The Voice Actors' Strike Bares Its Teeth | Opinion

Although the strike by video game voice actors in the SAG-AFTRA union may have slipped from public consciousness since its inception in late July, it remains very much active. A recent picket at Electronic Arts' Los Angeles studio and the launch of Genshin Impact's latest major update have brought the issue back into focus. The update, which introduced several hours of new main storyline quests, was notably missing English-voiced dialogue for two central characters, marking the first significant impact of the strike on a major title. Genshin Impact is particularly vulnerable to the effects of the strike due to its live-service model, which requires the production of large amounts of voiced dialogue in multiple languages within a tight and inflexible timeframe. Unlike more monolithic titles, Genshin lacks the flexibility to work around the strike, both in terms of timing and actor selection. Players are likely to notice if their favorite characters are suddenly voiced by different actors, as they have in the past when such changes were unavoidable. The current situation, which arose from a dispute between one of Genshin Impact's voice acting studios and the union, has left developer Hoyoverse with limited options. While this may be an isolated incident, it demonstrates the strike's potential to cause disruption. If a company of Hoyoverse's scale and resources is forced to apologize to players and release content without voiced dialogue, it is likely that the strike is causing significant difficulties behind the scenes at other studios. The value of high-quality voice acting in games is undeniable. The transition from text-based dialogue to fully voiced dialogue was a significant milestone for creators and players alike. Players closely associate voice actors with key characters, and poor voice acting can be jarring. The dispute over AI in voice acting is relevant to the entire industry, as the outcome will set a precedent for other creative professionals involved in game development. It is essential to take a realistic view of what AI voice acting can achieve. While AI can mimic an actor's voice, it cannot replicate the nuances and creative choices that an actor brings to a performance. At best, AI can alter a different actor's voice to sound like the original, but it lacks the understanding of the original actor's creative decisions and interactions with the scriptwriters and directors. The concept of replacing background and ancillary voice work with AI could have far-reaching consequences, potentially slashing the "bread and butter" work that sustains voice acting as a career and removing the pipeline for less experienced actors to gain more prominent roles. For an industry struggling to attract and retain talent, dismantling the talent pipeline could have severe repercussions. Ultimately, the issue at hand is not just about business considerations but also about the moral imperative to protect the rights of voice actors. A voice actor's voice is their key asset, and it is essential that they retain control and ownership of it. The notion that companies could assert similar rights to create digital facsimiles of other creative skills is a dystopian prospect that should concern all creative professionals. The fear is that if the idea that AI copies of creative output are "good enough" becomes embedded in the managerial class, the consequences for the industry could be catastrophic, leading to significant losses in jobs, creativity, originality, and ultimately, the medium itself.