291 réponses à ce sujet

[RosaAquafire]

I absolutely love character voice, it's very immersive and it brings characters to life in a way that plain text can't quite do. A game isn't a novel, you can't convey flavour and character through narrative. Voice acting is incredibly compelling.



However, I definitely know where the OP is coming from. It sucks when a game experience becomes limited and streamlined just because they can't afford voice acting to do a certain thing.



I'll put it this way:



- If I choose between a scene voice acted and a scene not voice acted, I definitely choose voice-acted. (So long as the acting is quality, of course, bad acting is offfensive.)



BUT



- If I choose between a scene being not voiced acted and a scene being ABSENT, I definitely choose the former.

[LdyShayna]

Anacronian Stryx wrote...

I wonder if back in the day when the cinema went from silent movies to talkies there may have been a loud group complaining about killing "immersion" by adding sound to the protagonists of the films..

*sigh*

Games aren't movies.

EDIT:  And I give up.  It seems that even my minor goal of having people understand has failed.  Meh.

Modifié par LdyShayna, 05 août 2010 - 12:38 .

[Melca36]

Serious Chicken wrote...

Thank you.

No thanks.

[Vandrayke]

RosaAquafire wrote...

I absolutely love character voice, it's very immersive and it brings characters to life in a way that plain text can't quite do. A game isn't a novel, you can't convey flavour and character through narrative. Voice acting is incredibly compelling.

However, I definitely know where the OP is coming from. It sucks when a game experience becomes limited and streamlined just because they can't afford voice acting to do a certain thing.

I'll put it this way:

- If I choose between a scene voice acted and a scene not voice acted, I definitely choose voice-acted. (So long as the acting is quality, of course, bad acting is offfensive.)

BUT

- If I choose between a scene being not voiced acted and a scene being ABSENT, I definitely choose the former.

depends on the scene

Like I said before, I'd rather have fewer, better scenes than have more scenes that I didn't like as much

[the_one_54321]

LdyShayna wrote...
EDIT:  And I give up.  It seems that even my minor goal of having people understand has failed.  Meh.

Don't assume that no one understands just because some people don't understand. I understand where you're coming fromt, as I outlined earlier, I just think you're limiting yourself unnecissarily.

[Brockololly]

LdyShayna wrote...
*sigh*

Games aren't movies.

AMEN.

This is my biggest problem with the direction BioWare is seemingly headed down with ME and now DA. While you can certainly take elements from movies and cinema to enhance story telling in a game, it seems with ME and (maybe?) now with DA2, you're ending up with interactive movies more than games. I'm sorry but if I want to watch a movie, I'll go watch one directed by the likes of Nolan or Spielberg, not Mark Darrah (no offense). Games have a unique interface and ability to engage their audience that movies don't have, and its disappointing to see BioWare "innovating" their games by just squeezing more cutscenes in there.

I mean, with a silent PC you're able to get right to the action- you read the response and you can put any inflection or accent on it you wish. You select the choice and see the companion/NPC respond. The problem with a voiced PC and the ME style blurbs is that its just boring and repetitive. So I get to hear some random voice actor say the same thing I basically already read, or worse, the main character goes off and says or does something I didn't intend based off of the paraphrase.

I just think BioWare is shooting themselves in the foot by going full VO in all of their games. I like BioWare games for their stories, but the gamplay mechanics and how you the player interact with the characters and the story is just as important. If all I was worried about was the story, I'd go watch a movie or read a book.

[Dtelm]

The idea of a game is to immerse you into the world as deeply and completly as possible. That means voice acted, fully animated dialouge. In the past this hasnt been a realistic goal. Today it is.



Voice acting has as much of an impact on dialouge and character interaction as music has on an IG enviroment. An area can be beautiful, but through music the developers tell us how to feel about it on a subconscious level. Voice acting has an effect just as great on dialouge.

[angj57]

This argument would make a lot of sense to me if the voice actors were also the writers, coders, or developers. They aren't so voice acting does not necessarily come at the expense of game content.

