291 réponses à ce sujet

[Haexpane]

TheMadCat wrote...

Addai67 wrote...

TheMadCat wrote...

What? Fallout 3 and Oblivion had full voice acting (Minus protaganist, but that's not the discussion here.)

Full voice acting minus the protagonist is a very big minus.

It absolutely is, 

I'd disagree.  I find the voice for the male shepard in ME2 to be way off, his dialog sounds empty, hollow and his emotions feel forced.

Which is a better/more interesting story  GTA3 silent protag or Ray Liotta's ham fisted delivery in GTA Vice City?  I'd take GTA3 any day.

But it varies by game.  I enjoy the Balky Batacawitz from GTA4, and I was a huge CJ fan from GTA SA

In Saint's Row 2 I gave my avatar the female Hard Ass voice choice.  I find it amusing

[In Exile]

MerinTB wrote...

Straw-man or non-sequitor.
You are going off on stuff I'm not addressing nor do I care about.
While it is your right to do that, and it fits more or less in this thread, why quote me when writing this?
It comes across to the casual reader as if I were blaiming EA or not understanding what BioWare's design decisions are...
which are not only inaccurate (I've not blamed EA once for anything short of killing Origin, but that was YEARS ago) but irrelevant to what your quoted from me.

That was not the point in the least. My point was that you misunderstood the post.

Your argument is that the changes are not in an objective sense improvements - they are neccesarily subjective, so to say that they are improvements at all is misleading.

My argument is that the original post was never about objective improvements. It was entirely designed to show that any change is subjective, and whether or not it is an improvement is entirely up to the taste of the person.

All of which is to say that making an argument about the specific intention of anything is pointless by nature. Your argument that all of these things are subjective, is well, missing the point.

I reacted to the person I was quoting listing off a bunch of changes and then setting up a false dichotomy of "blaming EA and the unwashed masses" OR "the changes being improvements" - by arguing that changes aren't always improvements, especially since whether they are improvements or not are subjective.

But the person was not doing this. I mean, literally, they were, but I believe in context the intention was simply to illustrate subjectivity. Which is to say once again that you are misunderstanding the post, and in fact the person agrees with you far more than you're giving credit.

You are responding to my attempt at saying there is not clear cut "this or that" by going back and attacking the "this" argument that I never postulated nor supported.

With you quoting me and responding to only PART of my post in an excessively out of context way, you have effectively set up a straw-man to argue against.  Whether you intended to or not.

An item by item address is pointless if I am addressing you and not the items. I don't quote entire posts when addressing the poster as a matter of style because I happen to think it takes up too much space.

At best, you did a non-sequitor.

In any case, your whole quoting of me and your response is one large logical fallacy.

Using latin terms does not add weight to an argument.

[In Exile]

Haexpane wrote...

darth_lopez wrote...

   now it's more like lower shields 1 cryo shot from predator 2 at most + Melee attack and insta kill. it's cool but sorta lame >.<

Yeah, combat is a 1 trick pony now.  You can either shield/cryo/kill or pretend you are not overpowered and just try and shoot.  Either way, ME2 has been dumbed down enough that even the primary focus, combat has been ruined by stripping out the RPG elements

That's absurd, though. Making something skill based (covered+aiming) does not make it less intelligent that something that is rote memorization (find weakness + spam exploit). Not to mention that short of insanity (which is just rigged with HP and resistances) ME1 had absolutely no tactical combat at all. It was stand, spam barrier/immunity and shoot.

[Haexpane]

In Exile wrote...

Haexpane wrote...

darth_lopez wrote...

   now it's more like lower shields 1 cryo shot from predator 2 at most + Melee attack and insta kill. it's cool but sorta lame >.<

Yeah, combat is a 1 trick pony now.  You can either shield/cryo/kill or pretend you are not overpowered and just try and shoot.  Either way, ME2 has been dumbed down enough that even the primary focus, combat has been ruined by stripping out the RPG elements

That's absurd, though.

Making something skill based (covered+aiming) does not make it less intelligent that something that is rote memorization (find weakness + spam exploit).

Not to mention that short of insanity (which is just rigged with HP and resistances) ME1 had absolutely no tactical combat at all. It was stand, spam barrier/immunity and shoot.

Wait, did you just suggest that the shooting in ME2 is skill based ???? ROFL  Peek and pop against CPU?

I'm not going to say that ME1 had some deep tactical combat, what I'm saying is ME1 combat was MORE RPG-ish

They removed RPG elements from ME2 combat, and what you are left with is
""lower shields 1 cryo shot from predator 2 at most + Melee attack and insta kill""
From start to finish.  Zero diversity.

although I use AI hacking just to try and mix it up for fun, but the battles end quicker if I DONT use that ability.

