Let's end the AI content debate - Does anyone have a good contact for Bethesada? (Yes, seriously)

[showler]

Voice performances and assets like textures and models are not really the same thing. Texture artists don't generally associate themselves personally with their textures.

 

As for whether the company should care or not...what happens when voice actors start refusing to work with companies that don't protect them? You get a "Last of Us pt. 2" without Ashley Johnson? A Horizon Forbidden West without Ashly Burch? Why, this could spread all the way to actors who aren't named Ashley/Ashly.

 

Frankly, why should the companies hurt their relationships with actors so that modders can rip off the actors' voices? What benefit does that give?

 

Nexus issued their first statement on it today. Bethesda might be forced to make a statement eventually.

 

For now, if you use an AI voice generated from an actual person's voice, you'd better be prepared to delete all those voice files upon request. If you aren't willing to do that, then use a generic voice instead.

[RoNin1971]

A texture or model was actually created by an artist. Your voice is just the result of the shape of your throat. Which happens to be far less unique as most people think.

 

So, if I use the voice of someone who simply sounds 100% the same, its ok? (it is @ the moment)

If I take the audio files and splice them to create new lines, its ok? (it is @ the moment)

...but if I use a program (called A.I.) to do it, its suddenly not ok?

 

The biggest issue people come up with is using it for porn ... (sic) without considering the fact that you don't need A.I. to do all that already...

[showler]

The problem is that a sound-alike is rare, splicing is hard work, but AI generation is easy. You're taking something that was possible but unlikely and making it common. That ups the threat value.

[DiodeLadder]

As a person who will be needing voice actors for my own project in the near future, I just hope that mod authors on Nexus do not alienate the voice actors who generously dedicate their time and offer their talent for free.

 

You can come up with all kinds of theories and rules to justify the use of AI and you maybe able to score your win, but if the actors start saying, "f-ck this Nexus place, I'm out", then it will be worse for everybody. I don't understand why mod authors here can't be respectful of others.

[RoNin1971]

A.I. is nothing but a tool. Just another one in the chest at that. One that offers the option to do things hard to do or find otherwise. That's all there is to it. It ups the level of possibilities and the ease of doing it. (which can be seen as a threat to some)

 

Its not pandora's box.

 

Its not "alienating" anyone either. Its just frightening the professional VA's they will become obsolete. (like taxi, bus & truck drivers ...)

 

So, lets ban self driving cars out of respect for taxi bus & truck drivers. (?) Just throw your 'sabot' between the cogs, that will teach them!

 

Is it respectful to use someone's voice without consent to say things they would not agree with? No. However, that's not the A.I.'s fault.

 

If I use a hammer to bash in some skulls, does that make 'hammers' a problem, or just me?

 

What's so special about a voice anyway, that makes it somehow different from everything else getting modded?

 

 

<snip>if the actors start saying, "f-ck this Nexus place, I'm out", then it will be worse for everybody. I don't understand why mod authors here can't be respectful of others.

This is not a "nexus problem" & this topic & the ongoing discussion is actually proof that (most) mod authors ARE respectful of others. (stating they aren't, isn't)

[DiodeLadder]

Of course, AI is a tool, and whatever unethical happening is a fault of the user. I don't think I've stated otherwise? Anyway, I just don't want the community here to be demoralizing for the actors to be in. That is all.

 

I was a professional audio recording engineer at one point in my life, and I've done my share of editing audio, lots of it. I've put together amazing performances that never happened, sure, but that sort of things were always done in accordance with the intention of the artists. The issue with the AI is, it is so powerful that anyone can use it. The thought that voice lines can be edited by anyone, and may end up in places they've never consented to with no quality control, is pretty scary, especially as the voices can be recognized to come from the actors themselves. Voice acting is a very hard work if you want to make it a career, and it takes a lot of efforts to learn and master the job. Random people playing with their voices and misrepresenting their work, I think, would be very demoralizing for the actors.

 

Human voice is a very delicate and personal thing. In my experience, an actor having any kind of doubts or mistrust will directly result in a subpar performance. Imagine a Nexus member is insisting how human voices are not unique and not as special as texture files, and that is what an aspiring actor reads on his/her first visit here? If that actor was me, I'd just get the hell out of this site and never come back, to protect myself from such a demoralizing and toxic comment.

[RoNin1971]

Of course, AI is a tool, and whatever unethical happening is a fault of the user. I don't think I've stated otherwise? Anyway, I just don't want the community here to be demoralizing for the actors to be in. That is all.

