Support NeoGAF

[Draugoth]

​

Polish video game developer CD Projekt SA used artificial intelligence technology in its latest release to recreate the voice of an actor who passed away, the company said.

The voice of the late Miłogost Reczek, a popular Polish voice actor who died in 2021, was reproduced by an AI algorithm for the Polish-language release of Phantom Liberty, the new expansion to CD Projekt’s Cyberpunk 2077. In a statement to Bloomberg, the company said it received permission from Reczek’s family to do this and that it had considered replacing him in the expansion and rerecording his lines in the original game but decided against it.

“We didn’t like this approach,” CD Projekt localization director Mikołaj Szwed said in the statement, as Reczek “was one of the best Polish voice talents” and his performance in the game as the doctor Viktor Vektor “was stellar.”

Instead, CD Projekt hired a different voice actor to perform new lines for the role and then used a Ukraine-based voice-cloning software called Respeecher to create an algorithm that would alter the dialogue to sound like Reczek. “This way we could keep his performance in the game and pay tribute to his wonderful performance as Viktor Vektor,” Szwed said.

Szwed also said that Reczek’s sons “were very supportive.”

 

[mhirano]

Was his state consulted and properly paid?
If so, it’s acceptable I guess

 

[Salty Popsicle]

It's cool that they asked permission, but what gives family the right to consent to a dead person's wishes?

 

[KiteGr]

If they had permission from his family and another voice actor did the bulk of the work, I see no harm done.
It's better (and more honorable) that erasing and replacing all existing lines whith the new actor, or having the character disappear from future content.

 

[ReBurn]

It's cool that they asked permission, but what gives family the right to consent to a dead person's wishes?

Rights to what someone produces in life transferring to family upon death is a normal thing in nearly every culture.

 

[Deft Beck]

They went through all the ethical considerations, so this is fine.

 

[artsi]

It's cool that they asked permission, but what gives family the right to consent to a dead person's wishes?

It's how it's been since forever. Paul Walker's family also gave permission to use his likeness in Fast & Furious when he died.

Same with Carrie Fisher in Star Wars.

 

[mortal]

Man that's fascinating. It's like cyberpunk IRL.

 

[chlorate]

I don’t really mind but I would prefer to recast the character since new VAs still need work. Imagine if we just kept using an AI of Sean Connery as Bond instead of hiring Dalton/Brosnan/Craig.

 

[Last Hearth]

It's cool that they asked permission, but what gives family the right to consent to a dead person's wishes?

The same way that Tolkien’s grandson can license LOTR to Amazon to make a TV show?

 

[Slothbeing1209]

I don’t really mind but I would prefer to recast the character since new VAs still need work. Imagine if we just kept using an AI of Sean Connery as Bond instead of hiring Dalton/Brosnan/Craig.

I don't think it's the same story. 1 is sequel dlc, other is complete reboot

 

[egocrata]

It is Cyberpunk. If there is a game where doing this is appropriate, is this one.

The game main story is about having someone’s conscience and soul and mine data mined and embedded on a chip in your head. It is fucking perfect.

 

[TransTrender]

This is fine

 

[kiphalfton]

It's how it's been since forever. Paul Walker's family also gave permission to use his likeness in Fast & Furious when he died.

Same with Carrie Fisher in Star Wars.

Yes, all for the same reason.

They're greedy bastards and wanted to cash in.

 

[Salty Popsicle]

It's how it's been since forever. Paul Walker's family also gave permission to use his likeness in Fast & Furious when he died.

Same with Carrie Fisher in Star Wars.

I'm not arguing that it's illegal, because it clearly isn't. However, is it ethical?

What's to stop a family in need of money from allowing a deceased relatives likeness to be used for things that are questionable? Just food for thought.

 

[Freelance Yakuza]

They paid a real actor to do the new lines
They got the family permission reproduce the original actor's voice

Nothing to complain here

 

[IFireflyl]

I'm not arguing that it's illegal, because it clearly isn't. However, is it ethical?

What's to stop a family in need of money from allowing a deceased relatives likeness to be used for things that are questionable? Just food for thought.

I guarantee you that no deceased person is going to care.

 

[Embearded]

When they recreated actors with CGI for movies (Star Wars, F&F) everyone thought it was cool. Now they do that with AI after asking for permission and suddenly they are under fire.

 

[Freelance Yakuza]

I'm not arguing that it's illegal, because it clearly isn't. However, is it ethical?

What's to stop a family in need of money from allowing a deceased relatives likeness to be used for things that are questionable? Just food for thought.

Nothing
It's like when a movie or book franchise get sequels after the death of the original creator and they ended up being bad.
Perhaps you can have a contract or testament stipulating what could be done but I bet most people won't even think about it.