[In Exile]

Haexpane wrote...
Wait, did you just suggest that the shooting in ME2 is skill based ???? ROFL  Peek and pop against CPU?

Apparently the annoying cover mechanic is evil twitch gameplay and evil because it uses player skill instead of automatic number crunching and mouse-clicking.

I was speaking more about a design implementation.

I'm not going to say that ME1 had some deep tactical combat, what I'm saying is ME1 combat was MORE RPG-ish

Sure, but that doesn't make RPG intelligent.

They removed RPG elements from ME2 combat, and what you are left with is
""lower shields 1 cryo shot from predator 2 at most + Melee attack and insta kill""
From start to finish.  Zero diversity.

although I use AI hacking just to try and mix it up for fun, but the battles end quicker if I DONT use that ability.

But ME wasn't any different in terms of what skills were crap and what weren't.

Modifié par In Exile, 03 août 2010 - 08:11 .

[Onyx Jaguar]

How the hell does full VA = pandering to Twitch Gamers?



I suppose ****ing graphical interfaces also pander to twitch gamers

[Sylvius the Mad]

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

How the hell does full VA = pandering to Twitch Gamers?

I don't see that connection at all.

Full voice-over does, I think, intentionally antagonise role-players, which is why I don't like it.

[Onyx Jaguar]

Haexpane wrote...

HTTP 404 wrote...

what does voice acting have to do with player options and game content?

The more VO scenes you have = less time spent on gameplay.

Mass Effect 2 is a great example.  Half of the game is standing around listening to someone complain.

You have to be kidding me, there are far more gameplay areas in ME 2 than 1.  

Of course I am coming from a forum that complains that ME 2 has LESS dialogue and is all focused on the gameplay

Modifié par Onyx Jaguar, 03 août 2010 - 08:18 .

[Onyx Jaguar]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

How the hell does full VA = pandering to Twitch Gamers?

I don't see that connection at all.

Full voice-over does, I think, intentionally antagonise role-players, which is why I don't like it.

I can see that.  Playing through BG 1 and 2 you see more options becuase the setup is more flexible

[Addai]

Haexpane wrote...

darth_lopez wrote...

  games and films are now the primary method of story telling 

Absolutely not true.  Storytelling in games is in the infancy stage.  Some 14 year old bragging about COD rank is not a story.

The best stories in films are usually converted from a book.   Or loosely stolen from books.   There are "original screenplays" out there, but by and large, film is a book driven medium.

Sadly many stories get ruined in the film conversion, but some do ok.  Either way, without the books, stuff like LOTR, Harry Potter, Generation Kill etc.. would not exist.

This idea that fiction in book form is gone is not based on reality, only fear and major publisher sales reports.

Absolutely, and the idea that it is otherwise is being sold by people trying to market movies and the more mindless type of games, trying to get more money out of people for putting out crap.

[Addai]

simfamSP wrote...

Don't these guys get it? THEY CAN DO EVERY ONE OF THESE! Just because they are doing a Voiced acted Main Char, doesn't mean they can't make a unique story line. They are BIOWARE for christs sakes not some bloody group of university students.

When I see what sort of content modders can put compared to some of the DLCs, not to mention the simple QA , your statement becomes rather funny.

[TheMadCat]

simfamSP wrote...

Don't these guys get it? THEY CAN DO EVERY ONE OF THESE! Just because they are doing a Voiced acted Main Char, doesn't mean they can't make a unique story line. They are BIOWARE for christs sakes not some bloody group of university students.

It's got absolutely nothing to do with them making a unique storyline, having voices in in no direct way effects the uniqueness of the story. We're talking about the realistic tradeoffs having a full cast of voice actors bring; less choices with a much more hollow impact, shorter game length, lower quality in dialogue, and so on.

[Haexpane]

In Exile wrote...

Haexpane wrote...
Wait, did you just suggest that the shooting in ME2 is skill based ???? ROFL  Peek and pop against CPU?

Apparently the annoying cover mechanic is evil twitch gameplay and evil because it uses player skill instead of automatic number crunching and mouse-clicking.

That's not what I said at all.  I said ME2 combat is EASY.  Twitch based IMO is usually easier to exploit against CPU because of AI.   If ME2 was multiplayer, I wouldn't be able to say "easy or hard" because it depends on the oponent.

What was nice about the direction ME1 was going was it used the Deus Ex system.  Twitch, heavily modified by stats. IMO best system for a shooter/RPG hybrid.  Deus Ex proved it

But ME2 is easy, and I don't consider it very "skill based" since pressing A and then following exactly what the tutorial says "Wait for reload, then peek and pop" isn't very diverse, challenging or interesting.

I also agreed w/ the other guy's statement that once you 'shield/freeze/shatter" it's game over

[Haexpane]

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

How the hell does full VA = pandering to Twitch Gamers?
 

