443 réponses à ce sujet

[Wulfram]

Selene Moonsong wrote...

Economically; if the developers had chosen to allow all races as protagonist (Human, Dwarf, Elf), they would have had to do voice overs for 6 possible protagonist characters and would also have to account for the races as well, meaning multiple dialogue scripts for the individual protagonist based not only on gender, but on race as well.

One of many reasons for not doing voice over for the protagonist.

[In Exile]

Wulfram wrote...

One of many reasons for not doing voice over for the protagonist.

Or rather, an argument for cutting multiple backgrounds. This is a flavour choice. I get that you think the superficial race choice is more important, but not everyone agrees.

[Ortaya Alevli]

To those who think additional races would require extra VA, what exactly makes you think that? Aside from a few extra lines, I don't see any reason for additional recording, never mind additional casting.

[Selene Moonsong]

Ortaya Alevli wrote...

To those who think additional races would require extra VA, what exactly makes you think that? Aside from a few extra lines, I don't see any reason for additional recording, never mind additional casting.

I suggest this thought is over-simplifying the issue.

And no, I did not even suggest using different actors for each voice set, but whether or not by the same voice actors, the cost would likely be just as expensive, likely equal to hiring different voice actors for each possible race.

If the same voice overs were to be used for multiple race protagonists, and not unique to the race being portrayed, it would sound like it was tacked on by amatures and destroy the effect of being about the character.

Modifié par Selene Moonsong, 14 novembre 2010 - 08:52 .

[Hukari]

Personally, I am extremely saddened by being unable to play a Dwarf. When I played DA;O and DA;A I always played a Dwarf Noble, since it was by far my favorite origin story and the response from other NPC's was fantastic.



Now, I'll get this out of the way first: Baldur's Gate 2, Arcanum, Planescape, these are perhaps in my top-5 list of favorite video games. Even today, they stand out as shining gems in a sea of blandness and repetition. I think the main problem is that they decided to make the main character voiced (and, to a lesser extent, the other NPC's).



Voicing in video games is inherently limiting, because it applies more expense to words written and story given. Where once you could have paragraph-length responses and conversations, now we're reduced to pithy one-liners. Where once we had a great deal of freedom in dialogue and origin, we're now rather restricted.



But I digress. I think that is my main problem with DA2: The fact that they decided to prioritize a superficial addition like voice acting over depth of story and choice in background is concerning to me, and I hope Bioware learns from this to return to a prior state.

[Housecarl]

Couldn't care less. I can't play as a Qunari, so I'll stick with the Human.

[In Exile]

Hukari wrote...
But I digress. I think that is my main problem with DA2: The fact that they decided to prioritize a superficial addition like voice acting over depth of story and choice in background is concerning to me, and I hope Bioware learns from this to return to a prior state.

This sort of opinion bugs the hell out of me. Why do you think one is depth and the other is superficial? I certainly think it's the opposite way. PC VO adds narrative depth because it makes the PC a living, interactive character in the world versus a blank puppet that occasionally emits noise. The background "choices" are typically even more irrelevant, and the origins were ironically knocked about very heavily when DA was announced becuase they would reduce RP by forcing you to have a specific background.

Personally, I think there is nothing more superficial that not having content in the game on the expectation the players will imagine their own content. Obviously, people will disagree with me. Dramatically so, in fact. I would just appreciate people recognize their idiosyncratic taste.

[kyles3]

sucks i won't be able to play as a dwarf again, but varric seems like he'll be a good hang. i'll deal.

Modifié par kyles3, 14 novembre 2010 - 09:30 .

[ladydesire]

----9----- wrote...


But I do have a question, if it can be answered. I've seen it said that the game collects some stats on how and what the player did/didn't play, for feedback on future game design. Was that a factor in the shift from 3 races to a single race? i.e. people are more likely to play humans than dwarves or elves?

Not likely. They wanted to tell a story about a specific character in the Dragon Age lore, and since that character would not work as other races, due to how they are perceived in Thedas, playing a Human is the only option. That it enabled them to voice the character is of secondary consideration, at least to me.

[Ghandorian]

I am coming to look at DA2 as an expansion of the franchise but NOT a continuation of the first game at all. We can hope they make a Continuation of DA0 that offers more than the awakening add on. But I am not really sure that will happen. I think the Awakening size expansions are fine to be sold as additional content as a replacement for DLC sized stuff. But the cost must be a problem for them. They were way overpriced with that.



I think they had issues with return on investment from what I read in some dev posts and the slimmer shorter games are a better bang for their buck.



Also what I see is a trend to online RP in persistent worlds making a comeback. BioWares swtor and Arenet GW2 are really taking a shot at giving us extended RP value in a persistent world like never before. Maybe that is where I should be looking for my continuing story gameplay needs?

[Gabey5]

im good

[Hukari]

In Exile wrote...

Hukari wrote...
But I digress. I think that is my main problem with DA2: The fact that they decided to prioritize a superficial addition like voice acting over depth of story and choice in background is concerning to me, and I hope Bioware learns from this to return to a prior state.