[Riona45]

DespiertaLosNinos wrote...
And this is the same type of argument you are fighting against.  I have a lot of respect for LadyShayna, we may not always have converging views but she presents her opinions with dignity.  What you imply is no different however than the hordes of forumites that claim anyone who dislikes something is ________ (fill in the blank).  So if I have interest in the new DA I would have somehow lost my imagination or patience?  Look I'm sorry you don't like the direction DA is heading honestly (I'm not sold on it myself), but making the odd claim that people who it appeals to lack your same mental capacity is rather counter productive.  The single most creative person I have met plays nothing but online FPSers (TF2 and the like), how does entertainment preference have any relevance on imaginations and a sense of patience and pacing?

I agree.  I don't really care whether or not any individual person will play DA2.  People are allowed to have their preferences.  It is annoying, though, when people try to imply (or outright state) that their preferences make them "better" than those who do not share them.  These are video games--it's not Serious Business.

[Brockololly]

angj57 wrote...

This argument would make a lot of sense to me if the voice actors were also the writers, coders, or developers. They aren't so voice acting does not necessarily come at the expense of game content.

What? I'm not some great industry insider but I do know they need to budget things out when making a game. And voice acting takes a lot of time and costs a lot of money. It eats up resources for the game that could likely have been used in other areas to create more content or improve other areas. Its a trade off. BioWare thinks that adding player VO adds to overall quality of the game. Many others, including myself, don't think it adds anything but rather takes away from the PC and to boot cuts back on possible content.

[tbsking]

Dtelm wrote...

The idea of a game is to immerse you into the world as deeply and completly as possible. That means voice acted, fully animated dialogue. In the past this hasnt been a realistic goal. Today it is.

I disagree entirely. Voice acting for a character that ostensibly is supposed to be me, or at least my window into the game world, actually ruins immersion for me. The few times I played Mass Effect, almost every dialogue was a question of which option was the "right one" versus which option would my character say. Dragon Age had tons of dialogue that did nothing to affect the game, the characters, or anything else that might have an obvious effect on the game world, and was there only for the sake of conversing.

Adding voiced dialogue and flamboyant animations to a scene just take me out of the game and make me feel more like I'm watching the events than participating.

[Vaeliorin]

Dtelm wrote...
The idea of a game is to immerse you into the world as deeply and completly as possible. That means voice acted, fully animated dialouge. In the past this hasnt been a realistic goal. Today it is.

I disagree.  Go ahead and voice/animate the NPCs, but as soon as you start voicing/animating my character, you're taking away my immersion.  When my character starts doing things that are completely out of character for him (punching an ally, making "I'm going to punch you" fists when talking to someone as some example from ME) you've completely removed me from the world.  No longer am I (not that I self-insert, mind you) in the world, but instead I'm just an observer watching someone who I don't really understand doing things that make him look like a lunatic.

[TMZuk]

Brockololly wrote...

angj57 wrote...

This argument would make a lot of sense to me if the voice actors were also the writers, coders, or developers. They aren't so voice acting does not necessarily come at the expense of game content.

What? I'm not some great industry insider but I do know they need to budget things out when making a game. And voice acting takes a lot of time and costs a lot of money. It eats up resources for the game that could likely have been used in other areas to create more content or improve other areas. Its a trade off. BioWare thinks that adding player VO adds to overall quality of the game. Many others, including myself, don't think it adds anything but rather takes away from the PC and to boot cuts back on possible content.

Not to mention that it takes up a lot of disc-space.

[SirOccam]

Spear-Thrower wrote...

I never had a problem with the paraphrasing in ME. It seemed pretty obvious what the aggressive or passive responses were. Extreme reactions, good or bad, are not caused by the dialog wheel or spoken lines, but the rigid morality system.

