This is a fine use for these tools, IMO, the actor consented, still gets paid and it’s done for consistency sake. No real issue here. It’s not a ghoulish application, like making digital doubles of long dead actors.

I guess I am more okay with this than other uses. But if its not local ai, I still don't really like anything that helps pump up big ai's numbers.

Normally I don't support AI in games, or in any art form in fact, but this is an admirable use of the tech.

This is basically a step above pitch correction which many perfectly talented voice actors and vocalists already use. They're using it as a tool to create tonal equilibrium with the original actor, using his own voice, in a project he already approved and a contract he was okay with signing. Yeah, this is 100% a legitimate use case of the technology. It's not even a case where work is being 'taken away' from somebody that would otherwise be paid to handle it; the DAWs we all are familiar with already combine thousands of automation layers and toolsets and an engineer STILL has to sit there and work through the samples and tracks even so.

What you people seem to completely miss here, Is the fact that the freaking AI company will get the money, instead of the professional audio recording studio.
The final product would probably be of the higher quality, but the costs would be much higher.
Talking about not seeing the forest from the tree. An example of a damn AI stealing the job from the humans right there.

VeseleilWhat you people seem to completely miss here, Is the fact that the freaking AI company will get the money, instead of the professional audio recording studio.

The voice actore (Jacek Rozenek) got paid. He did the work and CDPR paid the man. Which means that they recorded in a studio, almost certainly, though maybe it was remote, somehow? If this is the case, which seems likely, given the project is a major Wtcher 3 expansion, it means CDPR actually paid more than the bare minimum, to send the recording studio audio, to the "freaking AI company", meaning they did this, on face value, to create a better product.

VeseleilThe final product would probably be of the higher quality, but the costs would be much higher.
Talking about not seeing the forest from the tree. An example of a damn AI stealing the job from the humans right there.

"Probably be higher quaility" "costs would be higher"

Your statements seem hollow and based in anger. I Loathe AI but can look at individual moments with context, which is important in this instance.

VeseleilWhat you people seem to completely miss here, Is the fact that the freaking AI company will get the money, instead of the professional audio recording studio.
The final product would probably be of the higher quality, but the costs would be much higher.
Talking about not seeing the forest from the tree. An example of a damn AI stealing the job from the humans right there.

There are certainly an unending number of grounds to oppose ai on. Or, in some cases, at least its current built-out plans/financial structure (ie from the crowd that doesn't want ai to vanish completely, just massively downsized, which is what I think is the most likely short-mid term outcome, though I don't see the future of course)

VeseleilWhat you people seem to completely miss here, Is the fact that the freaking AI company will get the money, instead of the professional audio recording studio.

Who told you that? Would you rather the AI company didn't get paid at all?

cst1992Who told you that? Would you rather the AI company didn't get paid at all?

I would. Machine learning and dash.

VeseleilWhat you people seem to completely miss here, Is the fact that the freaking AI company will get the money, instead of the professional audio recording studio.
The final product would probably be of the higher quality, but the costs would be much higher.
Talking about not seeing the forest from the tree. An example of a damn AI stealing the job from the humans right there.

Yeah... OR... there was never even remotely a business case for the non-AI solution to begin with, and AI simply just adds more content to the mix.

Its a matter of perspective. But this reduction in expense to make something, and obtain a decent level of quality doing it, is exactly what the technology is useful for.

This is, by the way, also why I think when the storm has passed, AI won't really reduce the total number of jobs. AI or not, you still need very good source material to base something on. We're rapidly developing a keen eye for detecting what is AI slop and what is actually something special, made with AI, or without, or assisted.

VeseleilWhat you people seem to completely miss here, Is the fact that the freaking AI company will get the money, instead of the professional audio recording studio.

I think you glanced over this;

DrUsmanSaleemRozenek still performs every line himself. Respeecher's model, trained on his original Witcher 3 recordings, then reshapes the new takes to match how Geralt sounded in 2015.

Thing is, even the best doctor's were saying that Rozenek will not recover after the stroke. He went against all odds and had amazing full recovery. The total rehabilitation cost was PLN 1.5 mln, around $400k. He had to sell his apartment and his car and he still had to scrape everything he could.
To me he IS the Geralt's voice, there's no doubt about it. If he wanted the new recordings to sound the same as those original Witcher 3 lines and they had used AI to adjust it so be it, he still got paid. I just hope that he had all the bases covered from legal point of view when it comes to what happens with that trained AI model after delivery of the voice lines for this project.

