"F**k AI in performance," says Baldur's Gate 3's Neil Newbon: "it's dull as hell," and companies should "spread the wealth"

With gen AI making its way into some of 2025's biggest games, I asked BG3's Neil Newbon for his thoughts on the controversial tech.

Neil Newbon's stance on AI is pretty clear. Earlier this year when the SAG-AFTRA videogame strike was at its peak, he formed the Pixel Pack: a collection of some of gaming's most prolific actors that includes everyone from heavy hitters like Troy Baker and Matt Mercer to newcomers like fellow Baldur's Gate 3 alumni Devora Wilde and 2025 Game Award winner Jennifer English. "Fuck AI in performance," he tells me, but despite the cuss word, he's dead serious - Neil Newbon isn't here to play.

And he's got reason to be serious. While 2025 has felt like the dawn of a new era of indie games and showstopper double-A titles (cough Expedition 33, cough), it's also the year that gen AI use has ramped up exponentially. In just the past few months, we've seen Call of Duty: Black Ops 7 come under fire for its use of the tech, Krafton going "AI-first," and even a new Postal game revealed and then canceled within 48 hours due to alleged use of gen AI.

But, despite persistent backlash, the pendulum continues to swing in the opposite direction. Epic Games CEO Tim Sweeny took aim at AI disclosures, claiming that the technology "will be involved in nearly all future production." Days later, Fortnite Chapter 7 launched with what some believe to be AI-generated assets. Then, Embark's Arc Raiders, which uses text-to-speech voices trained on real-life actors, won best multiplayer game at the 2025 Game Awards.

Ahead of the TGAs, I asked Newbon about AI in the likes of BO7 and Arc Raiders, acknowledging that he's already been very vocal about the topic. "Comparatively speaking, the amount of money it costs to do those voice lines compared to the rest of the game's development is peanuts," he says. "When a game's successful, I don't really get why [developers] don't go 'well, at the time we couldn't afford to do it - it was too much or too difficult - but now we've been super successful, why don't we go back and actually redo the lines with actors?' That's an option; I'm just saying.

"I don't think there's a justification for taking people's jobs away," he continues. "I don't really think it's legitimate." While he can't comment on the specifics of something like Arc Raiders' text-to-speech tech, generative AI is a no. "If you're going to not record the lines in the first place and just use AI to take somebody's voice and manipulate it however the hell you want, that's a problem. You're robbing that performer of that day's fee, and you're robbing that performer of the ability to look after themselves or their family - most actors, notoriously, are not rich. Most of us struggle [for] our entire career.

"The justification is difficult. 'Ah, we couldn't really afford it;' well, maybe find a way, now that you've made your money, to go back over those lines and do it better."

"The other thing as well [is that AI] sounds boring," he continues. "I've heard generative AI; it's dull as hell. I don't believe it; it takes me out of the immersion. People are saying it helps the immersion because it's reactive. It takes me out of the experience because I just hear something that doesn't sound like a human being in jeopardy, or in combat, or excitement, or whatever emotion you're supposed to be aiming for. It doesn't feel real. No matter how good it sounds, there's something about it that doesn't quite sit with you, and that's uncanny valley territory.

"I don't really care about generative AI, because it sounds crap. No matter how advanced it's getting, it still sounds not right. And I would say to anyone who made a shit ton off of a release that uses generative AI for voices: maybe go back to those actors you paid however much money to clone their voices, maybe get them in the booth and re-record that stuff. Just saying. You've got the money now, spread the wealth. I think it would definitely do a lot of good for the actors, and it would definitely do a lot of good will in the community, because a lot of people have a feeling about this as well. Out of longevity, probably a good idea out of decency, y'know?"

Imagine a world where Morrigan from Dragon Age: Origins was partially voiced by AI. Or Cole Phelps and Rusty Galloway from L.A. Noire. Both games had a profound influence on my life because they were so raw, not unlike the impact Baldur's Gate 3 has had on both a newer and older generation of gamers. These games, games that go down in history as epics, do so because they're inherently human, even where there are archdemons flying around or silver-haired vampires casually snacking on boars. That humanity - the moment that Astarion breaks down when Cazador finally meets his demise - cannot be replicated by a machine. Hell, it can't be replicated by most people.

So while the specter of gen AI looms, seemingly ever-menacing, I'm not convinced it's going to take over videogames anytime soon. Well, not the ones worth playing, at least.