Arc Raiders Fejlesztő Embark Defends GenAI Voice Lines, Claims Actors “Would Go Crazy” Reading All the Dialogue

Despite taking the voice performances of actors and feeding them into machines to produce AI-generated mimicry, Embark CCO Stefan Strandberg insists that “we are not in the industry of replacing actors.” In a new video posted to the Arc Raiders channel focused on audio design, Strandberg refers back to the infamous use of genAI in Arc Raiders to generate voice lines based on real voice actors’ performances, something which the game was heavily (and rightly) criticised for before and since its release.

In that linked piece (thanks Oisin!), CEO Patrick Söderlund stated that they have been replacing lines that were originally generated with actual recorded lines, presumably because Arc Raiders has made quite a bit of money and now they feel that they can continue paying actors to record more lines, rather than just scraping their talents and avoiding the dreaded fee of paying professionals for their work. This choice already came after their previous game, The Finals, was heavily criticised for the exact same thing, which is just a fascinating series of decisions to consider.

In the video, audio director Bence Pajor explains that the apparent reason for the use of AI was to avoid the “stress” of having to work around actors’ availability, as they may be busy working on other projects when Embark decides that a new feature needs new voice lines recorded. Pings, quests, and in-level mission briefings were thus generated using training data based on existing actors’ recordings, saving the need to actually get anyone back in a studio or pay them for their time. Citing the amount of variables that the ping system creates, Pajor claims it “becomes too impractical to record every possible version of something. The actors would just go crazy if they had to read all of that”, which is a take that falls apart if you consider the simple fact that games of this scope (or bigger) have been managing to work around actors’ availability for as long as genAI has not been an accessible technology, which has been almost all of the time that video games have existed. Isn’t it crazy that games like Disco Elysium and Baldur’s Gate 3 had so, so much recorded dialogue, all without genAI? Or fellow live service shooter Apex Legends, which has been adding and adjusting voice lines via updates for years? How could they possibly have managed it?

Voice actresses Jo Rideout and Diana Gardner, who play Shani and Celeste respectively, are also featured speaking on their characters’ relationships as well as their experience working within this hybrid model of recording and generating voices. Gardner notes that “if they only need an hour of my time for a couple call-outs that are short, then I don’t have to cancel other shoots or some other project that might also be interesting. So in that way, I feel quite good about it.” She then explains that “the contract seemed fair…so it was a no-brainer in that sense. But I didn’t know what to expect once I heard the voice come out. I was like, ‘Can I take ownership for the performance?’ This is hours of work that I’ve put in, but can I take ownership for the final product? No.”

Strandberg went on to elaborate on his comment about not replacing actors, saying that “We are not in the industry of replacing actors, actually, I think quite the opposite. We should celebrate the performance, and we should give them more space.” While Embark’s audio team are indeed working on replacing the generated lines with actual performances, that doesn’t change the fact that the choice to use AI in the first place was one made simply to save money in not paying actors for their specific work and get the game out the door faster — effectively the ‘we’ll fix it in post’ of games development. While I can respect Garner’s awareness that it means she can prioritise other projects when necessary, there is that notable tinge of regret in not being able to take ownership for her hours of work. Fundamentally, Embark has demonstrated its willingness to cut talent to cut costs, seemingly happy to post PR videos implying they had no choice due to the game’s scope, and that isn’t something a company just goes back on once they realise how ‘efficient’ it can be.