I always feel conflicted when it comes to how AI is used.
On the one hand, I think there are ways AI can be used artistically, ethically and morally; and I'm glad it sounds like Paradox is being conscious about how they use it and are trying to make sure the voice actors get credited and compensated. That's great, right? That's how it should be used.
On the other hand, I'm concerned about the proliferation of AI. AI is cheaper than humans, even when humans are being compensated for their work. Sure, it means a human voice actor can make more money because they can effectively be in multiple places at the same time. However, it also means there's less demand for in-person voice acting, which basically sucks the fun out of voice acting. Same with art, writing or other forms or generative AI.
Furthermore, while generative AI is scarily competent, it's really not competent enough yet to truly replace humans. There are always subtle tells, whether it's fingers being slightly odd, uncanny speech or meandering text. Yet because it's cheaper, that means companies are incentivized to use it in place of real people. The result is that generative AI is poised to suck the enjoyment out of artistic fields while also lowering the already poor quality of commercial creative works. Turning creative fields into soul-sucking jobs and reducing the quality of high-budget creative works fucking sucks.
But then let's return to the upsides... Cheaper art means a lower barrier of entry for people wanting to make traditionally collaborative forms of art (like video games). It also means that control remains in the hands of the director and could result in artistic works that are more accurate to the creator's original artistic vision. It means Joe Rando doesn't need a hundred-million-dollar studio with thousands of developers to create his vision of "GTA but it's in space". Isn't that a good thing?
I just... Feel so conflicted. Generative AI can be used to significantly lower the barrier of entry for creative works that traditionally need a significant team and budget to create, which, imo, is a good thing. Yet, it also threatens to suck the life out of creative jobs, lower the overall quality of creative works that it's used in, and even replace those jobs entirely (even in studios that have the money for real artists). That is a bad thing.
How does one reconcile this?