291 réponses à ce sujet

[Riona45]

Brockololly wrote...

Thats the thing that bugs me about the voiced PC- in Origins they ardently defended that choice against a more Shep like voiced PC.

No doubt, but I'm sure that also had to do with the impracticality of voicing six different origins, and not using the same voices regardless of background.

[Ariella]

I'm just going to shake my head at this one. It seems to me that the DA teams has decided they have a certain story they want to tell and the system they're using for DA2 is what they think will get the job done. Focusing on a single character with less variables (race for example) allows the team to develop more detailed backstory. Is it a tradeoff: yes, but consider for a second that we have yet to be told that the DA 2 model is going to be THE model for DA products period.



Honestly, Dragon Age seems to be a test bed for various types of storytelling in gaming media, and I wouldn't be surprised to find that DA3 ends up being a different storytelling style from 1 or 2 if the story merits it.

[TheMadCat]

Ariella wrote...

I'm just going to shake my head at this one. It seems to me that the DA teams has decided they have a certain story they want to tell and the system they're using for DA2 is what they think will get the job done. Focusing on a single character with less variables (race for example) allows the team to develop more detailed backstory. Is it a tradeoff: yes, but consider for a second that we have yet to be told that the DA 2 model is going to be THE model for DA products period.

Not necessairly true, take a look at Shepard he had no real detailed backstory. You selected a couple of crucial events and that was that. You don't want a detailed backstory for the players character in an RPG because ultimately it's going to be meaningless as the player will go about developing their character their own way, possibly completely contradicing their given backstory. You want a characters past to be vague and generalized save for a few unclear moments that landed the character where they are in game.

[Arijharn]

Haexpane wrote...

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

I just want to touch upon this statement and other statements like this. Let me first point out the obvious;
1) EA (and even BioWare when it was still independent) are companies, they tend to like money and want more of it. Contrary to popular belief, a capitalistic bent is not a crime (or more accurately; a miss-judgement), and it shouldn't be used against it in the context of 'those dratted sell-outs!'
2) BioWare is still (from what I can see) largely independent. Why?
- Because it would make no sense for EA to buy (at premium) one of the worlds most respected RPG developers and gut the living crap out of it, potentially loosing all the stellar staff that made the company successful in the first place (EA's learnt that lesson long ago; specifically Westwood Studios).
- It's patently obvious that BioWare is staffed by gamers. True, EA holds the purse strings, but as long as BioWare meets it's milestone targets (date to Alpha build, date to beta build etc) EA corporate isn't going to jump in unless EA corporate suffers a catastrophe (in which case, BioWare would be affected anyway since it's owned)
3) All BioWare games wish to evolve on the one beforehand. Perhaps BioWare recognizes the weaknesses of voiced characters as well as recognized the weakness of static characters as well, and wish to try again. Why shouldn't they? Because vocal people disagree (or agree)?
4) This process will very likely never be reversed due to public opinion. Or at most, be very unlikely to.
5) DAO wasn't voiced, but you hardly had a versatile main character either.
6) Why wouldn't BioWare want to expand their audiences? This is not corporate sell-outs because you know -- the gamer market evolves/changes, why not BioWare? Did people really forsee the point and click adventure market die out so suddenly or did it just sort of spring up.

[Biotic Budah]

I apreciate good voice acting. Mass Effect and Dragon Age have had some of the best voice acting. It's RPG, we're escaping into another world, and to a point it's almost like watching an interactive movie. There should be an award for voice acting on a video game.

[TheMadCat]

Hmm, I'll tackle a few of those that I disagree with.

Arijharn wrote...


2) BioWare is still (from what I can see) largely independent. Why?
- Because it would make no sense for EA to buy (at premium) one of the worlds most respected RPG developers and gut the living crap out of it, potentially loosing all the stellar staff that made the company successful in the first place (EA's learnt that lesson long ago; specifically Westwood Studios).

If EA learned their lesson they wouldn't have brought Ricitiello back, majority of those "lessons" that should have been learned came when he was COO several years ago. Anyways no, BioWare would not be "largely independent." They are a studio of EA, they have to work around EA fiscal needs and strategies; they will set the budgets, they will approve all long term roadmaps, they will steer the major design choices to suit their budget and target numbers that will satisfy their shareholders. BioWare is a big part of EA, they have to control in order to take full advantage of it and ptop up their numerous weak spots.

