AI to voice the additional dialogue?

[BobT]

Would it be possible to have AI voice the additional lines, rather than play the music track? 

I've seen people use it in BG3 and the results are absolutely AMAZING. It seamlessly integrates. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tM98vkJk4RE
https://www.nexusmods.com/baldursgate3/mods/5573?tab=videos#lg=2&slide=0

I've even heard someone do it with Edwin's voice and while they had to re-record the lines manually, imitating the accent, the AI output gets it spot on. 
I understand why the music was used back in the day, but it would be amazing to have a fully voiced option now! 

 

EDIT: Response from one of the BG1 NPCProject team here: https://www.gibberlings3.net/forums/topic/37626-ai-to-voice-the-additional-dialogue/?do=findComment&comment=332640

EDIT2: An excellent post containing actual similar examples based in law: https://www.gibberlings3.net/forums/topic/37626-ai-to-voice-the-additional-dialogue/?do=findComment&comment=332657

 

 

Edited January 11 by BobT
Answer received

[Trouveur80]

Would be strange to have different voices for original content and then for the mod content. 

[BobT]

That's the thing, with AI it's hardly different at all! 
It struggles with accents a bit so some lines have to be manually recorded with the modder "putting on" the accent a bit, then AI applied and it sounds just like Edwin etc. Can barely tell it's AI and not the original VA. 

[Trouveur80]

27 minutes ago, BobT said:

That's the thing, with AI it's hardly different at all! 
It struggles with accents a bit so some lines have to be manually recorded with the modder "putting on" the accent a bit, then AI applied and it sounds just like Edwin etc. Can barely tell it's AI and not the original VA. 

But you would need original actors agreement to do so. 

[Connelly]

If you have the original actors' agreement, you might as well ask them instead to voice the lines. And if you don't have it, then you shouldn't use AI at all, period.

And in both cases I wouldn't play with it. I understand not every mod author can pay a voice actor or have one to collaborate/volunteer to work freely, or the know how to split audio files. But I know how fucked up voice acting work is already, and I'll take silence over AIs.

[Thacobell]

Using someone's voice to make them say things they never agreed to is hecka sketch.

[BobT]

17 hours ago, Connelly said:

If you have the original actors' agreement, you might as well ask them instead to voice the lines. And if you don't have it, then you shouldn't use AI at all, period.

And in both cases I wouldn't play with it. I understand not every mod author can pay a voice actor or have one to collaborate/volunteer to work freely, or the know how to split audio files. But I know how fucked up voice acting work is already, and I'll take silence over AIs.

People making a FREE mod are hardly reducing voice acting work.. 
The original VAs have already been paid for the work that they have done, via the modders and users all buying the game in the first place! Any additional work is done by the modders. 

I don't get this aversion to AI, it's no different than a really skilled impressionist. Permission isn't needed for transformative work. The VA isn't being "made" to say anything, the computer is. 

As long as (the reference) is credited, the additional work is clear about being a representation (AI or otherwise) and only the output (no models etc.) are being freely distributed and not paywalled, there's literally no downside for anyone. 
Do you ask permission from the artists, writers and programmers to modify and re-use their work too? Come on..

[Thacobell]

There's a HUGE consent issue here. Its not "transformative" if you're literally stealing a person's voice. And uising software to make them say whatever you want? That's just gross.

[Trouveur80]

7 hours ago, BobT said:

Do you ask permission from the artists, writers and programmers to modify and re-use their work too? Come on..

Hum yes actually? And in most countries, the law enforces this. 

[BobT]

4 hours ago, Thacobell said:

There's a HUGE consent issue here. Its not "transformative" if you're literally stealing a person's voice. And uising software to make them say whatever you want? That's just gross.

You're not "literally stealing" it though are you, no-ones reaching into their throat and ripping their vocal chords out. This is NO DIFFERENT to a skilled impressionist lol. It's an IMITATION. 
For something like the NPC project it's a free mod, a homage, how is it gross just to have those existing lines voiced rather than have the random music playing? The COMPUTER is saying those lines, no-one is shoving their hand up the VA's @rse and "forcing them" to say anything. 

