The voice actor behind Baldur’s Gate III character Karlach has slammed gaming CEOs for their application of AI in development, saying they simply want to save money even if it means destroying their reputation in the long run.
Speaking with EDGE, Samantha Béart also touched base how actors will react to the continue push for AI in gaming, feeling they won’t simply back down while the technology effectively takes away their jobs.
'If the big companies dictate what games can be created, I don't think that will advance the industry.' -Shihei Yoshida
🙄 same guy who said 80$ is a steal lol and according to him M$ shouldnt put good on a services🤣 wtf
Talks about "innovation" while all his previous company is focused on is GaaS and Remasters. Smh.
This guy is a walking contradiction.
This makes no sense at all.
What does his PREVIOUS company have to do with him and his statement??
Did he have a say on what they are doing? Could of sworn that was Jim Ryan’s fault?
Subscription services have f***ed the movie industry and it's work force, caused massive studio buyups by companies like Disney consolidating huge parts of the industry under one roof and have creatively sterilised the IP's they've gobbled up. The same thing is happening to gaming, MS being the main greedy piggy.
I get what he's saying, but I don’t think we need subscription services to see a lot of the problems he's pointing out. All we really have to do is look at the gaming industry over the last two console generations. Even without subscriptions, the big AAA publishers have already been moving in a direction where almost every game feels like it's built from the same template. It’s all about streamlined, safe design choices that are meant to appeal to the widest possible audience. At this point, you could probably ask an AI to make a AAA game from a certain publisher and it would spit out something pretty close to what they’re actually making.
Now, about the whole “walled garden” thing... that’s not some future problem, it’s already here. Consoles have always worked like that. Their entire business model is based on controlling what gets released on their platforms. Sure, maybe they’re not as locked down as the extreme examples people bring up, but the end result is similar. If you’re not making the kind of game the platform holder wants, you’re probably not getting through the door. We’ve seen it with Sony, Nintendo, Microsoft, even Valve does this in its own way with Steam. So yeah, the issue isn’t new or exclusive to subscription services.
Would a subscription-only future make that problem worse? Sure, it definitely could. But I don’t think we’re heading in that direction anytime soon. Unless physical hardware truly becomes a thing of the past and everyone switches to streaming games, I just don’t see subscriptions becoming the dominant model. They’ll stick around as an option, but I doubt they’ll take over completely.
Now, what will take over completely is digital media, and that’s a whole different issue that’s going to hit us a lot sooner. PC and mobile are already basically 100% digital, and that makes up around 70% of the gaming market. The remaining 30% is consoles, and even there we’re seeing the shift. Sony’s removing the disc drive from boxed consoles, Nintendo is releasing just one super expensive 64GB cartridge for their new system, which means almost all third-party publishers will end up going digital and Microsoft is mostly digital already. You either get a digital-only or a physical box with disc that only acts as a activation key. So yeah, that future’s already knocking on the door and the damage will be enormous.
Right, because then you can’t sell individual games at $80, which is an incredible value for the consumer!
I find this statement quite telling. Apparently a certain fan base wasn't buying games at $60 or $70 dollars either. That's why the Gamepass model exists with day and date. What was the excuse then?
We as gamers want it all but don't want to pay for anything. Well, I take that back. A good chunk of them. You don't have to buy a game at $80. Wait for to go down in price. Most gamers have a massive backlog. Play those games until the one you wants drops and n price. Simple
It's now easier than ever to make "broad incorrect assumptions" about how games work.
yes
when i said "how is it easier" i was referring to the thing that was called easier
congrats
People parroting AI responses without actually knowing about the subject to be able to tell if its accurate or within context
Constant rise of media/youtubers chasing negativity as it generates more views
Continued increase of independent “media” that rarely seems to care about fact checking or context (linked to point above)
More and more people using said youtubers/streamers/tik tokers as their news/opinion consumption and then just repeating everything (even more so when dealing with streamers that basically seem to have cults for a fanbase)
Making up fake news, information, files, etc and making them viral being easier than ever thanks to AI and social media explosion of provocative topics
I mean… it shouldn’t really need that much explaining why he is right in saying its easier than ever, all those same points right now apply to pretty much every topic out there, not just games
I'm just gonna say, the PS YouTubers that I watch don't do that. You want to know what YouTubers do, do that? One guess. You got it 😅
Because people can just say random crap and get upvoted. It reinforces them to think what they say has validity.