Now I'm sure BioWare has a lot of creative control at the lower levels, but overall they wouldn't be "largely independent." What would be the point of buying them in the first place?

- It's patently obvious that BioWare is staffed by gamers. True, EA holds the purse strings, but as long as BioWare meets it's milestone targets (date to Alpha build, date to beta build etc) EA corporate isn't going to jump in unless EA corporate suffers a catastrophe (in which case, BioWare would be affected anyway since it's owned)

Every development studio is staffed by gamers, it's not a profession you really get into if you're not a fan of the market so not sure what you mean there.

4) This process will very likely never be reversed due to public opinion. Or at most, be very unlikely to.

I don't think realistic people ever expect BioWare to change. It's just we occasionly dive down into the "what if" scenarios, not because we want it changed but because we want to see how other alternative styles stack up and judge BioWares decision based on that.

5) DAO wasn't voiced, but you hardly had a versatile main character either.

To an extent I agree, then again Shepard had even less versatility so if that's the standard they're shooting for it's a definte step back.

6) Why wouldn't BioWare want to expand their audiences? This is not corporate sell-outs because you know -- the gamer market evolves/changes, why not BioWare? Did people really forsee the point and click adventure market die out so suddenly or did it just sort of spring up.

P&C Adventures didn't really die out suddenly, they spent an entire decade and a half slowly decaying away and even now hasn't fully died, unlike space sims and tycoon games.

But no, nothing wrong with BioWare adapting with the market, really it's the only choice if they have if they wanted to maintain their AAA status as a developer. As for why they wouldn't want to expand, well for the same reason dozens of other small and indy development studios don't expand, they're content designing and styling games exactly how they want and share it with their niche. Ultimately I think BioWare was more interested in the dollar signs then anything else, and there isn't anything wrong with that at all. But it's not like every developer out there is targeting the big bucks, some chose themselves and their small groups over the masses and their "dumbed down" styles, making enough to get buy rather then looking to buy themselves a Porsche, summer home in Aruba and a couple of yachts.  

[Massadonious1]

I'm pretty sure the guys animating the darkspawn or designing the weapons aren't going to be buying yachts anytime soon.



And "getting by" sounds like they should be living with their parents and working out of their garages. Everyone is entitled to a better life. I don't see why it's a bad thing that someone would strive to get to the point where they can drive a Porsche instead of a '89 Civic.

[valleyman88]

Biotic Budah wrote...

I apreciate good voice acting. Mass Effect and Dragon Age have had some of the best voice acting. It's RPG, we're escaping into another world, and to a point it's almost like watching an interactive movie. There should be an award for voice acting on a video game.

I do too, but if the Hawke voice actor sounds nothing like me or whoever I'm pretending to be, it's a big immersion killer.

Manshep in Mass Effect did exactly that for me.

[TheMadCat]

Massadonious1 wrote...

I'm pretty sure the guys animating the darkspawn or designing the weapons aren't going to be buying yachts anytime soon.

And "getting by" sounds like they should be living with their parents and working out of their garages. Everyone is entitled to a better life. I don't see why it's a bad thing that someone would strive to get to the point where they can drive a Porsche instead of a '89 Civic.

Obviously the use of extremes to prove a point isn't something you're quite familiar with, and why are you bringing up animators? We're not talking about the grunts here we're talking about the big guys who actually make decisions.

But to clarify for you my point was this, not all developers/publishers are strictly looking at the big bucks. There is a sizable chunk of developers/publishers who prefer to develop games for themselves and their niche fan base, and they are able to succeed just fine, Paradox and Stardock are a couple of examples you may be aware of. There is nothing wrong with either of those philosophies, and I never implied there was anything wrong with them. I just made note that not all companies are looking to adapt and expand.

[Massadonious1]

You may not have a problem with it, but it sure as heck sounds like you wish BioWare was the opposite of that.

Modifié par Massadonious1, 04 août 2010 - 08:32 .

[AlanC9]

It's also possible that Bio wants to be an AAA developer because they like making big games, rather than for the money itself. Some film students want to be Jim Jarmusch, but others want to be Steven Spielberg.Or even Michael Bay...

[TheMadCat]

Massadonious1 wrote...

You may not have a problem with it, but it sure as heck sounds like you wish BioWare was the opposite of that.