 

I was a professional audio recording engineer at one point in my life, and I've done my share of editing audio, lots of it. I've put together amazing performances that never happened, sure, but that sort of things were always done in accordance with the intention of the artists. The issue with the AI is, it is so powerful that anyone can use it. The thought that voice lines can be edited by anyone, and may end up in places they've never consented to with no quality control, is pretty scary, especially as the voices can be recognized to come from the actors themselves. Voice acting is a very hard work if you want to make it a career, and it takes a lot of efforts to learn and master the job. Random people playing with their voices and misrepresenting their work, I think, would be very demoralizing for the actors.

 

Human voice is a very delicate and personal thing. In my experience, an actor having any kind of doubts or mistrust will directly result in a subpar performance. Imagine a Nexus member is insisting how human voices are not unique and not as special as texture files, and that is what an aspiring actor reads on his/her first visit here? If that actor was me, I'd just get the hell out of this site and never come back, to protect myself from such a demoralizing and toxic comment.

I agree voices are more personal, or at least feel that way, than say a 3D model, but to say a voice actor is on par with a 3D modeller is an insult to the modeler.

Sure, to be any good at it still requires skill (especially with animations / cartoons), and voices are fairly unique, just not as much as most regard them.

Its an instrument that some know how to use and play with at an artistic level for sure.

 

Besides, I never said a voice isn't as special as anything else. Its just not MORE special and shouldn't be treated differently. Using a voice without consent is no different then using a model or texture without consent, imho.

 

Anyway, although I'm not into creating or modding characters or dialog, I would personally rather generate a unique voice instead of using one (without permission / consent). Which is the core of the problem, imho. Then again, the option to make a character say new things is awesome.

 

I really couldn't care less for the 'actors' who regard that as 'toxic' to leave. (Seriously? Demoralizing, sure, it can be. But what the heck is toxic about it?)

[HeyYou]

Beth allows folks to do all sorts of stuff with game assets..... including voice files. Just because AI makes something 'easier', does not necessarily imply that it shouldn't be legal. (in work that is distributed for free......) Is there ANY real difference between a voice file generated by splicing, and a voice file generated by an AI?? To the end user, nope. No difference at all.

[showler]

To the voice actor, yes.

 

And you can make arguments that voice performances are technically, logically, legally and even morally equivalent to every other asset in the game like textures, models, sounds, effects whatever...but in reality THEY JUST AREN'T.

 

There is no "Behind the texture artist" website. Texture artists don't get invited to major gaming expos to host panel discussions about the game. Reviewers and Let's Players never say "I recognize that texture style, I didn't realize Joe Smith was working on this game". Nobody gets a press release that Joe Smith has been picked up for a new game as a texture artist. If Joe Smith isn't available for an expansion pack or sequel they don't try to rearrange the schedule to work around Joe's availability.

 

Voice artists are much more of a public asset to a game company and much less replaceable than a texture artist. The game companies have good reasons to keep them happy.

 

(And yes, I realize that some character/world designers do reach a level of notability that means that people are aware of them and follow their work, but that's a lot different from a texture artist).

 

As for the "splicing vs. AI" debate: When cars were invented and only a few people had them they didn't really have many laws/rules regarding their use. The more popular/easier it was to have a car, the more rules/laws they had to create. Just because they haven't come down on the relatively small number of mods that use splicing doesn't mean they won't come down on an explosion of AI generated content.

[HeyYou]

To the voice actor, yes.

 

And you can make arguments that voice performances are technically, logically, legally and even morally equivalent to every other asset in the game like textures, models, sounds, effects whatever...but in reality THEY JUST AREN'T.

 

There is no "Behind the texture artist" website. Texture artists don't get invited to major gaming expos to host panel discussions about the game. Reviewers and Let's Players never say "I recognize that texture style, I didn't realize Joe Smith was working on this game". Nobody gets a press release that Joe Smith has been picked up for a new game as a texture artist. If Joe Smith isn't available for an expansion pack or sequel they don't try to rearrange the schedule to work around Joe's availability.

 

Voice artists are much more of a public asset to a game company and much less replaceable than a texture artist. The game companies have good reasons to keep them happy.

 

(And yes, I realize that some character/world designers do reach a level of notability that means that people are aware of them and follow their work, but that's a lot different from a texture artist).

 

As for the "splicing vs. AI" debate: When cars were invented and only a few people had them they didn't really have many laws/rules regarding their use. The more popular/easier it was to have a car, the more rules/laws they had to create. Just because they haven't come down on the relatively small number of mods that use splicing doesn't mean they won't come down on an explosion of AI generated content.

So the real question becomes, Who owns those assets? And what rights do they have over them?

 

For the typical texture artist, yep, they create original works, however, the company they are working for owns all the rights to those works, not the artist. Thus, beth doesn't care if we alter textures, and redistribute them. Same goes for pretty much ALL in-game assets. Do voice actors have more protections/rights than anyone else involved in creation of the game???

 

I suspect these questions can ONLY be answered by beth, and we can debate this till the cows come home, and not come to any legal conclusion.