I could understand if it was being used to "impersonate" in a negative way, but it isn't is it lol. It's also taking no-ones jobs away since the original VAs have been paid for their work already, and it's a free mod. Giving 66% of the royalties from the mod would still give £0. 

[BobT]

4 hours ago, Trouveur80 said:

Hum yes actually? And in most countries, the law enforces this. 

That's what mods do, change and re-use artist's writer's and programmer's work.. Are you saying most countries law enforces modders doing a FREE HOBBY PROJECT to gain permission first? Did the NPC project mod request permission from the original programmer's etc. to bolt this on? 

Don't be silly. 

[Thacobell]

51 minutes ago, BobT said:

You're not "literally stealing" it though are you, no-ones reaching into their throat and ripping their vocal chords out. This is NO DIFFERENT to a skilled impressionist lol. It's an IMITATION. 
For something like the NPC project it's a free mod, a homage, how is it gross just to have those existing lines voiced rather than have the random music playing? The COMPUTER is saying those lines, no-one is shoving their hand up the VA's @rse and "forcing them" to say anything. 

I could understand if it was being used to "impersonate" in a negative way, but it isn't is it lol. It's also taking no-ones jobs away since the original VAs have been paid for their work already, and it's a free mod. Giving 66% of the royalties from the mod would still give £0. 

Many voice actors have made it VERY clear that they are not okay with someone takinh their likeness without permission. Look up that Scooby Doo/FNAF project that used ai generated voices and the truble that stirred up for a recent example.
The idea that writing fanfiction for a fictional character (NPC porject) and taking a real person's likeness without permission (ai generated voice) is not remotely equivalent, and its delusional to think they are.

[BobT]

Yet it's the character "Edwin Odysserion's sound though isn't it, as fictional as the writing for it. No-one's making the "actor" say anything or attributing anything to them. Extending their voice work (FOR FREE) is exactly the same as extending the writing or programming. VA's aren't special here.  

Once again, the actual end result is NO DIFFERENT than a skilled impressionist doing the same. 

If there was money being made, a model being distributed so it could be used for other non-benign purposes or some sort of disrepute then fine I agree, but that would be a different scenario and is otherwise not the case in a free hobby mod project where only the OUTPUT is used.

Everyone would laugh off the writer's having a claim to the character and preventing fan-extension of their work, yet someone can't make a computerised imitation of "the Edwin voice"? Daft. This anti-AI sentiment is really silly when applied to hobby projects, it's not taking anyone's jobs away here because there was nothing to take. If anything increased engagement from mods is a GOOD thing considering everyone who enjoys it has bought the game (unless they're a dirty pirate, but again that's another matter). 

How about those games where the MC is based on a facescan? Imagine creating extended scenarios etc. where that same character does more stuff in extra content, and Sam Lake or Pierce Brosnan comes and says the mod can't be made lol. And that's not even the case here as unlike with a facescan it isn't even the actor, just a computerised IMITATION of them, and even then it's not of the 'person', but the video game character. 

Edited January 5 by BobT

[Morgoth]

I don't know how things will be sorted out concerning AI but I have the following thoughts:

- generally AI does a very subpar voice compared to original voice-actors. I'm a fan of no voice acting; when it's added to games or mod it should be perfect and I can assure you, we are very far from perfection - unless you are fine with Dagoth Ur not having any inflexion or emotion in his voice when talking to you.

- The Ai does an imitation. Should the original voice actor of duke nukem sue Gianni Matragnano for doing Duke nukem's imitation? 

 

Edited January 5 by Morgoth

[Thacobell]

"Yet it's the character "Edwin Odysserion's sound though isn't it, as fictional as the writing for it. No-one's making the "actor" say anything or attributing anything to them. Extending their voice work (FOR FREE) is exactly the same as extending the writing or programming. VA's aren't special here."
There is NO Edwin Odesseiron, he is a fictional character and does not have a voice. That is Jim Meskimen's voice. An actual person.

And the both of you are STILL disregarding the fact that voice actors have already voiced their opinon on the matter.