885 réponses à ce sujet

[Dave of Canada]

Brockololly wrote...

Right- its not just the voice that can potentially kill your RPing, but its the fact that BioWare went to the trouble of voicing the PC - and that costs a good amount of time and resources. Resources which had they not been wasted on player VO could have gone towards more choices/consequences and branching quests and more content in general.

That can be said about every feature.

"I don't like X, cut out X and make more Y."

[Ziggeh]

Dave of Canada wrote...
That can be said about every feature.

"I don't like X, cut out X and make more Y."

Get that sound guy doing level design.

[upsettingshorts]

"Wasted"

Scoff. For you maybe, from where I sit it's money well spent.

[Atakuma]

I'm going to miss all the fetch quests that they had to cut due to the PC VO.

[Jshay512]

simfamSP wrote...

Well, since in Dragon age II we are not playing OUR character, but a other one, a voice is extremely necessary. People are looking at this in a extremely negative way. Yes we are not playing OUR role but we are playing A role.

In Dragon age: Origins we were attached to our character, I am looking forward in how Bioware will make me attached to Hawke, like I attached to Sheperd in a way.

It is not really necessary but in this situation it surely is.

It is still our character maybe not our warden character but it is our Hawke character. It is still us playing OUR role as you said.

Modifié par Jshay512, 21 novembre 2010 - 08:56 .

[KJandrew]

if you don't like it you could just mute it whenever hawke speaks

[Herr Uhl]

Dave of Canada wrote...
That can be said about every feature.

"I don't like X, cut out X and make more Y."

What difference does that make to the validity of the statement?

[CerealWar]

It's nice having a voiced PC. What I really don't care for is the dialogue wheel. I didn't like being surprised by what Shepard had to say. If you have voice acting and a dialogue tree, everyone wins. Except for the people that are obsessed with their inner voices. Now if we can only get voiced PCs across multiple races...

[Dave of Canada]

Herr Uhl wrote...

Dave of Canada wrote...
That can be said about every feature.

"I don't like X, cut out X and make more Y."

What difference does that make to the validity of the statement?

"I don't like [combat], cut out [combat] and make more [dialogue]."
"I don't like [hitchcock zooms], cut out [hitchcock zooms] and make more [armor]."
"I don't like [sound effects], cut out [sound effects] and make more [concept art]."

Does that make any of those valid statements too? It's opinionated.

Modifié par Dave of Canada, 21 novembre 2010 - 09:19 .

[Onyx Jaguar]

Plus nowadays with companies that big it is



Fire the [sound people] so we can focus on [level design] and hire more [level designers]

[upsettingshorts]

CerealWar wrote...

It's nice having a voiced PC. What I really don't care for is the dialogue wheel. I didn't like being surprised by what Shepard had to say. If you have voice acting and a dialogue tree, everyone wins. Except for the people that are obsessed with their inner voices. Now if we can only get voiced PCs across multiple races...

Does "I don't want to see the full sentence before the character speaks it because having to read it then hearing a character speak it sounds annoyingly repetitious to me" count as obsessed with inner voice?

I'm big fan of the dialogue wheel, was never surprised by Shepard.  Not once.  In Exile puts it well, it's about caring how your choice influences the world and the other characters, the precise words Shepard or Hawke use to get across the idea I want isn't really a huge deal for me.  That and having plain text can be equally or even more confusing because there's just as much room for error with regards to tone.  DA:2's system looks like an improvement on both DA:O and ME2 to me.

Herr Uhl wrote...

Dave of Canada wrote...
That can be said about every feature.

"I don't like X, cut out X and make more Y."

What difference does that make to the validity of the statement?

It doesn't make it invalid.  It just means that the argument is by definition about personal preference as everyone has different priorities.  

[Jshay512]

CerealWar wrote...

It's nice having a voiced PC. What I really don't care for is the dialogue wheel. I didn't like being surprised by what Shepard had to say. If you have voice acting and a dialogue tree, everyone wins. Except for the people that are obsessed with their inner voices. Now if we can only get voiced PCs across multiple races...

I kinda agree with this now I learned more about the voice acting. The only thing I won't like is if there is a bad voice actor. Which is pretty much what I said in the beginning and how i hope there will be a way to mute the voice actor and get subtitles instead.

[Herr Uhl]

Dave of Canada wrote...

Herr Uhl wrote...

Dave of Canada wrote...
That can be said about every feature.

"I don't like X, cut out X and make more Y."

What difference does that make to the validity of the statement?

Because it's not valid when I can make a similar statement regarding everything else in the game? It's not a valid argument against anything?

"I don't like [combat], cut out [combat] and make more [dialogue]."
"I don't like [hitchcock zooms], cut out [hitchcock zooms] and make more [armor]."
"I don't like [sound effects], cut out [sound effects] and make more [concept art]."

Yes, and? It is an argument that it is something that he'd rather do without, and that it costs money that could be spent on something else instead, which he would prefer. That is a valid point.

Just because you can make similar statements about other things doesn't make it any less valid.

[Nerivant]

Herr Uhl wrote...

