now they'd go from a foodstuff to a luxury good. When you already have a luxury good, like entertainment, everything is already "so expensive" it's reasonable to find ways to cut people out.
I have no real love for Hollywood. When the writer's strike happened it resulted in fewer coming back better paid...and we got stuff like the Halo series. We got stuff like the Acolyte. We got people who knew what we wanted better than we did...and the writing rooms sucked the life out of things that should have been a license to print money. I feel that the same thing will happen with games...where the core issue is a lack of delivery on fun. I then look at many of the games I play....and top tier voice acting is not on their list of expenditures.



I'm hoping that this is a step towards restructuring. A step towards people asking whether what is necessary is another AAA preach, or a AA game that makes money. That said, SAG probably won't seek to fix that...their goals are clearly about not wanting to be obsolete, instead of wanting a healthy industry.

As much as I'm against AI, why games and films aren't enjoyable anymore isn't due to AI, imo. In our current divided world, there are just way too many constraints on what you can or cannot write into your piece, or even who you can or cannot hire as a writer or actor. These constraints are what make sure that everything you watch in a movie theatre is pure cringe.

I agree with the sentiment that a complete restructuring is needed, but not only in the entertainment industry.

 

[dirtyferret]

As much as I'm against AI, why games and films aren't enjoyable anymore isn't due to AI, imo. In our current divided world, there are just way too many constraints on what you can or cannot write into your piece, or even who you can or cannot hire as a writer or actor. These constraints are what make sure that everything you watch in a movie theatre is pure cringe.

I agree with the sentiment that a complete restructuring is needed, but not only in the entertainment industry.

You have several factors that impact the industry but the largest (not sole) is the monopolization of the media industry and its not alone. Games and Films are not enjoyable because they all look and feel the same. They are designed to make a quick buck and remove risk as much as possible so we get the same repackaged stuff over and over.

I fully support the voice actors and motion capture performs

​

 

[ADB1979]

this is the same kind of fear that people had when the steam engine was invented, that it would "take our jobs", yet here we are, more than 100 years later, still working our asses off for minimum wage.

I both agree and disagree.

Remember the phrase "Luddite", it was a real thing, people in the (clothing) industry destroyed (weaving) machines for this exact purpose, because the machines were replacing people, but only kind of, and this is where "AI" has real potential for good, working alongside a Human to help that Human do their job better, be more productive, etc. The great fear of course is the unknown, and for the vast majority of people, "AI" is a literal mystery and the average person in the street will be more inclined to believe that current "AI" is "actual intelligence" just like the have read in books, watched on the small and big screen for decades.!

People are fearful but not for the right reasons, because they simply do not know what "AI" is and is not, how it works, etc, and especially when most of "The West" is in turmoil and/or has high inflation, high unemployment and low (if any) growth and this compounds those fears.