Stop releasing broken games that need 6-12 months of patches/updates and while waiting for those patches/updates if gamers complain we are lecturer by game developers and community managers on how we don't understand how hard development is. First of all we are gamers we don't need to understand we are paying money to play a game and at the very least we expect a working product
Games cost 80 now and in few years will be 90 and within 10 years will be $100. So is it really asking for a lot to say please release games when they are in a stable playable state? Release now fix it later, release it now get some criticism but later when we will fix it gamers will praise us and call us great and our game sales will rise again. It's the same cycle. Just look at cyberpunk 2077 and how developers hid the actual console footage and reviews were using footage provided by CDPR and gamers were mad and now many of those same gamers praise CDPR for the job well done. This is why gaming is where it is today and developers know they can release unfinished games
Who do you think chooses the release date? The in the chair developer or their "I've never played a video game and never coded one" CEOs?
For as much as we blame the CEO's we shouldn't be so naive to always guce free pass to high ups in the studios. Concord developers are prime example of that, Sony didn't need to force them they were make dumb decisions as is
You do know when a game makes back it's development costs there are 6 to 7 figure bonuses /royalties
It would be awesome if every game made had no major issues and didn’t require any patches from day one. Unfortunately, with the complexity of [most] games these days, that’s an unrealistic expectation.
There’s not a dev out there who wouldn’t like more time to work on their baby. But, outside of self-published, they’re not the ones who are setting a release date. Eventually the bean counters, sitting in their luxurious offices, decide that enough time and money has been spent creating the product and its high time they started to see a return on their investment.
Arguing with these people that you need another 12 to 18 months to iron out some of the problems gets you precisely nowhere. They don't give a damn about the developers, or the games really, that care about one thing and one thing only. Profit!
Telling them that releasing a game which isn’t fully finished and will affect the profit margin by association of a poor product also gets you nowhere, they simply say ship it, then fix it.
There are exceptions to the rule of course, as there always is, but those are fewer and far between these days.
Sadly what you are saying is true too. Gaming has become too big to where now those who have zero interest want to invest in it
I agree and that’s why accountability is key. Of course game development is a lot that requires a village to get it done, but all us gamers want is a finish product that works, so we can keep coming back for more via sequels. And when it comes to retail the customer is always right.
It’s bad when the game developers develop unnecessary things like too much microtransactions, from an already $80 plus game, when we just want the finish product, not too many paywall from one $80 - $100 game!
Most drivers don’t know how cars are made, but still expect the car to be good quality and reliable.
The thing is that when you dont understand something, the judgement of quality becomes affected. People will see a giant open world game with infinite variables and say “why is this buggy?” The one who understands will say “it has to be buggy, thats the trade-off.”
Most gamers understand that. Bethesda essentially build their games that way. What we don’t understand is, you can buy the car now at full price and the wheels will arrive in a few months-like many games tend to be.
I’m using the car industry as an example, but they are just as bad sometimes. Such as paying for features that are already included in the car. Oh, you want sports mode? Pay more! It’s the same engine and transmission! It’s just a mode that is locked away.
@franwex
Maybe you do, but alot of them dont understand. I see the discourse around it constantly.
@MDTUNKOWN
Apply this to yourself next time you f up. Or better yet, feel free to go and develop a bethesda style game. Tell me how that works out.
Armageddon, oblivion remaster is not a new game, its remaster of almost 20 year old game and the game has fps issues on a ps5 pro. Because of guys like you, devs think they can release unfinished products and now also increase the price.
It doesn't matter. I don't know how a good risotto is made, but I know when it tastes like sh$%.
It is impossible to understand everything in today's modern world, but despite this we can still say a product is sh$% while not understanding the process. If we are not allowed to do this, we would be forced suck up any sh%& people give us and say it's good because, "we don't understand the process". This is the height of stupidity.