This sort of opinion bugs the hell out of me. Why do you think one is depth and the other is superficial? I certainly think it's the opposite way. PC VO adds narrative depth because it makes the PC a living, interactive character in the world versus a blank puppet that occasionally emits noise. The background "choices" are typically even more irrelevant, and the origins were ironically knocked about very heavily when DA was announced becuase they would reduce RP by forcing you to have a specific background.

Personally, I think there is nothing more superficial that not having content in the game on the expectation the players will imagine their own content. Obviously, people will disagree with me. Dramatically so, in fact. I would just appreciate people recognize their idiosyncratic taste.

I will admit, my using the word 'superficial' is entirely based upon my opinion. However, let me propose a hypothetical to you, or at least show you what I think this represents.

Let us take a sentence. Say... "There is a door here." Would that sentence be greatly improved by someone saying it? Or, would you rather have it be silent, and instead read "There is a large, elaborate stone door, covered in the ancient runes of some long-forgotten Dwarf clan in front of you. Behind it is the sound of many clawing and ravening beasts."

Now, one argues, "Well, why couldn't that be voice acted?". And, admittedly, it could. But, simply typing a line and putting it in game, and actually going out, hiring a voice actor, having him read those lines, puts the cost of that line several multiples more than what it would be. Thus, you have to make that voice actor you hire do more and more lines in a shorter amount of time, so you condense things; you remove choices and other options, you make sentences and dialogue shorter and more one-sentence banter.

That, to me, reduces depth. Rather than being part of a Tolkienesque epic, we're now Joe Adventurer having conversations with Farmer MacGuffin about how he needs us to get us ten garnets. That, at least, is where I'm coming from.

Now, how does this relate to character origins vs. voice acting? Well, mainly in that character origins actually impacted the story. As a Dwarf Noble (like I was), you could even go so far as to have a family; a son. You could be named Paragon, and redeem your name. Whereas voice acting... didn't. I won't deny, voice acting is -nice- to have, but if it ever comes between adding more stuff to the story and adding more voice acting, I'm going to go with the one that adds more stuff to the story.

[Nerevar-as]

ladydesire wrote...

----9----- wrote...


But I do have a question, if it can be answered. I've seen it said that the game collects some stats on how and what the player did/didn't play, for feedback on future game design. Was that a factor in the shift from 3 races to a single race? i.e. people are more likely to play humans than dwarves or elves?

Not likely. They wanted to tell a story about a specific character in the Dragon Age lore, and since that character would not work as other races, due to how they are perceived in Thedas, playing a Human is the only option. That it enabled them to voice the character is of secondary consideration, at least to me.

I don´t remember human speciesm (sp?) towards dwarfs, and I doubt elves are worst looked upon than apostates in a Chantry controlled state, so I hope for a better explanation than that in game.
About if it comes from gameplay data, I don´t know. Acording to th devs of The Witcher, some years ago the most popular was female elf, as one distributor had asked them to change Geralt to one in order to publish the game because of some research.
I also wonder if some players choose human or just the faster character to create. In ME Soldier is the most popular class, but is it because it´s default?

[Morroian]

Hukari wrote...

Voicing in video games is inherently limiting, because it applies more expense to words written and story given. Where once you could have paragraph-length responses and conversations, now we're reduced to pithy one-liners. Where once we had a great deal of freedom in dialogue and origin, we're now rather restricted.

From the sound of it there won't be a significant reduction in dialogue choice options  from DAO. The only restriction in terms of lack of choice is the race restriction however this will allow them greater focus on the story itself rather than having to write extra dialogue for each race, and its not like the racial choice made a difference after the origin anyway. Plus as has been pointed out time and time again there are a lot of old time rpgs without racial choice, there can be good reasons for restricting racial choice. 

[Bryy_Miller]

Ortaya Alevli wrote...

To those who think additional races would require extra VA, what exactly makes you think that? Aside from a few extra lines, I don't see any reason for additional recording, never mind additional casting.

A lot of the times, companies don't want a background actor doing a double-voice as a main. You run into situations where Nolan North ends up talking to himself. Also, take into mind that Origins had 144 voice actors (or something in that range). This all brings up the idea that BioWare is striving for a breathing, individual world. 

Those "few additional lines", if you think about it, wouldn't be "a few". If we're talking about a 20-hour game, do you realize how many racial references there would be? That's not even taking into account all the branches of dialogue regarding race.

David Gaider has already implied that there is already quite a bit more dialogue for Hawke than the Warden, considering things like the Personality System.

Then there comes into play the fact that, since different races have different anatomy, the voices will be different. Dwarves are so gruff because they are so compact, for instance. 

Including different races for Hawke doesn't just affect VA. It affects armor, facial customization, and animation as well. Then you'd need to modify Hawke's entire family. 

What you're basically asking them to do is to start over on the game, which is not very reasonable, you know?

[mousestalker]

Bryy_Miller wrote...
What you're basically asking them to do is to start over on the game, which is not very reasonable, you know?