I think it is more of an association and not =.  Because Mass Effect became more twich, more VA, and less RPG it's hard to ignore what is really just a coincidence.

The problem is EA games sees the coincidence and counts dollars.

[Haexpane]

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

Haexpane wrote...

HTTP 404 wrote...

what does voice acting have to do with player options and game content?

The more VO scenes you have = less time spent on gameplay.

Mass Effect 2 is a great example.  Half of the game is standing around listening to someone complain.

You have to be kidding me, there are far more gameplay areas in ME 2 than 1.  

Of course I am coming from a forum that complains that ME 2 has LESS dialogue and is all focused on the gameplay

Well I've been playing lots of ME2 the past few days.  The "gameplay areas" IMO seem a lot smaller than ME1, the argument is they are "better looking" which I guess is true?  IDK I'm not particularly blown away by metal stairs and empty pick up trucks and chest high boxes.

My point about "standing around listening to someone complain"  is about the dialog.  The dialog scenes are mostly One guy standing talking, or then folding his arms, while another person stares at them waiting for their turn to talk.

Compare that dialog to something like Band of Brothers, where people talk during battle (not always, but the best scenes are usually in battle)

Point being, lots and lots of VA has historically become lots of characters standing giving monologues at each other.  The more VA you add, the more standing around watching Jack complain about her life or something.

I guess it's the same as CAMP in DAO, but at least in CAMP I could put the Cone on Barkspawn or give STEN the rainbow sword?

[LdyShayna]

Vicious wrote...
 Bioware will do the games they want to do and you will buy them regardless.

Not true, at least not for me.  I passed on ME2.  I should have passed on ME1, but lept in with the blind faith and benefit of the doubt thing.  Not in a hurry to repeat that.  I would like to see some information that will make me not pass on DA2, hence the reason I'm here to read your interesting little assertion.  I'm still scanning the boards and interviews, hoping, but I currently think that's unlikely.  That likely means that Dragon Age: Origins is the last game of theirs I will buy.  More's the pity.

[Haexpane]

Mass Effect "skill" combat just got even easier!

-----------------

The Firepower Pack adds three new weapons to Shepard's armor locker: When a “heavy” pistol won’t do the job, the Phalanx brings the bang! It hits like a hand cannon and features an integral laser sight for a whole new aiming experience! Ever wanted a sniper rifle without the scope or an assault rifle without the recoil? The Mattock heavy rifle is a hybrid of the two, a semi-auto beast usable by any class with an assault rifle skill! The Geth Plasma Shotgun is a three-barreled monster that creates plasma the right way -- on impact! Charge it up for even greater damage, or blast away rapid-fire at longer ranges than normal shotgu

--------------------------------------------

[Vicious]

That likely means that Dragon Age: Origins is the last game of theirs I will

Depressing. I remember you posting back when Bioware had to piggyback on the Black Isle message boards, I had the same name but doubtless you don't remember. A long strange trip, to be sure.


That said, I've been gaming since Zork, and so far Bioware hasn't let me down... but that may be because I am interested in games of all shapes and sizes - And I have learned that Bioware can be trusted to spin a good yarn, if nothing else.

Modifié par Vicious, 03 août 2010 - 11:24 .

[LdyShayna]

Vicious wrote...
That said, I've been gaming since Zork, and so far Bioware hasn't let me down... but that may be because I am interested in games of all shapes and sizes - And I have learned that Bioware can be trusted to spin a good yarn, if nothing else.

Yeah.  Many JRPGs also spin good yarns, but I generally don't play those either.  About 95% of the games out there aren't my taste.   BioWare was a rarity, and had been hitting a sweet spot for me, allowing me to maintain an illusion of interactivity and capturing my imagination in a way that their current direction does not allow.  It cannot, from the way I play.  Based on the attitudes I've seen in interviews, they don't really take this too seriously, and are steadfast in their surety that theirs int he ONLY way to approach games.  Much like those who were fans of PWs and such, I guess it's time to admit that they aren't interested in making games for me any longer.  I'm part of too small an audience for them to even direct a small portion of their stable to.

Been a long time coming, I suppose.  I should learn to read the writing on the wall when it's neon pink and twenty feet tall, eh?

[tbsking]

LdyShayna wrote...

Vicious wrote...
 Bioware will do the games they want to do and you will buy them regardless.

Not true, at least not for me.  I passed on ME2.  I should have passed on ME1, but lept in with the blind faith and benefit of the doubt thing.  Not in a hurry to repeat that.  I would like to see some information that will make me not pass on DA2, hence the reason I'm here to read your interesting little assertion.  I'm still scanning the boards and interviews, hoping, but I currently think that's unlikely.  That likely means that Dragon Age: Origins is the last game of theirs I will buy.  More's the pity.

I think this is a very good example of the rift between fans of no VA and fans of VA.

