885 réponses à ce sujet

[upsettingshorts]

Brockololly wrote...

In DA2, you not only have voiced lines for Male and Female Hawke, but then Male Aggressive Hawke, Male Sarcastic Hawke, Male Diplomatic Hawke and Female Aggressive Hawke, Female Diplomatic Hawke, and Female Sarcastic Hawke- and everything in between.

But all of those lines - or at least, the same level of options available to the player - existed in DA:O.  They weren't labeled as such, or voiced as such - but the same relative number of options existed.  Although if we're going to make a direct comparison, the lines in DA:O that existed referring to specific origins are now gone.  

Without actually having the numbers at our fingertips, and I don't expect we ever will, debating how much dialogue is available to the player compared to Origins is always going to be a pointless rhetorical exercise.

Brockololly wrote...

(budget stuff)

While it might seem a certain way, since we don't and won't know what DA:2's budget is compared to DA:O, and won't know how many man-hours have been gained/lost in development - speculating about budgets is just speculating.  People worried about DA:2's direction will simply assume the worst, and defenders/apologists/whatever will simply assume the best.  Neither has anything particularly insightful to add because we don't have any actual information.  

[Maria Caliban]

Big Blue Car wrote...


Yes? More content means more characters and a more in depth world. Personally I think both are desirable traits for an RPG.

That's why Oblivion has far more depth than Knights, Mass Effect, or Dragon Age: Origins: It's much, much larger.

[upsettingshorts]

Maria Caliban wrote...
That's why Oblivion has far more depth than Knights, Mass Effect, or Dragon Age: Origins: It's much, much larger.

/points sarcasm detector at this post

Hmm... I think I need to get this calibrated again.  Where's Garrus...?

[Atakuma]

nevermind

Modifié par Atakuma, 22 novembre 2010 - 01:29 .

[Big Blue Car]

I can't parse that sentence, it needs context or something.

[Morroian]

ejoslin wrote...

Edit: and given that DA2 has been described at being about half the length of DAO, my guess would be that there are fewer/shorter conversations.  We'll see, however.

It would be quite easy to shorten DAO a lot by reducing the endless lengths of levels like The Deep Roads and the Fade plus some of the minor side quests without reducing any of the dialogue conversations.

[Maconbar]

Atakuma wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

Big Blue Car wrote...


Yes? More content means more characters and a more in depth world. Personally I think both are desirable traits for an RPG.

That's why Oblivion has far more depth than Knights, Mass Effect, or Dragon Age: Origins: It's much, much larger.

Sarah jinstar once once replied to the same argument that "content is content". Can't argue with that logic.

Sadly I only experienced a little Oblivion content before I decided that I didn't need any more Oblivion style content.

[upsettingshorts]

Atakuma wrote...
Sarah jinstar once once replied to the same argument that "content is content". Can't argue with that logic.

Well, if one's standards for "content" are that low, then that's up to them.

Big Blue Car wrote...

I can't parse that sentence, it needs context or something.

I am going to venture a guess and say Maria is making the point that content best described as a mile wide and an inch deep has very little "depth" to it.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 22 novembre 2010 - 01:27 .

[Maconbar]

Big Blue Car wrote...

I can't parse that sentence, it needs context or something.

That's because it's missing content.

[Big Blue Car]

Maconbar wrote...

Big Blue Car wrote...

I can't parse that sentence, it needs context or something.

That's because it's missing content.

If only it were voiced, it might be more understandable...

[Ortaya Alevli]

Maconbar wrote...

Atakuma wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

Big Blue Car wrote...


Yes? More content means more characters and a more in depth world. Personally I think both are desirable traits for an RPG.

That's why Oblivion has far more depth than Knights, Mass Effect, or Dragon Age: Origins: It's much, much larger.

Sarah jinstar once once replied to the same argument that "content is content". Can't argue with that logic.

Sadly I only experienced a little Oblivion content before I decided that I didn't need any more Oblivion style content.

Exactly the point.

[Atakuma]

I apologize, I suck at making sense.

[Maconbar]

Big Blue Car wrote...

Maconbar wrote...

Big Blue Car wrote...

I can't parse that sentence, it needs context or something.

That's because it's missing content.

If only it were voiced, it might be more understandable...

But with paraphrasing there's no way I could make an informed dialogue choice.

[Maria Caliban]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Without actually having the numbers at our fingertips, and I don't expect we ever will, debating how much dialogue is available to the player compared to Origins is always going to be a pointless rhetorical exercise.

David did once tell us how many words total were in Dragon Age: Origins. I assume this means dialogue, descriptions, and codex entries. I once again weep for the loss of Dragon Age Central.

We've also gotten to the total for BG 2 from him. DA:O was larger in that aspect.

Yes, if we asked nicely, he or mike might give us that information for DA 2, but probably not before it's released.

[Morroian]

Nighteye2 wrote...
I couldn't care less about the voice acting. I do, however, care about all the things that were cut because of the voice acting.

What like meaningless side quests and endless levels of nothing but more combat.

Nighteye2 wrote...
I'd rather have a choice of race, multiple origins and full-text - instead of a voiced protagonist with those inaccurate paraphrases in that dialogue wheel.

And I'd rather have a more focussed story and characterisation with greater depth. Think about what needs to be sacrificed in terms of depth to give a game more breadth.

[TheRevanchist]

Morroian wrote...

ejoslin wrote...

Edit: and given that DA2 has been described at being about half the length of DAO, my guess would be that there are fewer/shorter conversations.  We'll see, however.

It would be quite easy to shorten DAO a lot by reducing the endless lengths of levels like The Deep Roads and the Fade plus some of the minor side quests without reducing any of the dialogue conversations.

