EA says the AI voices were developed with "full consent and active collaboration" from in-game announcers John Buccigross and Darren Pang.
  • bookmeat@fedinsfw.appEnglish
    34·
    6 days ago

    No, it lets them not pay for talent. They could easily add variety by hiring voice actors.

  • 64bithero@lemmy.worldEnglish
    33·
    6 days ago

    And from what I hear it still repeats lines that have little to no context with what’s actually on screen. Such a joke

    • NoForwadSlashS@piefed.socialEnglish
      8·
      6 days ago

      But that one commentator got paid the same and did less work, so the drop in quality is fine!

      I wonder if he will get paid at all next year…

  • jqubed@lemmy.worldEnglish
    20·
    6 days ago

    The use of generative AI in NHL 27 was first reported by ESPN sportscaster John Buccigross, who also serves as the play-by-play man for EA’s NHL series. “They’re using some AI stuff now,” he said on the Chirping Zebras Podcast last week (via IGN). “They played me some stuff back in my voice. It’s like, wow, that’s pretty good. If it means less work and the same check, I’ll take it.”

    […]

    something else Buccigross related about the process: The AI is sometimes off.

    “They were playing me back some of my AI voice, and they’re playing it like, ‘Score! And the crowd gets out of their chairs!’” he said. “I was like, no, they’re not chairs. I know, AI, they look like a chair, but we call them seats. Little things like that, you gotta go back and listen because those words matter in sports.”

    So they’re not just having the AI mimic his voice, but even create the dialog? That sounds really lazy

    • Victor@lemmy.worldEnglish
      84·
      6 days ago

      That sounds really lazy

      Isn’t that the whole point of the generative aspect in this case? To be able to add more varied commentary that’s a little bit more specific to the play, rather than just generic, bland, recorded commentary that has to fit generic situations?

      I wouldn’t say it’s lazy in this case, unless I misunderstand what you mean.

      • NoForwadSlashS@piefed.socialEnglish
        31·
        6 days ago

        Plugging in a chatbot to commentate is absolutely less labour intensive than actually writing and recording dialogue lines and hooking them up to contextual situations. If it is getting things wrong, as he states in the interview, it’s lazy on multiple levels.

        • Victor@lemmy.worldEnglish
          2·
          6 days ago

          Don’t get me wrong, I understand the difference of doing more work versus doing less work. But to achieve the same level of variety that an AI generator can using manually pre-recorded dialogue would be an incredible feat, and take up an insane amount of space on your game installation medium. That seems like unnecessary work.

          I see this as an acceptable use of generative AI. And I’m normally very much against AI.

  • matti@sopuli.xyzEnglish
    310·
    6 days ago

    I’m critical of many applications of AI but let’s be real, sports video game commentary is a perfect application for it. It’s not high art, nor does it need to be particularly insightful. The more dynamic the commentary, the more immersive the game.

    Its early stages so they probably are just generating equivalent snippets, both dialogue and the voice, but it wouldn’t take long for this to evolve to something that just generates the commentary on the fly, specific to the game you’re playing.