>>56439763Yes, in a perfect world it would be morally questionable ("scummy") to lock the actress's identity under a contract, but in the real world it's needed and therefore acceptable.
First of all, you should recognize the company's role in the vtuber's success. A company or agency provides resources, guidance, promotion, and hopefully a conducive working environment to an otherwise 1 view literal-who sad girl, streaming alone from her room in front of 2 people and slowly going even more insane. (Many such cases.)
>>56440022>you are a fan of the characterCorrect.
>the person behind the vtuber doesn't matterWrong and you should know it.
This was made clear to everybody, including any company doing their reps, during Kizuna AI's clone yab. A vtuber is not a fully developed character, it's a masked "type", plus a "canovaccio" (the lore) to be used in the contemporary successor to Commedia dell'Arte and other improv theater traditions.
Therefore the person behind matters a lot, not just for her voice, singing, and acting, but also for the many parts of her personality and life experience she decides to include in her character.
This is why the company cannot treat the person like a generic voice actress. Every resource they invest into the character is tied to the specific individual, as evidenced by the fact that once they end their contract, the character is "graduated." The most obvious way to protect their investment is by keeping the actress identity somewhat bound by contract.
Again, in a perfect world it would be morally questionable, but in the real world is considered an acceptable compromise.