Why do we need to understand anything? I'm a consumer i dont care how its made or what it takes to make a game, i buy it if I think it looks good this just sounds like victimhood 101
If this games turns out to be shit do we give them a pass because reasons?
@anast
Just because you can do a thing, doesnt mean you should. If a person does not like a game, fine. But people cast a domain expansion so large with their opinion, it starts to effect others adversely. Just because a game is crap for one, doesnt mean thats the case for everyone, and that is something many dont….understand….
@cockney
You need to understand because it makes things better…including for yourself. If you understand the true nature of why a game does not resonate with you, if you understand that its not objectively bad just because it doesn’t resonate with you, it can make your own experiences better. It will definitely make things better for other people because they have a habit of acting based upon the opinions of others. If people had an opinion from a place of understanding, more people will be able to make better informed decisions. Understanding will definitely help the devs. They wont be left in a confused stupor as to what happened that caused such unnecessary outrage against their hard worked game *Cough cough dragon age
Lack of mastery will come back and bite you in the rear end, when you have no games to play because vitriolic feedback broke all of the pillars holding up gaming.
Vapourware can end up being the stuff of legend, like Rockstar's Agent, Star Wars 1313, or StarCraft: Ghost. Without ever seeing the light of day, these games never risked the possibility of being played and forgotten, and instead live on forever as the subjects of lengthy YouTube essays.
Still, Molyneux's most notable lost game (or tech demo, depending on who you asked at the time) was arguably Project Milo.
I can see the potential of the kinect hardware... its rather impressive tech, but it was just not meant to be for gaming. If anything, MS had a huge missed opportunity to have used it for the AR/VR projects.
You can use the Kinect as an SLS camera for paranormal investigations. So it wasn’t a complete failure.
Remember Star Wars Kinect announcement? Biggest laughable acting seen
"Unfortunately, as we were developing Milo, so the Kinect device was being developed. And they realised that the device that Alex Kipman first showed off would cost $5,000 for consumers to buy.
"So they cost-reduced that device down to such a point, where the field-of-view...I think it was a minuscule field-of-view. In other words, it could only just see what's straight in front of you."
Hmm, exactly what tech was in it, that was cut, affected the development? It was only ever interpreting visual and audio inputs right? The xbox was processing those inputs.
Nor do I see how the field of view thing is relevant to the discussion.
Exactly! Tf kinda BS statement was that? i don't really see how fov is relevant at all, since when do you move all around a room while talking/interacting to someone?
This is entirely untrue. There was never a 5000 dollar Kinect prototype that could somehow use a wider field of view to scan and import generated in-game items and advance AI by over a decade. Anybody that fell for this was a stupid moron child, myself included. Anybody that falls for this lie now is a stupid moron child who doesn't realize that these people *only* know how to lie.
Crazy though because destroying their reputation will turn people against them and you'd get more people overtime who will just not buy their products meaning less money.
So by "saving" money they end up losing it along with any good will they had with their audience...and i's not something you can get back so easy.
But I thought people keep saying AI is garbage and it won't take any jobs..?
Yeah, pretty sure those who had jobs doing adult calls are out of a job, like those you used to see on late night TV.. Plus numerous other *ahem* adult entertainment stuff.
They're already starting to use robots on car assembly lines. Not just the standard robot arms like you see in factories, but full humanoid robots, Mercedes included, not just Tesla.
So things are going ahead.. To be honest I kind of want a huge change anyway, we haven't had anything earth shattering happen for a long time, yes we've had powerful computers, smartphones etc..But this will be bigger than anything we've ever had if it continues to advance at a rapid pace over the next decade or even before that.
David Bowie saw something in an interview from 1999 : https://m.youtube.com/watch... I know anyone can make predictions or whatever.. still makes you think.
If someone’s voice is used to create an AI voice performance, that someone should have royalties for the usage. It’s the same with someone’s image.
The advent of AI shouldn’t be just another way the ultra rich get richer in the expense of ordinary people…
CEOs don't have good reputations that's why people want em dead. Don't think they'll care much.
I know this sounds heartless, but if it cuts down cost and dev time, and I can’t tell it’s an AI voice, I honestly vote for AI.