NathaaabI think you glanced over this;

I don't think he necessarily did, at least based on the text. There will obviously be two bills for the voice product, the voice actor himself, and the modification component (whatever that is, ai or otherwise) I think his problem is with the latter.

Or it could be that he missed that line, but in that case, don't you think he would be complaining about the actor not getting the money, instead of an audio studio using more established methods of modification, which is what I took from it. I mean, both the visuals and the audio of movies has been at half 'fixed in post' for a lot longer than the ai train has been going.

I dunno how much I agree. I mean I do think this is one of the more legit uses for ai and like he said, probably will produce a good result. But I still have a burning hatred for it due to current hardware prices. If things settle down into a new norm, where regular people still have the freedom to buy computers without selling a kidney, and also ai exists without this constant over-speculating and circular money shenanigans, then maybe I'll go back to how I was before... which was mostly along the lines of 'meh, I guess its here to stay and has some legitimate uses,' but right now its out of control.

Also, kind of off topic but the english voice actor for Geralt, Douglas Cockle, is also in my favourite modern rts game, spellforce III reforced, playing Sentenza Noria. But seriously its an amazing game that not enough people know about. Also made in europe (forget where), but its definitely more known there than North America. Playing multiplayer is always european player on the other side, if you can even find anybody playing.

To all the people that can't or didn't want to read, but were in a hurry to attack my opinion.

I didn't mention the actor, nor his payment. I was talking about the fact that a damn AI company got the job, and not the professional audio recording/mixing/mastering studio. The actor would get paid either way, even more by doing the same thing in a recording studio, because that would require even more working hours.

Do you people really think that the situation where the original voice actor is not able to reproduce his voice for a sequel is something new? For various reasons like getting sick or passing away?
How do you think the motion picture industry solved that problem before the damn AI wasn't available?
Now return to my first post and read again, or go back to school to learn to do so.

I'm not wasting my time by quoting ignorant people that praise a damn AI.

VeseleilTo all the people that can't or didn't want to read, but were in a hurry to attack my opinion.

I didn't mention the actor, nor his payment. I was talking about the fact that a damn AI company got the job, and not the professional audio recording/mixing/mastering studio. The actor would get paid either way, even more by doing the same thing in a recording studio, because that would require even more working hours.

Do you people really think that the situation where the original voice actor is not able to reproduce his voice for a sequel is something new? For various reasons like getting sick or passing away?
How do you think the motion picture industry solved that problem before the damn AI wasn't available?
Now return to my first post and read again, or go back to school to learn to do so.

I'm not wasting my time by quoting ignorant people that praise a damn AI.

Well... no, actually, I think I did read your comment properly and stand by my earlier response, from the first letter to the last.

Its clear you don't like AI and I'll be honest with you, I hate it too. But try to keep emotion and reality separated, I'd say. Things aren't black and white

Vayra86Well... no, actually, I think I did read your comment properly and stand by my earlier response, from the first letter to the last.

Its clear you don't like AI and I'll be honest with you, I hate it too. But try to keep emotion and reality separated, I'd say. Things aren't black and white

I wasn't referring to you, my friend. AI has its good uses, but creating or modifying sound/music isn't one of them.
Also you could try to understand why my stance is like that, if you wish. And the reason is simple, sound does effect my whole being in a special way.
That's why I have and give huge respect to the people that compose, sing, play instruments, do recording, mixing and mastering. And I don't like seeing an AI taking away their daily bread.
I hope the answer is satisfying enough. @Vayra86

As long as the result sounds good and people get paid for their work, what difference does it make? Your complaint seems similar to the guy peeling potatoes at a restaurant being out of work because the Lay's factory used an industrial grade machine to peel their truckloads of potatoes instead of hiring him.

Well, they won't and he isn't. The two use cases are different.

VeseleilI wasn't referring to you, my friend. AI has its good uses, but creating or modifying sound/music isn't one of them.
Also you could try to understand why my stance is like that, if you wish. And the reason is simple, sound does effect my whole being in a special way. That's why I have and give huge respect to the people that compose, sing, play instruments, do recording, mixing and mastering. And I don't like seeing an AI taking their daily bread away from them.

Fair. I have a connection to music too as a DJ and producer and promoter of events... although more on the digital/electronic music side of things. That might also explain how our perspectives differ... I reckon you're more into acoustic music?

