ARC Raiders slammed for replacing voice actors with AI
ARC Raiders slammed for replacing voice actors with AI
Occurred: 2025-
Page published: November 2025
Embark Studios' release of ARC Raiders generated significant controversy due to the confirmed use of AI text-to-speech (TTS) technology for in-game dialogue, fueling a heated debate about the ethical and economic implications of generative AI replacing human creative labour and creative authenticity in the video game industry.
Developer Embark Studios' multiplayer game, ARC Raiders, came under intense scrutiny for its use of AI-generated voices.
Specifically, the studio confirmed it used AI-based Text-to-Speech (TTS) technology for in-game voice lines, such as player "ping" callouts (identifying enemies, items, or locations) and the dialogue for non-player characters (NPCs) like traders/vendors, particularly in the game's hub, Speranza.
The initial backlash largely followed a highly critical review published in November 2025 that penalised the game for its AI use.
The studio asserted that this technology was not fully generative AI but rather an AI TTS system trained on the voices of contracted voice actors who were paid for the initial use of their voice likeness.
Despite this clarification, many players and critics, voiced strong opposition to what they saw as the sometimes "soulless" delivery and "weird inflections" of the AI voices - a reflection of poor artistic integrity.
The studio also came under fire for bypassing human actors for repeat recording sessions, threatening future work and job security for voice actors.
Embark framed the decision as a "studio strategy" and a "production solution" aimed at maximising output while remaining a small team, enabling them to create "rich worlds" and rapidly generate new dialogue for continuous game updates (like new ping callouts for enemies or items). This points to an effort to cut down on production costs and increase development speed by replacing the necessity of repeatedly recalling and paying human actors for new lines.
The controversy highlights significant transparency and accountability limitations in the rapidly evolving space of game development:
Contractual opacity: While Embark stated the actors consented and were paid, the long-term contracts regarding the ownership and perpetual use of their voice likenesses for future, potentially unlimited, AI-generated lines remain opaque, raising questions about whether actors are adequately compensated for essentially trading long-term work for a single up-front fee.
Industry precedent: This incident followed similar controversy over Embark’s previous game, The Finals, indicating a deliberate, corporate-level decision to integrate AI into their pipeline, suggesting a wider industry move towards cost-cutting over creative employment. The studio's owner, Nexon, even suggested people should assume "every game company is now using AI," pointing to a normalization of the practice without full transparency.
For voice actors: The incident represents a clear and present threat to their livelihood and professional integrity. It demonstrates a corporate willingness to commodify and indefinitely replicate their voice for new content, diminishing future work opportunities and potentially forcing them into less-lucrative, one-time payment deals for their voice likeness. This fuels the urgency for stronger union protections (like those negotiated by SAG-AFTRA) and clearer legislation regarding digital replica rights.
For players/consumers: Players are forced to choose between supporting a game they might otherwise enjoy and protesting the use of AI that threatens creative jobs and potentially lowers the product's artistic quality. The use of AI voices is becoming a red-line ethical issue for a vocal segment of the gaming community, leading to debates and even accusations of a "snub" when ARC Raiders received minimal nominations at The Game Awards.
For society: The ARC Raiders controversy serves as a high-profile case study in the broader societal struggle over AI's role in creative industries. It pits the promise of efficiency and speed touted by developers (and investors like Epic Games CEO Tim Sweeney) against the value of human creativity, authenticity, and labor rights. The public reaction suggests a growing resistance to what critics call "AI slop" - low-quality, machine-generated content that undercuts human professionals - and is helping to draw clearer ethical lines for AI adoption in culture.
Speech synthesis
Speech synthesis is the artificial production of human speech. A computer system used for this purpose is called a speech synthesizer, and can be implemented in software or hardware products. A text-to-speech (TTS) system converts normal language text into speech; other systems render symbolic linguistic representations like phonetic transcriptions into speech.[1] The reverse process is speech recognition.
Source: Wikipedia 🔗
Unknown
Developer:
Country: USA
Sector: Media/entertainment/sports/arts
Purpose: Imitate actors' voices
Technology: Generative AI; Text-to-speech
Issue: Authenticity/integrity; Employment; Transparency
AIAAIC Repository ID: AIAAIC2133