Not at all and there's two reasons for that. First is that what BioWare does from a gamer stand point is of no real concern to me. If they produce a game I like I'll buy it, if not I'll buy another game. BioWare isn't the only decent RPG developer on the block. I'm simple like that.

Second is the fact my EA stock has been screaming in agony for God knows how long and a BioWare title that caters entirely to the larger markets could go quite a long way in soothing that pain, so long as they keep putting DLC out at a decent pace.

It's also possible that Bio wants to be an AAA developer because they
like making big games, rather than for the money itself. Some film
students want to be Jim Jarmusch, but others want to be Steven
Spielberg.Or even Michael Bay...

It's a possibility, but you can't make big games without looking to make the big money (Same with movies), it's just not financially possible and you'd be bankrupt before you knew what happened. So at the very least it's an indirect consquence of whatever they've been aiming to do, which means I'm not entierly wrong either way.

Modifié par TheMadCat, 04 août 2010 - 08:48 .

[HolyMoogle]

I have this dark feeling that all the human accents are going to become American in DA2. Perhaps because they're going the Mass Effect route on it...

[TheMadCat]

HolyMoogle wrote...

I have this dark feeling that all the human accents are going to become American in DA2. Perhaps because they're going the Mass Effect route on it...

I don't see any real reason to assume that, one thing BioWare constantly does great is casting.

Modifié par TheMadCat, 04 août 2010 - 08:49 .

[Wyndham711]

I hope if/when TOR is a success it gives BioWare enough financial freedom to start a sideproject with a small but passionate team, whose goal is to make a truly traditional classic CRPG without full VO or any need to be overly cinematic. Something isometric with mostly 2D graphics perhaps, with endless replay value, varied options, deep roleplaying and 200+ hour length.

[AllThatJazz]

Ariella wrote...

I'm just going to shake my head at this one. It seems to me that the DA teams has decided they have a certain story they want to tell and the system they're using for DA2 is what they think will get the job done. Focusing on a single character with less variables (race for example) allows the team to develop more detailed backstory. Is it a tradeoff: yes, but consider for a second that we have yet to be told that the DA 2 model is going to be THE model for DA products period.

Honestly, Dragon Age seems to be a test bed for various types of storytelling in gaming media, and I wouldn't be surprised to find that DA3 ends up being a different storytelling style from 1 or 2 if the story merits it.

I agree with this.

[DPB]

HolyMoogle wrote...

I have this dark feeling that all the human accents are going to become American in DA2. Perhaps because they're going the Mass Effect route on it...

No. We already know that Hawke has an English accent.

[AllThatJazz]

The choices that have been made for us in terms of background (race, name, having escaped Lothering during the Blight, sister called Bethany etc) do allow for greater narrative focus than a completely blank slate. I tend to find that the more generic a character is from the beginning, the more generic the story ends up being.

The origins from the first game, while not having much of an impact on the story, were a good way of making players feel that the story was more specific to them. But it was when the Origins converged, in the joining of the Grey Wardens, that Bio was able to start really telling the story.  In the absence of a mechanic such as a great big world-saving organisation to join, if Bioware still wants to tell a strong story, limiting player customisation and providing some preset detail seems the way to go. It seems probable to me that certain 'facts' about Hawke (race, Bethany) will play an important enough part in DA2 for Bio to want to set these things in stone.

In ME, Shepard's history had a decent amount of detail. A childhood either on Earth, on a starship, or on a colony, followed by enlistment in the military where Shep distinguished herself enough to begin the ME events. Sure, it's vague enough to create bits of your own story in the 'gaps', but then I bet Hawke will be the same. He/she isn't going to have every chapter of childhood written down, but there is enough there to give Bio some 'hooks'. 

I'm pretty happy with Hawke being voiced, and I'm okay with making the trade off with 'player options', and I've yet to hear anything that worries me with regards to game content. Also, as Ariella said, I wouldn't assume that this is the direction Bio is going in for all future games in the DA universe. Different styles for different stories works well for me. :happy:

Modifié par AllThatJazz, 04 août 2010 - 10:47 .

[LdyShayna]

Hmmm...where to start? OK, on the idea that this is just the style they're using for this game and they'll go back to a non-voiced character soemtime later. I don't find this a very compelling argument, I'm afraid. However, I suspect most will assume that I'm just being all doom-and-gloomy, so I'll give my reasons agaisnt that assertion.

