I think the point is its a high turnover game, which is generally considered bad.
Also tons of people don’t touch cod or battlefield anymore who used to.
I think the point is its a high turnover game, which is generally considered bad.
Also tons of people don’t touch cod or battlefield anymore who used to.
Share your drugs with the rest of us please.
Its awful with at least every article posted on world.
You forgot one, test runs. See what works and what doesnt.
I just wouldnt pitch this idea as a benefit for VAs is all. It won’t be uses by VAs to benefit their profession, it will be used by non-VAs who want to cut costs. Thats not a worthwhile goal to me. We shouldnt be trying to make art more efficient, or remove the human element from it.
They didnt flop because they are new. They flopped because there wasnt a demand for what they were selling. What was the price tag again?
Almost like the price was what killed it.
And what did happen to those apple VR goggles?
Thats just extortion. You can argue you disagree but its just a difference of opinion. I also don’t think that voice actors would agree with your license idea. I’m sure there would be a few exceptions though.
I agree, but with AI instead of socializing.
As a consumer I’d rather a real person voice acted it live or not at all. Thats petty to put your entertainment above someone’s livelihood.
You know the way these programmers talk about AI, I think they just don’t want to have to work with anyone else.
How is this not taking from voice actors and giving to yourself in that regard? The system you described would mean only the biggest names get paid, all so a developer can avoid learning social skills.
So the content stays the same but you don’t need a voice actor now?
They won’t because of hallucinations. They could work in mature games though where its expected that whatever the AI says is not going to break your brain.
But yeah a kid walks up to toad in the next Mario game and toad tells Mario to go slap peaches ass, that game would get pulled really quick.
People will use whatever tools available to them. If their community supports it they will do it publicly, if not they will hide it. Drug use is a great example in some cases.
If Australia allows people to convert their families to a company just to avoid taxes, then thats on the government to fix, not the people to stop doing.
As long as there is no UBI there will always be pressure to use all tools available when things get hard.
It becomes harmful once you start selling it for profit based on its similarity to a real person.
Just so you know that does happen quite a lot on a small scale. Copyright law tends to be applied once a business pattern is established around the problematic content.
Some people get away with it selling at craft fairs and such and just noone ever hears about it.
Thanks for the reference, ever heard of that game!
Same as anything else, if it causes someone harm (in american financial harm counts) it gets regulated.
There are exceptions to allow people to disregard laws as well. Its legal to execute a death row prisoner.
One is banned because it can affect someone’s earnings, and is theft, the other is not banned because noone is harming another party by making a pencil drawing of a celebrity or scene.
Its theft, which is against the law to do against a company or person. Its similar to trading in empty boxes at GameStop or sending back boxes full of rocks to amazon.
Although most people seem to just pick a side based on whether they think that company should exist or not.
Depends who would pay more for the technology. Game developers or invidividual voice actors.
Maybe if they had a big enough union, they could swing it. Although at that point just get ai voices banned to protect your field.
Also, just an aside, I wouldnt pay extra for an AI version of an actor I liked. Thats still not them acting.