The main thing that bothered me about the paraphrasing is that the paraphrases seemed to fit the flow of the conversation better, yet Shepard had to launch into this big, clunky, unwieldy sentence. It's almost like the concept of the paraphrases prompted them to make sure every line was longer than its paraphrase, even if the situation didn't call for it. In truth, most of the time, his short responses like "like hell" or whatever were much more snappy and interesting.

I agree about the morality system. I think the blame should be placed mostly on it as opposed to the paraphrases.

tbsking wrote...

Adding voiced dialogue and flamboyant
animations to a scene just take me out of the game and make me feel more
like I'm watching the events than participating.

I don't know; I felt pretty un-immersed when my character looked like a mannequin 99% of the time. He should be able to laugh at jokes, fume with anger, cry, smile, etc. Not having a voice removes all of that. It needs to be a balance, of course, but like Spear-Thrower said, those extreme reactions have more to do with the morality system (which DA2 will thankfully lack) than the dialogue wheel or a voiced protagonist.

[Vaeliorin]

Spear-Thrower wrote...

Vaeliorin wrote...
When my character starts doing things that are completely out of character for him (punching an ally, making "I'm going to punch you" fists when talking to someone as some example from ME) you've completely removed me from the world.  No longer am I (not that I self-insert, mind you) in the world, but instead I'm just an observer watching someone who I don't really understand doing things that make him look like a lunatic.

Hence the 'intent' icons in DA2 -- clenched fist, olive branch, etc. If people misunderstand the lines they've only themselves to blame.

Assuming the intent actually matches the icon in the way I expect, sure.  Perhaps DA's writers (whom I rather like) won't have insane moments where the implied intent of a line is completely different from what actually occurs, such as Persuade options that involve threatening to break an elcor's legs, or paragon choices that involve punching one of your squadmates in the face.  The only thing we really have to compare it to, however, did have these types of insane moments.

And that's only the major problems.  Minor problems also occur, such as having a character who stands around with his arms crossed all the time or a character who always gesticulates wildly while talking.  Miranda in ME2, for example, makes some rather bizarre hand gestures while talking.  If my character does this, I will be displeased.  These minor things matter.

I never had a problem with the paraphrasing in ME. It seemed pretty obvious what the aggressive or passive responses were. Extreme reactions, good or bad, are not caused by the dialog wheel or spoken lines, but the rigid morality system.

But it's not just extreme reactions that are the issue.  I just used them to demonstrate as they're the most memorable examples for people (and the fist clenching occurs regardless of any dialogue choices.)  As soon as the game starts giving my character body language, that body language needs to be appropriate for my character, and all the intent icons in the world can't really handle that.

SirOccam wrote...
The main thing that bothered me about the
paraphrasing is that the paraphrases seemed to fit the flow of the conversation better, yet Shepard had to launch into this big, clunky, unwieldy sentence. It's almost like the concept of the paraphrases prompted them to make sure every line was longer than its paraphrase, even if the situation didn't call for it. In truth, most of the time, his short responses like "like hell" or whatever were much more snappy and interesting.

This was definitely an issue in ME2 (I can't recall if it was in ME1, it's been a while since I've played it.)  There are times when Shepard completely interrupts the flow of conversation with what he says, by saying things or asking questions as if he's just started the conversation, even though he's in the middle of it.  Some context sensitivity within the conversation would be nice, if we're forced to have voice acting.

Modifié par Vaeliorin, 05 août 2010 - 08:07 .

[AllThatJazz]

 I would never accuse anyone of being a 'hater', or 'whiner', just because they dislike aspects of DA2/Bioware's new 'direction' in general, I believe that all opinions are equally valid. I can appreciate why people feel pissed off because a) Bio doesn't seem to be making the game they want or expected, and they can't register unhappiness with that, or be critical, without being slagged off by some. It isn't fair.


I have to admit, however, to feeling somewhat aggravated at the implication (or sometimes outright accusation) that anyone who IS enthusiastic about the game is a 14 year old Modern Warfare obsessive with neither intelligence nor imagination. Because clearly, if I were an adult in full possession of my faculties I would feel differently, right? There's a lot of silliness on both 'sides' of this debate and no need to get personal. If the points we make are good enough, surely they can stand on their own merits. 