I've seen digital music rise and fall, different genres of it... and it was exactly the democratization of creation of electronic music that has enabled so much. The entire dance scene for example. I've lived the creation of the underground Dubstep scene when it started in Croydon, London some 20 years ago... So I view this AI thing as something... yeah... yet another way of creation in the sea of options, really. Not so much as 'the thing that will erase everything else'

Like gaming has and will survive these technologies... so will music. I have no fear whatsoever. Humans will never just fall in line, we get bored and we destroy things.

Vayra86Fair. I have a connection to music too as a DJ and producer and promoter of events... although more on the digital/electronic music side of things. That might also explain how our perspectives differ... I reckon you're more into acoustic music?

I've seen digital music rise and fall, different genres of it... and it was exactly the democratization of creation of electronic music that has enabled so much. The entire dance scene for example. I've lived the creation of the underground Dubstep scene when it started in Croydon, London some 20 years ago... So I view this AI thing as something... yeah... yet another way of creation in the sea of options, really. Not so much as 'the thing that will erase everything else'

I love all kinds of music where its quality is satisfying for my taste. I'm also a decent tenor. I love Berlin Techno for example, Detroit and Chicago (Rush) were good once upon a time.

cst1992As long as the result sounds good and people get paid for their work, what difference does it make? Your complaint seems similar to the guy peeling potatoes at a restaurant being out of work because the Lay's factory used an industrial grade machine to peel their truckloads of potatoes instead of hiring him.

Yeah, its similar in that a new technology has made older workers redundant. Buuut I bet that lays factory employed more people than a datacentre.... which is why I feel this transition may be different than the previous ones when it comes to employment. Maybe anyway.... I don't really know how things will shake out.

cst1992As long as the result sounds good and people get paid for their work, what difference does it make? Your complaint seems similar to the guy peeling potatoes at a restaurant being out of work because the Lay's factory used an industrial grade machine to peel their truckloads of potatoes instead of hiring him.

Well, they won't and he isn't. The two use cases are different.

It's exactly this. If the AI company can do the voice approximation a lot more accurately and a lot faster than the sound mixing studio would, then what's the harm?

If potato peeling ceases to be a job because of industrial potato peeling machines, all the better for us - as long as there are people left who know how to peel a potato in case the industrial machine fails. This statement doesn't apply to the creation of art, which should always be a human endeavour.

Gotta say that using AI on stuff like this when the voice actor approves this, is totally fine.

VeseleilI was talking about the fact that a damn AI company got the job, and not the professional audio recording/mixing/mastering studio.

What makes you think it isn't recorded in a professional studio then goes through the AI model before the output is manipulated again by sound engineers?

VeseleilHow do you think the motion picture industry solved that problem before the damn AI wasn't available?

With EQ and filters and whatever? You act like that's not what the AI will basically do like another plug-in in a DAW and replace an entire part of the process and the people associated with it.
AI or not you still need to get a professional studio and engineers to record his lines, then post process them and master them.

VeseleilI'm not wasting my time by quoting ignorant people that praise a damn AI.

Unsure who is being reffered to tbh.

VeseleilAI has its good uses, but creating or modifying sound/music isn't one of them.
Also you could try to understand why my stance is like that, if you wish. And the reason is simple, sound does effect my whole being in a special way.
That's why I have and give huge respect to the people that compose, sing, play instruments, do recording, mixing and mastering. And I don't like seeing an AI taking away their daily bread.

I love music too and I hate generative AI used for the creative process that is making music and the work that goes into it, but even generative AI music needs mixing and mastering at the end of the day.

AusWolfIf potato peeling ceases to be a job because of industrial potato peeling machines, all the better for us - as long as there are people left who know how to peel a potato in case the industrial machine fails. This statement doesn't apply to the creation of art, which should always be a human endeavour.

I'm talking in the sense of a business owner's mindset. Imagine employing workers to peel by hand twenty tons of potatoes daily.
Even if you do, what would be the total of all their salaries be? Humans are, at the end of the day, expensive to employ.

So for purely large-scale workloads, you want to use something that will be able to handle the amount of work in the time you have (and be able to afford using it).
And in CDPR's case, I doubt it's even about that. It's about changing the SAME ACTOR'S voice to a different version of itself. They're even paying the actor!

(Oh and someone should tell the OP how they put Iceman's voice in Top Gun 2 because Val Kilmer was unable to talk).