(1)They're fully voicing their MMO and using the dialog wheel there too. I find it difficult to believe that their RPG-Shooter hybrid, their MMO, and their party based RPG all suddenly had stories that could only realy be told by fully voiced.
(2) In the past, they've been pretty good about saying how they're 'branching out' and 'trying different things', but also pretty quick to re-assure logn term fans that this doesn't mean their preferred play style is being eliminated. That is most definitely NOT the tact their taking this time. Indeed, they've spoken often of the 'evolution' into full voice over PCs, which in common parliance is definitely not used about something you're just trying out for certain types of stories.
(3) I believe I've seen a level of frustrated mockery towards people who object, which suggests impatience with those particular fans who don't 'get it'. Some of it is here, sure, but mostly I'm talking about the various interviews and such.

So, I've hung my hope so n some pretty thin threads before, but this one is too perilous a perch even for me. Heh.

As to the idea that it ALWAYS makes sense to go for the broadest market possible - I would disagree. While on the surface this makes sense, I've seen more than a few indie or small developers destroy themselves by following this spurious logic. These small companies appealed to niche markets so well that they WERE very successful - as in the owner of at least one company got a Porche successful, not "I paid most of my bills this month!' successful. Being so successful, they decided that of course they should move on to the even bigger money. At least one of them did so while roundly insulting their core base, assuming that soon they would be in the big time, and those that didn't hop on the gravy train deserved to be run over. What happened? They found out very quickly that the broad market had A LOT of games to choose from, and you have to spend a lot in marketing to even briefly get their attention. Also, the broad market has unbelievably high demands as far as production values go, such that even games that sell very well cannot possibly make back the money the company had to spend to make it. Many are the games that fans assume were successful because of sales numbers, but ended up losing the company lots of money and causing them to shut down or be bought out.

So in short, many companies that attempt to move from niche markets where they were successful to broad market appeal end up failing to make even the money they made while in their niche. They lose their loyal base in an attempt to appeal to the broader market, the broader market is fickle and hard to get brand loyalty with because they have dozens and dozens of games to choose from, and making AAA games is so expensive that most AAA games don't make money. So no, it does not always make sense. Does any of this apply to BioWare? Hah! I'm hardly in a position to be objective enough to say either way.

So, why am I still here? Well, habit, for one thing. I have been hanging around the various incarnations of their forums for about a decade now. I also haven't definitively made up my mind. I guess there's still a part of this loyal niche fan that hopes to find something that will really spark my interest again, since there is, literally, no other game maker in the market that is making RPGs I want to play (Correct - I have no interest in Alpha Protocol, or the Witcher, or Fallout, etc). It's just that over the last several years, my confidence that BioWare will make games that I'll enjoy playing has been eroded. There's no real smoking gun (even the full PC VO, though a biggie, wouldn't do it alone). It's just that drip by drip and chip by chip my enthusiasm has been worn down.

And this is mighty frustrating to me, for several reasons - not least of which is because I have such respect and liking for the people of BioWare I've talked to over the last many years.

Modifié par LdyShayna, 04 août 2010 - 02:38 .

[Addai]

AllThatJazz wrote...
I'm pretty happy with Hawke being voiced, and I'm okay with making the trade off with 'player options', and I've yet to hear anything that worries me with regards to game content. Also, as Ariella said, I wouldn't assume that this is the direction Bio is going in for all future games in the DA universe. Different styles for different stories works well for me. :happy:

The dev interviews indicate that they see this as where games are headed, hence not just a temporary choice but a trend they are moving all their games into.

Why do I always get these flashes of the Borg...

Anyway, it appears that diversity of storytelling mechanic is not the priority, despite what the writers have said about needing this or that mechanic to tell Hawke's story.  They are trying to play up the positive aspects rather than the limitations, which is understandable from a PR perspective.

Edit P.S.: Consider the changes to the dialogue system in Awakening.  What about Awakening made it necessary to eliminate the camp dialogue system?  Nothing that I can see.  It was considered a broken and boring system, however... by "someone," I have no idea who... so a rather arbitrary change was made which in my view really limited the storytelling capacity of the expansion rather than enhancing it.  This was a marketing driven change, not a story driven.  I see no reason to view DA2's changes in any different light.