"Hey, here is 1 million to use your grandma likeness for porn"

 

[Goalus]

Rights to what someone produces in life transferring to family upon death is a normal thing in nearly every culture.

Outrageous, isn't it?

 

[L*][*N*K]

It's cool that they asked permission, but what gives family the right to consent to a dead person's wishes?

The law

 

[MidGenRefresh]

Any audio clips?

 

[Panajev2001a]

It's cool that they asked permission, but what gives family the right to consent to a dead person's wishes?

They used an Ouija board?!?

I do not get who else should have been asked.

 

[existensmaximum]

It's cool that they asked permission, but what gives family the right to consent to a dead person's wishes?

Who cares, he's dead? He certainly can't care.

 

[Lux R7]

A single person can agree or not with the family, but they asked permission, so it's fine.

 

[Little Chicken]

I'm not arguing that it's illegal, because it clearly isn't. However, is it ethical?

What's to stop a family in need of money from allowing a deceased relatives likeness to be used for things that are questionable? Just food for thought.

Yeah it's a huge grey area that could easily be abused and in perpetuity.

 

[SJRB]

Very cool, handled very well by CDPR.

 

[timothet]

I don’t really mind but I would prefer to recast the character since new VAs still need work. Imagine if we just kept using an AI of Sean Connery as Bond instead of hiring Dalton/Brosnan/Craig.

It was only for couple new lines for expansion. Recasting and re-recording all existing lines from base game would be worse for couple reasons imo.

 

[MidGenRefresh]

It was only for couple new lines for expansion. Recasting and re-recording all existing lines from base game would be worse for couple reasons imo.

I wonder what was the reason for re-casting the voice actor that did Mr. Hands in the English version.

 

[SJRB]

I wonder what was the reason for re-casting the voice actor that did Mr. Hands in the English version.

Because the original was a complete miscast considering the spy thriller vibes of Phantom Liberty.

Dude sounds goofy as fuck.

 

[MidGenRefresh]

Because the original was a complete miscast considering the spy thriller vibes of Phantom Liberty.

Dude sounds goofy as fuck.

I don't even remember how he sounds to be honest, I just know that Mr. Hands sounded differently.

 

[timothet]

I wonder what was the reason for re-casting the voice actor that did Mr. Hands in the English version.

They mentioned on recent RedStream that whey wanted Mr.Hands to have mix of different accents or something like that. Maybe old voice actor just couldn't pull it off.

 

[elmos-acc]

The whole voice "AI" thing is pretty weird anyway. Isn't it basically just a filter that uses the reconstruction of a person's voice and speech patterns from existing recordings? How is it more unethical than someone else doing an impression of that character.

 

[crackajack]

I'm not arguing that it's illegal, because it clearly isn't. However, is it ethical?

What's to stop a family in need of money from allowing a deceased relatives likeness to be used for things that are questionable? Just food for thought.

The same can be said about inventions that have no copyright attached to them since "forever". The dude who realised or experimented to find that gun powder explodes might also not like for what it is being used nowadays.
I guess art will need to figure out how preserving and a continuation of use of deceised people can work without angering too many people. Art in the style of Michelangelo, Rubens etc. will be created too, I guess musicians soon as well. Usually their students continued their style sometimes, sometimes maybe creating work that was credited to the old master.
I guess many forms of art will be made very different with all the current developments in the near future. Previously only the product itself stayed, now we will be able to keep the "tools" forever.
I assume a Napoleon or Jesus movie might be made in the future with a digitally created likeness, and a motion capture actor underneath at most, and not with Joaquin Phoenix and James Caviezel. Might even be necessary with all the cultural appropiation lunatics. Using resurrected dead material might become more ethical than allowing an unavoidably "wrong" actor to do anything beside entirely fictional characters.

 

[Cyberpunkd]

It's cool that they asked permission, but what gives family the right to consent to a dead person's wishes?

The fact he is dead.

 

[Aion002]

It's cool that they asked permission, but what gives family the right to consent to a dead person's wishes?

When the dead resurrect they can sue them for some easy money.

It's great for for them, trust me, since when they return they might not have much money left.

 

[Drizzlehell]

It's cool that they asked permission, but what gives family the right to consent to a dead person's wishes?

I'm pretty sure that being dead removed any ability for that person to give a shit.

The closest family are the only ones who are actually qualified to make such decisions on their dead relative's behalf, so if they gave their blessing then it's none of anyone's business. I would actually think that it's a cool way to commemorate someone and let their legacy live on into the future.

 

[ReBurn]

Outrageous, isn't it?

Not particularly.