Allow me to pose you this question: would you buy DA2 if it didn't have VA? I would.

As it stands, nothing about DA2 is all the exciting to me, and actually makes it sound like a game that I don't want to play. I won't be getting it, at least right now. Maybe it'll come out and there will be something about it that I can say "alright, I like that" and I will get it. Right now, that's not likely.

I don't care for VA in an RPG where I'm supposed to be the lead character. Giving Hawke, or Shepard, dialogue choices is just a fancy way to make me think I'm the main character, when in fact it's Hawke. Hawke has a handful of ways he can respond to a situation. Hawke will deliver the line with the same intonation every time. I didn't have that problem with the Warden.

For that matter, what about all the times I skip dialogue in DAO? Every time Bhelen speaks I skip it, because he's sort of boring and doesn't have anything I want to hear. I don't recall being able to do that in ME. I was never a fan of ME because you had voiced protagonist. I don't like that.

As far as that goes, Alpha Protocol is probably the best example of the worst way to do VA. Every line out of the main character's mouth is some varying level of douchebaggery. You get to choose between suave, aggressive, and professional, but that just gives your doucheness a different tone. Maybe that was the point of the game, I don't really know. I do know that I just could not get into the game so long as there was speaking. Worse yet, I couldn't skip the talking parts on repeat plays (of which I only did two) and if I spaced out during an important conversation, I had guess how to respond in the time alotted to me.

In DAO, I could skip the parts I ddin't like, and still knew what to say, or what my character would say. Furthermore, my character, in my mind, didn't sound like varying levels of douche. Instead, he (or the occasional she) sounded just like I wanted them to sound. Whether they were sincere, airheaded, firm, aloof, or a total ponce, they were not anything that I didn't imagine them to be. And that's roleplaying, or at least it is for me.

A voiced protagonist will inherently have a personality, simply because BioWare can't have Hawke deliver a single line in every permutation I can imagine. Shepard, as an example, sounded like a soldier everytime, regardless of how I would like them to have responded. Mike Thorton sounded like a insufferable dolt that actually served as the anti-roleplay. At least with a silent Hawke, however not cinematic it might be, I don't have to sit through repeated scenes that I don't want to watch.

So, after all that, I ask again: If DA2 had no VA, would you still buy it?

[LdyShayna]

tbsking wrote...
So, after all that, I ask again: If DA2 had no VA, would you still buy it?

No protagonist VA?  Probably would, yes.  That is the proverbial straw for me.   It fundamentally changes the way I view the game and my character.   

And before anyone replies, yes, I'm well aware others feel differently.  Also no, it doesn't matter how it's implemented, so I'm not jumping the gun. There is NO way that this can be implemented that would not have this effect for me, because of my play style and approach.  Giving full text is highly unlikely, and wouldn't adress all of my problems with the whole approach.  Turning it down doesn't help, because my character is still (presumably) doing something during these dialogs.  They are just filling in the blanks too much for my enjoyment. 

I don't feel strongly about the voicing of minor NPCs.  I rather enjoy the voicing of major NPCs, but am ambivalent about every line being voiced.

*sigh*  I would explain WHY more, but not only has this been hashed out endlessly already, in the past they have explained the benefits of no player voice over.  they, the designers, already know what it offers to players like me.  They have actively decided to move their entire stable in a different direction despite that, so I find it unlikely that any argument about the differign approaches will make any difference whasoever.  I'm not happy, but them's the breaks.

[Brockololly]

LdyShayna wrote...
They have actively decided to move their entire stable in a different direction despite that, so I find it unlikely that any argument about the differign approaches will make any difference whasoever.  I'm not happy, but them's the breaks.

Thats the thing that bugs me about the voiced PC- in Origins they ardently defended that choice against a more Shep like voiced PC. Now they're basically saying that "Oh, well Hawke needs a voice now for his story." Yeah it allows for a more "cinematic" game and all that, ok.

My issue is- what if I want to play an RPG and not watch some cinematic movie-game? It just disheartens me to see DA go this direction as it basically homogenizes all BioWare games in to full VO affairs, which like it or not cuts into content and choice, big time. I know the devs have said its not set in stone that all future games will be with a voiced PC, but come on- its clear thats the direction BioWare is going and given the tradeoffs that need to be made to afford a voiced PC, I think it just hurts the role playing ability too much and you end up with an interactive movie...meh.

[Haexpane]

One of the deepest, most fun, most challenging, most replayable RPGs of all time IMO is



Vagrant Story



Zero VA. Instead it has comic book chat bubbles. It works wonderfully for that game. Very cool backstory too

[Riona45]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Full voice-over does, I think, intentionally antagonise role-players, which is why I don't like it.

Even if you feel antagonized by it, how do you figure that is intentional?  Are you saying you feel like the game developers are sincerely trying to annoy you?