Dave of Canada wrote...

Herr Uhl wrote...

Dave of Canada wrote...
That can be said about every feature.

"I don't like X, cut out X and make more Y."

What difference does that make to the validity of the statement?

Because it's not valid when I can make a similar statement regarding everything else in the game? It's not a valid argument against anything?

"I don't like [combat], cut out [combat] and make more [dialogue]."
"I don't like [hitchcock zooms], cut out [hitchcock zooms] and make more [armor]."
"I don't like [sound effects], cut out [sound effects] and make more [concept art]."

Yes, and? It is an argument that it is something that he'd rather do without, and that it costs money that could be spent on something else instead, which he would prefer. That is a valid point.

Just because you can make similar statements about other things doesn't make it any less valid.

Wait... wait... slow down.

How is one person deciding that they don't like something and that there should be less of it, and more of something he does prefer, in a game that X many people will play, a valid point?

[Dave of Canada]

Herr Uhl wrote...

Yes, and? It is an argument that it is something that he'd rather do without, and that it costs money that could be spent on something else instead, which he would prefer. That is a valid point.

Just because you can make similar statements about other things doesn't make it any less valid.

He says the resources were wasted and could've been spent elsewhere, saying "wasted" and it could've been done with something else is an argument anybody could make about anything they hate. Do I find it wasted? No.

If I say I hate combat  and they should've focused on dialogue instead because they are wasting resources. Is that a valid statement? No, it's an opinion. It should be said as an opinion instead of a fact. That's not a "point".

Modifié par Dave of Canada, 21 novembre 2010 - 09:24 .

[Herr Uhl]

Nerivant wrote...

Wait... wait... slow down.

How is one person deciding that they don't like something and that there should be less of it, and more of something he does prefer, in a game that X many people will play, a valid point?

Are you going to say that truth is decided by the majority next or what?

[upsettingshorts]

Herr Uhl wrote...
Are you going to say that truth is decided by the majority next or what?

"Truth" is a very silly word to be assigning towards any preference regarding voice acting. 

[Nerivant]

Herr Uhl wrote...

Nerivant wrote...

Wait... wait... slow down.

How is one person deciding that they don't like something and that there should be less of it, and more of something he does prefer, in a game that X many people will play, a valid point?

Are you going to say that truth is decided by the majority next or what?

I'm saying that everyone has their own personal opinions regarding everything and that the slightest fraction of them are valid points.

[TheRevanchist]

Herr Uhl wrote...

Nerivant wrote...

Wait... wait... slow down.

How is one person deciding that they don't like something and that there should be less of it, and more of something he does prefer, in a game that X many people will play, a valid point?

Are you going to say that truth is decided by the majority next or what?

What he stated is an opinion and an opinion does not = truth

[Herr Uhl]

Dave of Canada wrote...

Herr Uhl wrote...

Yes, and? It is an argument that it is something that he'd rather do without, and that it costs money that could be spent on something else instead, which he would prefer. That is a valid point.

Just because you can make similar statements about other things doesn't make it any less valid.

He says the resources were wasted and could've been spent elsewhere, saying "wasted" and it could've been done with something else is an argument anybody could make about anything they hate. Do I find it wasted? No.

If I say I hate combat  and they should've focused on dialogue instead because they are wasting resources. Is that a valid statement? No, it's an opinion. It should be said as an opinion instead of a fact. That's not a "point".

Would it have been more valid if he used the expression "used" instead of wasted? It is still the same reasoning.

[Jshay512]

Ok what is the opinion thing even based on? what is the opinion again?

[Herr Uhl]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Herr Uhl wrote...
Are you going to say that truth is decided by the majority next or what?

"Truth" is a very silly word to be assigning towards any preference regarding voice acting. 

That isn't about VA, but the silly reasoning that unless the majority thinks like you, you don't count.

[Nerivant]

Herr Uhl wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Herr Uhl wrote...
Are you going to say that truth is decided by the majority next or what?

"Truth" is a very silly word to be assigning towards any preference regarding voice acting. 

That isn't about VA, but the silly reasoning that unless the majority thinks like you, you don't count.

It doesn't mean you're not right, but depending on the circumstances, you can very easily not count.

[upsettingshorts]

Herr Uhl wrote...

That isn't about VA, but the silly reasoning that unless the majority thinks like you, you don't count.

Every opinion, majority or minority, counts to me.  I'd be just as much in favor of a voiced protagonist with the dialogue wheel even if I was the only person on the planet who thought so, and I'd still be in favor of it being in a game so that I could play it and enjoy it.  Everyone's elses opinion isn't relevant to my enjoyment of a game.  It's relevant for a game developer, though, and I imagine the majority view takes precedence - however it might prove too difficult to nail down and I bet they trust their own creative judgement. 

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 21 novembre 2010 - 09:32 .

[Dave of Canada]

Herr Uhl wrote...

Would it have been more valid if he used the expression "used" instead of wasted? It is still the same reasoning.

"I feel the resources were wasted" or "I hate VO because...", instead of my above example of "I hate X, so remove X and add more Y".