With regards to fully voiced protagonists  - if this is indeed the direction that Bio is headed in permanently, I'm a little concerned. I have difficulty seeing how they can offer the kind of choice in terms of playable races (for example) in future games that they have offered in the past. Either there will be one single voice for each gender no matter what the race (very difficult for any one actor to achieve - imagine Jennifer Hale's Shepard voice if we'd been allowed to play as a Salarian!); or there will be multiple voice actors, which could seriously impact the amount of game content due to the expense; or future games will have to limit playable race to human, as in Mass Effect and DA2. I hope I'm being unnecessarily pessimistic, but none of those are great scenarios, imo. I'm still not fully convinced that we've the last of the silent hero as far as DA is concerned.


That said, I am looking forward to DA2 immensely, and I think, that for this game and style of narrative, a fully voiced protagonist works, as I believe it worked in Mass Effect. I am somewhat hesitant to project either fear or optimism for all future Bioware titles based on just a couple of recent examples and an 'indication' (but not outright statement) of intent by devs. And who knows anyway? Maybe the Old Republic will be so ridiculously successful that Bio will be able to provide multiple voice actors for every one of 12 playable races in DA3 (oops, mindless optimism alert!)

Gah, apologies for rambling, wall of text and a certain amount of fence-sitting. Actually, scrap the apology for fence-sitting. Someone grab me a cushion, I like my fence and I'm here to stay. Bit pointy, though! 

Modifié par AllThatJazz, 05 août 2010 - 09:29 .

[Massadonious1]

Brockololly wrote...
And voice acting takes a lot of time and costs a lot of money. It eats up resources for the game that could likely have been used in other areas to create more content or improve other areas. Its a trade off. BioWare thinks that adding player VO adds to overall quality of the game. Many others, including myself, don't think it adds anything but rather takes away from the PC and to boot cuts back on possible content.

I find this a little hypocritical myself. Everyone but the PC was voiced in Origins. They could of easily added a metric crapton of "options" if they left everyone unvoiced. Yet, somehow adding PC VO is suddenly a strain on the system. A strain that somehow didn't exisit in Origins when every random nobody had something to say.

[AllThatJazz]

Massadonious1 wrote...

Brockololly wrote...
And voice acting takes a lot of time and costs a lot of money. It eats up resources for the game that could likely have been used in other areas to create more content or improve other areas. Its a trade off. BioWare thinks that adding player VO adds to overall quality of the game. Many others, including myself, don't think it adds anything but rather takes away from the PC and to boot cuts back on possible content.

I find this a little hypocritical myself. Everyone but the PC was voiced in Origins. They could of easily added a metric crapton of "options" if they left everyone unvoiced. Yet, somehow adding PC VO is suddenly a strain on the system. A strain that somehow didn't exisit in Origins when every random nobody had something to say.

Good point, although the PC is somewhat different, in that every line of dialogue must be recorded by two actors (male and female) - and that's not taking into account different races if it applies. Plus, the PC often has multiple choices in what to say, whereas NPC comments/responses (particularly random nobodies) are much more limited. Believe me, I'm saying this as someone who likes the idea of voice acting in DA2  It's just a bit more complicated with a protagonist.

Modifié par AllThatJazz, 05 août 2010 - 09:50 .

[Brockololly]

AllThatJazz wrote...

Good point, although the PC is somewhat different, in that every line of dialogue must be recorded by two actors (male and female) - and that's not taking into account different races if it applies. Plus, the PC often has multiple choices in what to say, whereas NPC comments/responses (particularly random nobodies) are much more limited. Believe me, I'm saying this as someone who likes the idea of voice acting in DA2  It's just a bit more complicated with a protagonist.

