MarStrMind wrote: ↑Sat, 12. Apr 25, 18:46
It's a little more involved than simple TTS these days.
Try "spacebourne AI voices" in a search engine. See what users say about it.
AI content, when it is recognized by the user, instantly devalues the whole work, and makes it look cheap and poor quality. The longer people are exposed to generated content, the better they are at spotting it. That's the issue with it and that's the reason not to use it. Because no matter how high quality is the voice you used, if the user recognizes it, it'll make the final product appear as cheap junk. It is sort of like RPG Maker effect.
It happens because in creative works, value comes from human labor. AI is not a human. No human labor - no value. This is not an obvious thing. For the same reason humans value hand-crafted work higher, and for the same reason luxury cars have hand-crafted components.
The acceptable use seems to be at the line where it is a filter. Like AI voice changer, where a voice of the original is replaced. The situation when somebody "buys a style", i.e. trains a net to mimic a living painter, however, can ruffle many features, because the idea here to use a tool in order to avoid paying the dude. Which is not very ethical thing to do.
Likewise, if people realize that some ship is created from AI-generated sketch, that'll be enough for many people to become furious and abandon the game for good.
That's the primary reason to avoid AI content. Note that it only matters in user-facing parts. Nobody cares if the engine itself is written by a robot.
And that's the reason why I'm not excited about AI radio chatter idea.
The situation is a bit different in a training flight sim because that's less a work of art, and more of a training tool. There a robot may be more tolerable because the point is to listen to the ATC chatter and not for it to be real. But again given choice between AI voice and actor voice, I'd expect many would pick an actor voice.