Player Accuses Indie Game of Using AI Voice Acting

[u/NeNest0r]

A player criticized the voice acting of one of the heroines in the indie game Luminary, assuming that the voice had been generated by AI.

The developer jumped into the review to explain that the voice actually belongs to his wife, who was trying her hand at voice acting for the first time.

[u/ToXiiCBULLET]

exactly. "made with ai" could mean something is vibe coded slop, it could also mean a very good and experienced coder used it to speed up the process.

there's also the problem with when do you add the "made with ai" tag onto something. should you use it when placeholder assets were ai but then they got replaced? should you use it when someone used it to just speed up a process that's similar to how people that could code have been using bots and scripts for years? in the future, if/when ai is deeply embedded into basically digital tool, do you always have to have that tag?

[u/DarthGogeta → u/ToXiiCBULLET]

As a software engineer. People underestimate how useful AI is to write comments and tests. Especially the later is my favorite use of AI. "Hey here are the requirements, give me unittests for each usecase".
Another great use are things like creating Regex or if you have to read something like XML. Creating classes for serialization/deserialization etc.
Yeah, AI can be used in an awful way but there is also a huge benefit of using it in certain cases.

[u/spacechimp → u/DarthGogeta]

For multiple decades in my career as a developer, none of my employers would even give us enough time to create unit tests. With AI, it's now so easy to get 100 percent line/branch coverage that there is no excuse not to do so.

If someone hates bugs, they should love what OCD devs can do with AI to prevent them.

[u/dishrag → u/ToXiiCBULLET]

That’s the thing.… Like [u/C0d3M3chan1c](u/C0d3M3chan1c) said, “AI” encompasses such a wide variety of tools and can be incorporated as little or as much as a creator wants that “made with AI” ends up saying about as much as “made with software.”

And the people who are most adamant about AI disclosure seem to leave very little room for nuance or distinction. They’ve collapsed everything under one single “AI” umbrella, as if it’s all just the product of typing a prompt into ChatPeeBeeGee. They have some very strong feelings about a technology they often seem to barely understand.

I don’t think a generic “made with AI” label communicates particularly useful information, nor do I think most consumers are even equipped to make much sense if a developer took the time to a complete detailed breakdown of every instance where AI may have been used throughout a workflow or pipeline. They’re essentially demanding a label that doesn’t really tell the consumer anything meaningful.

[u/Bhuvan2002 → u/dishrag]

Absolutely agree with the last point. Rather let the people be the judge, if something is obviously slop, then the reviews and general consensus will reflect that. But giving people the Made with AI tag without the background of the usage and/or the knowledge of the tool is just stupid.

[u/C0d3M3chan1c → u/dishrag]

Yeah, that’s basically my concern too.

Disclosure should be informational, not a warning label. The moment “contains AI” becomes a giant binary badge, people start reading it as “cheap / fake / low effort” even though it tells you almost nothing about the actual process or quality.

Your organic analogy is pretty good in that sense: a label can start carrying a whole cultural meaning that goes far beyond what it technically says.

That’s why I’d much rather have specific disclosure like “AI-generated voice acting”, “AI-assisted code tooling” or “AI used for animation cleanup”. Then people can actually decide whether that particular use matters to them instead of reacting to one loaded word.

[u/C0d3M3chan1c → u/ToXiiCBULLET]

Yes, and I think that's where the current binary label starts breaking down.

If I use generated placeholders for two weeks and replace every single one before release, was the game "made with AI"? If an AI tool helps me refactor code I already wrote, does that count the same as generating an entire system from prompts?

I'd still rather err on the side of transparency, especially when generated material actually ends up in the product. But Imho disclosure needs to describe what the AI actually contributed, otherwise we're eventually going to label half of modern software production "made with AI" and the label stops communicating anything useful.