A voiced PC is waaaay different than just having another voiced companions character. Like you said, you've the male/female VO's, then each choice has to have multiple iterations based on emotion and all the investigate options and so on- its not an insignificant unertaking or an insignificant cost to incur. The amount of writing and VO is probably equal to that of several companion characters- thats just my speculation though.

Maybe, my hope is that by not having the Origin stories, thats the trade off in terms of content to keep things equal with Origins. But Darrah already mentioned to Gamestar I believe that DA2 won't be as long as Origins but will be longer than Awakening...still, its less content more likely than not.

Modifié par Brockololly, 05 août 2010 - 10:49 .

[AllThatJazz]

[quote]Brockololly wrote...

[quote]AllThatJazz wrote...





Maybe, my hope is that by not having the Origin stories, thats the trade off in terms of content to keep things equal with Origins. But Darrah already mentioned to Gamestar I believe that DA2 won't be as long as Origins but will be longer than Awakening...still, its less content more likely than not.
[/quote]



Crumbs, hope DA2 is a lot longer than Awakenings ... if the actors cost THAT much, I volunteer my services for free, Bio - I do all sorts of good British accents  

[Massadonious1]

I do understand that it is a tad more complicated for the PC, but in the end, VO is still VO regardless of how significicant it is, and it is expensive regardless.



Take away all the random NPC banter, and the need for shopkeepers to tell you their life story, and you can do any number of things with that diskspace and money they would apparently save.



It just irks me because the logistics of it are apparently only becoming an issue now because it's VO that people got used to not having in Origins. If you don't like it, then that's fine, but don't hind behind "cost and diskspace" when any kind of VO falls under the same premise.

[AllThatJazz]

Massadonious1 wrote...

I do understand that it is a tad more complicated for the PC, but in the end, VO is still VO regardless of how significicant it is, and it is expensive regardless.

Take away all the random NPC banter, and the need for shopkeepers to tell you their life story, and you can do any number of things with that diskspace and money they would apparently save.

It just irks me because the logistics of it are apparently only becoming an issue now because it's VO that people got used to not having in Origins. If you don't like it, then that's fine, but don't hind behind "cost and diskspace" when any kind of VO falls under the same premise.

True, but voiced random NPC banter has existed to some degree since the BG series - it would remove existing 'flavour' if it were taken out. Whereas, I guess in the sense that 'you don't miss what you've never had', a fully voiced PC hasn't been a part of DA up until now, so it's inclusion seems unnecessary to some (which was kind of your point, I know). But add to this the apparent Dev statement that DA2 will be shorter than Origins, and you've got people asking why, what does DA2 therefore possess, to make up for seemingly less content? A fully voiced PC is kind of the obvious answer because it's one of the few things that has been revealed (along with 'more cinematic visuals', also a bone of some contention). If people perceive that content they would love is being sacrificed for content they are decidedly underwhelmed by, then that's a legitimate concern, and cost comes into it, I guess. 

I loved my voiced Shepard to tiny pieces, and I will no doubt feel a similar level of attachment to my LadyHawke. I am very enthusiastic about what I've heard of DA2 so far. But can I understand why some fans are bothered? Sure.  

Modifié par AllThatJazz, 05 août 2010 - 11:40 .

[In Exile]

Vaeliorin wrote...
I disagree.  Go ahead and voice/animate the NPCs, but as soon as you start voicing/animating my character, you're taking away my immersion.  When my character starts doing things that are completely out of character for him (punching an ally, making "I'm going to punch you" fists when talking to someone as some example from ME) you've completely removed me from the world.  No longer am I (not that I self-insert, mind you) in the world, but instead I'm just an observer watching someone who I don't really understand doing things that make him look like a lunatic.

I was going to reply with this in another thread debate we were having (but other things interfered) when you asked me how it was that I demaned the game make you show an attitude for you to have it, since in real life we very obviously can have attitudes without showing them or otherwise making them apparent.