Modifié par Addai67, 04 août 2010 - 03:49 .

[Azdeus]

LdyShayna wrote...
 It's just that over the last several years, my confidence that BioWare will make games that I'll enjoy playing has been eroded. There's no real smoking gun (even the full PC VO, though a biggie, wouldn't do it alone). It's just that drip by drip and chip by chip my enthusiasm has been worn down.

And this is mighty frustrating to me, for several reasons - not least of which is because I have such respect and liking for the people of BioWare I've talked to over the last many years.

Well said!

[AllThatJazz]

To LdyShayna - I've been lurking on the Bio boards for many years now, and you are one of the people whose posts I have most enjoyed reading throughout that time. I really hope that you find something to like about DA2 :-)



I didn't know that TOR is going to be fully voiced - I have to wonder how they'll handle voicing so many different protagonists - that must be a real pain in the behind for them.



To be honest, I've sort of assumed that they are fully voicing the PC because they are making the story more personal - Hawke's story, like Shepard's story (only apparently to a lesser extent). Full voicing would be much more contentious for me if there were a choice of races - no one voice could possibly suit humans and elves and dwarves of a single gender. And since I still hope that they may return to this model some day, I was assuming that they would also return to a silent protagonist (either that, or so many different voices that it'll be a very short game ..). But in the light of what you've said about their MMO, I'm not sure where that leaves my assumptions. Hmmmm.

[TMZuk]

LdyShayna wrote...

So, why am I still here? Well, habit, for one thing. I have been hanging around the various incarnations of their forums for about a decade now. I also haven't definitively made up my mind. I guess there's still a part of this loyal niche fan that hopes to find something that will really spark my interest again, since there is, literally, no other game maker in the market that is making RPGs I want to play (Correct - I have no interest in Alpha Protocol, or the Witcher, or Fallout, etc). It's just that over the last several years, my confidence that BioWare will make games that I'll enjoy playing has been eroded. There's no real smoking gun (even the full PC VO, though a biggie, wouldn't do it alone). It's just that drip by drip and chip by chip my enthusiasm has been worn down.

And this is mighty frustrating to me, for several reasons - not least of which is because I have such respect and liking for the people of BioWare I've talked to over the last many years.

Aside the fact that I did like Fallout 3 and The Witcher, I have to agree with you. By and large, everything I hear about DA2 so far, is utterly dissapointing.

Modifié par TMZuk, 04 août 2010 - 04:04 .

[AllThatJazz]

Addai67 wrote...

AllThatJazz wrote...
I'm pretty happy with Hawke being voiced, and I'm okay with making the trade off with 'player options', and I've yet to hear anything that worries me with regards to game content. Also, as Ariella said, I wouldn't assume that this is the direction Bio is going in for all future games in the DA universe. Different styles for different stories works well for me. :happy:

The dev interviews indicate that they see this as where games are headed, hence not just a temporary choice but a trend they are moving all their games into.

Why do I always get these flashes of the Borg...

Anyway, it appears that diversity of storytelling mechanic is not the priority, despite what the writers have said about needing this or that mechanic to tell Hawke's story.  They are trying to play up the positive aspects rather than the limitations, which is understandable from a PR perspective.

Edit P.S.: Consider the changes to the dialogue system in Awakening.  What about Awakening made it necessary to eliminate the camp dialogue system?  Nothing that I can see.  It was considered a broken and boring system, however... by "someone," I have no idea who... so a rather arbitrary change was made which in my view really limited the storytelling capacity of the expansion rather than enhancing it.  This was a marketing driven change, not a story driven.  I see no reason to view DA2's changes in any different light.

I didn't hate the Awakenings dialogue system, to be honest. I thought it was okay in the context of an expansion pack. I'd want a LOT more interaction in a full game, and a sort of hybrid between what we had in Origins and Awakenings would be my preference. I liked objects prompting dialogue/reminiscences, I thought it was a nice touch.  I'm NOT a fan of the exclamation marks over character's heads, but then nor was I a fan of the repetitive dialogue trees that often went nowhere in Origins. 

PS. Borg? As in 'resistance is futile?' 

[Addai]

AllThatJazz wrote...
PS. Borg? As in 'resistance is futile?' 

Yep.  There are variations of the same mantra all over this board, regarding the "amped" nature of the voiced protagonist and dialogue wheel.