Since when does being reasonable have anything to do with being a fan?

:innocent:

[Bryy_Miller]

Since never.

[Nerivant]

In DA2, people complain about their character's race being limited to human.



In DA1, I complained about my character's ability to speak being limited to mute.



In DA3, people will complain about their religion being limited to being Pastafarian.



People will always complain about limits.

[Sharn01]

Selene Moonsong wrote...

Okay...

As has been stated by the Devs, Origins was about recruiting an army to face the Darkspawn horde.Your character, from whatever Origins, becomes a Warden who is only one of two surviving Wardens after the fall of Ostagar who must build an army to face the horde and Archdemon, all of which occurs over about a 2-year span. This format did not use VO for the protagonist.

DA II is about a single individual refugee who becomes the hero of Kirkwall and is told over a 10-year period, from the time of the horde invasion, to 10 years after. The DA 2 format uses voice-over for the protagonist (Male or Female).

Economically; if the developers had chosen to allow all races as protagonist (Human, Dwarf, Elf), they would have had to do voice overs for 6 possible protagonist characters and would also have to account for the races as well, meaning multiple dialogue scripts for the individual protagonist based not only on gender, but on race as well.

As I see it, attempting to account for just the basic three race/gender options would be astronomically expensive all the way around, because it would not just be possible choices that would affect events, but racial perspectives as well, which could well complicate development not just for voice overs, but the additional possible effects and outcomes throughout the project.

While I much prefer the ability to play all of the three basic protagonist races, I am interested in seeing how DA II will play out, while hoping for a later follow-up of DAO (a DA: Origins 2 for example) to tie up all the loose ends for our Wardens as an expansion (although that can be complicated since on ending means the ultimate sacrifice).

The problem lies in the fact that if this is the route they plan to take with DA games from now on, we will never get to play any race but human ever again.  Unless they go with the high risk endeavor of making a game elf or dwarf only for the story, which I doubt because to many players are in love with the forever Mary Sue human race, its just not going to happen.

As the old saying goes, never give anything up without a fight, because once its gone, its a thousand times harder to get it back.

[Enshaid]

Nerivant wrote...

In DA2, people complain about their character's race being limited to human.

In DA1, I complained about my character's ability to speak being limited to mute.

In DA3, people will complain about their religion being limited to being Pastafarian.

People will always complain about limits.

Nerivant wrote...
Pastafarian.

teehee

Modifié par Freek on a Leesh, 14 novembre 2010 - 10:45 .

[Nerevar-as]

Sharn01 wrote...

The problem lies in the fact that if this is the route they plan to take with DA games from now on, we will never get to play any race but human ever again.  Unless they go with the high risk endeavor of making a game elf or dwarf only for the story, which I doubt because to many players are in love with the forever Mary Sue human race, its just not going to happen.

As the old saying goes, never give anything up without a fight, because once its gone, its a thousand times harder to get it back.

I expect to play something other than human in the future, maybe in DLCs. What I don´t expect to have race choice in any story of significant lenght anymore. I really don´t think any DA will have anything other than human as PC unless VO gets cheaper and/or sound files change to ocupy less memory.

[Dhraiauvessillus]

I refuse to play as a human. I refuse to play as one on Dragon Age Origins. I have elves or dwarves only.
The whole point of dungeons and dragons style games is diferent races. Diferent races, diferent resistances, diferent reactions, diferent story reactions etc.
Baldurs Gate series has diferent races. Champions Of Norrath and Champions Return To Arms has diferent races.
That is the main thing about dnd style games.
You make a character from race of your choice and play the game however you want
.
It is a cretinous thing to make a make your own character game of this type and have only one race.

I am not buying that sorry excuse for Mass Effect In A Fantasy Skin, Dragon Age 2.

The idiotic only one race thing is the main but not the only thing they butchered.
From the sound of it they destroyed the skills too.

Modifié par Dhraiauvessillus, 14 novembre 2010 - 10:52 .

[StingingVelvet]

It's of minor concern to me... I would rather get to choose, sure, but I imagine having a set origin to some extent will allow for a more focused and linear story, which is what Bioware want.

[Bryy_Miller]

Nerevar-as wrote...
 I really don´t think any DA will have anything other than human as PC unless VO gets cheaper and/or sound files change to ocupy less memory.

I don't see why this would be the case. If the sole race in DA3 is an Elf, that takes as much effort as DA2's sole main being a human.

Dhraiauvessillus wrote...

I refuse to play as a human. I refuse to play as one on Dragon Age Origins. I have elves or dwarves only.
The whole point of dungeons and dragons style games is diferent races. Diferent races, diferent resistances, diferent reactions, diferent story reactions etc. 
Baldurs Gate series has diferent races. Champions Of Norrath and Champions Return To Arms has diferent races.
That is the main thing about dnd style games.

You're going to need to explain how being able to pick your race is the most important aspect of a role playing game. Race is not a role. Race is race.

Modifié par Bryy_Miller, 14 novembre 2010 - 10:52 .