And the answer to that is the constrained choice of video games. In real life, as a Cousland, I can try and fail to organize a political coup against Anora and Alistair. I can try to parlay my fame and success in building an army to date to make paint Anora as a potential barren traitor who conspired with her father to murder Cailin because he would have replaced her with an Orlesian, and Alistair as a bastard price who will be Eamon's puppet on the throne. Whether or not this can succeeed, or is even an appropriate course of action is irrelevant.

What is the case is that there is no dialogue option, and no option at all really, for a character that does not want to beg Anora/Alistair for the crown.

There are other story and design issues related with a lack of VO, too, particularly the lack of how they can portray any character in a game.

Say you had VO and you could rule alone. This is not a design problem for importing your choice, because the actor can simply adopt your attitude on quest triggers and interact with a new PC. But without VO the main character must be absent - otherwise they would have to portray that main character in a way that is absolutely impossible for the game. This leads to design decisions that have to background your PC.

We talked about this before, but a lack of VO forces your character to be a bit player as a matter of design. This is incredibly aggravating for people who are not particularly keen on being off to the side.

Specifically, though, the problem you describe above isn't related to VO. It's related to anchoring an action to a dialogue choice, and even if Shepard were silent and you picked a line that said '' This interview is over.'' and Shepard literally said this line (without the VO) and then punched a reporter, it would still break your character all the same. The VO is not the problem with a loss of control.

Vaeliorin wrote...
And that's only the major problems.  Minor
problems also occur, such as having a character who stands around with
his arms crossed all the time or a character who always gesticulates
wildly while talking.  Miranda in ME2, for example, makes some rather
bizarre hand gestures while talking.  If my character does this, I will
be displeased.  These minor things matter.

DA does this all the time. In fact, DA has the straight as an arrow, arms fixed at your side post for a lot of the game, except when you do randomly cross your arms occasionally in dialogue scenes.

It is not VO that drives these actions, but how physical conversation is scripted which is entirely independent from VO. Even if Bioware had you as the straight as the arrow type the whole game, you would still have the issue that this was your gesture.

Unless you want to debate that the game is hiding content from you, in which case our position will be just be fundamentally incompatible.

But it's not just extreme reactions that are the issue.  I just
used them to demonstrate as they're the most memorable examples for
people (and the fist clenching occurs regardless of any dialogue
choices.)  As soon as the game starts giving my character body language,
that body language needs to be appropriate for my character, and all
the intent icons in the world can't really handle that.

Like I said: DA already did this. The times hwen they gave you the slack-jawed yokel look when they thought you had to be shocked, e.g. when Wynne collapsed after a random encounter and your PC was forced to run back and look worried is just one example.

The design is poor, I agree, but independent of VO.

This was definitely an issue in ME2 (I can't recall if it was in
ME1, it's been a while since I've played it.)  There are times when
Shepard completely interrupts the flow of conversation with what he
says, by saying things or asking questions as if he's just started the
conversation, even though he's in the middle of it.  Some context
sensitivity within the conversation would be nice, if we're forced to
have voice acting.

The same happens in DA. ''I want to move back to my other questions'' or some similar statement, and an NPC acknowledging this mid-conversation is just as stupid and unnatural. It has to do with a poor implementation of the limited number of options on screen. Much better for Bioware just to have a sub-menu.

Modifié par In Exile, 05 août 2010 - 02:47 .

[tbsking]

tbsking wrote...

Adding voiced dialogue and flamboyant
animations to a scene just take me out of the game and make me feel more
like I'm watching the events than participating.

I don't know; I felt pretty un-immersed when my character looked like a mannequin 99% of the time. He should be able to laugh at jokes, fume with anger, cry, smile, etc. Not having a voice removes all of that. It needs to be a balance, of course, but like Spear-Thrower said, those extreme reactions have more to do with the morality system (which DA2 will thankfully lack) than the dialogue wheel or a voiced protagonist.

As I recall, the camera was fixed over the shoulder for most dialogues so that the person you were talking to was centered in the frame. I don't know why everyone keeps bringing up the fact that your character just stands there; I never noticed it as a problem, my focus was always on the person I was talking to.