Exaclty...The Deep Roads and The Fade were both ridiculusly long...to the point of aggrovation...you reduce that and remove pointless things like "Mages Collective, Blackstone Irregulars" etc...and you've cut all the content that don't really mean anything at all. While all the while still posses the same depth in story and character building. All they are really removeing is the "fluff" content that holds little to no significance. And to those who think having a none voiced VO is "having more control" then I'm afraid that's simply inaccurate. Because VO or not you still can't CONTROL what your character says because you still have to choose from pre-determined options already present within the game, something adding VO does not change.

[Atakuma]

Morroian wrote...

And I'd rather have a more focussed story and characterisation with greater depth. Think about what needs to be sacrificed in terms of depth to give a game more breadth.

In other words think Fable

[ejoslin]

kylecouch wrote...

Morroian wrote...

ejoslin wrote...

Edit: and given that DA2 has been described at being about half the length of DAO, my guess would be that there are fewer/shorter conversations.  We'll see, however.

It would be quite easy to shorten DAO a lot by reducing the endless lengths of levels like The Deep Roads and the Fade plus some of the minor side quests without reducing any of the dialogue conversations.

Exaclty...The Deep Roads and The Fade were both ridiculusly long...to the point of aggrovation...you reduce that and remove pointless things like "Mages Collective, Blackstone Irregulars" etc...and you've cut all the content that don't really mean anything at all. While all the while still posses the same depth in story and character building. All they are really removeing is the "fluff" content that holds little to no significance. And to those who think having a none voiced VO is "having more control" then I'm afraid that's simply inaccurate. Because VO or not you still can't CONTROL what your character says because you still have to choose from pre-determined options already present within the game, something adding VO does not change.

while i seriously hope that the game will be shorter because fluff content is removed, fluff content is very cheap while full voiced, in depth conversations are expensive.  I have a feeling that it's not going to be the fluff that is cut as with fluff added you can claim a far longer game.

[TheRevanchist]

Atakuma wrote...

Morroian wrote...

And I'd rather have a more focussed story and characterisation with greater depth. Think about what needs to be sacrificed in terms of depth to give a game more breadth.

In other words think Fable

I agree...I feel Fable 3 was a major leap forward for the franchise and restored my faith in it...I personaly got sick of seeing the character stand there silently shrugging like a moron.

[TheRevanchist]

ejoslin wrote...

kylecouch wrote...

Morroian wrote...

ejoslin wrote...

Edit: and given that DA2 has been described at being about half the length of DAO, my guess would be that there are fewer/shorter conversations.  We'll see, however.

It would be quite easy to shorten DAO a lot by reducing the endless lengths of levels like The Deep Roads and the Fade plus some of the minor side quests without reducing any of the dialogue conversations.

Exaclty...The Deep Roads and The Fade were both ridiculusly long...to the point of aggrovation...you reduce that and remove pointless things like "Mages Collective, Blackstone Irregulars" etc...and you've cut all the content that don't really mean anything at all. While all the while still posses the same depth in story and character building. All they are really removeing is the "fluff" content that holds little to no significance. And to those who think having a none voiced VO is "having more control" then I'm afraid that's simply inaccurate. Because VO or not you still can't CONTROL what your character says because you still have to choose from pre-determined options already present within the game, something adding VO does not change.

while i seriously hope that the game will be shorter because fluff content is removed, fluff content is very cheap while full voiced, in depth conversations are expensive.  I have a feeling that it's not going to be the fluff that is cut as with fluff added you can claim a far longer game.

David Gaider even said at Pax "As long as you enjoy the experience I don't really think the length of the game matters."

[Atakuma]

ejoslin wrote...

while i seriously hope that the game will be shorter because fluff content is removed, fluff content is very cheap while full voiced, in depth conversations are expensive.  I have a feeling that it's not going to be the fluff that is cut as with fluff added you can claim a far longer game.

In my opinion thats what happend with origins.

[upsettingshorts]

fluff content is very cheap while full voiced, in depth conversations are expensive.

Good thing EA's got all that money!  Too bad they're so evil, though.  If only Bioware was a fringe company that made one game every few years specifically tailored to my preferences.  Then all would be right and good in the world.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 22 novembre 2010 - 01:55 .

[ejoslin]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

ejoslin wrote...
while i seriously hope that the game will be shorter because fluff content is removed, fluff content is very cheap while full voiced, in depth conversations are expensive.  I have a feeling that it's not going to be the fluff that is cut as with fluff added you can claim a far longer game.

Good thing EA's got all that money!  Too bad they're so evil, though.  If only Bioware was a fringe company that made one game every few years specifically tailored to my preferences.  Then all would be right and good in the world.

Wow, where did THIS come from?  It is not in response to my post.  I don't believe I've ever said anything like what you just threw at me here.

edit; And I really do hope that the game is shorter because of fluff removal.  but it really doesn't make sense that that is where the cuts would be coming from since fluff is cheap and in-depth content is expensive.  It would be great, though.

Modifié par ejoslin, 22 novembre 2010 - 01:51 .

[upsettingshorts]

ejoslin wrote...

Wow, where did THIS come from?  It is not in response to my post.  I don't believe I've ever said anything like you just threw at me here.

Sorry, took your point about money/expense and used it as a springboard to make a general sarcastic comment.  It's not directed at you.  It's certainly directed at some other people though.

Edit: Can't choose when and by whom I'm going to be inspired to heights of snark like that, I have to go with the flow.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 22 novembre 2010 - 01:54 .

[ejoslin]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

ejoslin wrote...

Wow, where did THIS come from?  It is not in response to my post.  I don't believe I've ever said anything like you just threw at me here.

Sorry, took your point about money/expense and used it as a springboard to make a general sarcastic comment.  It's not directed at you.  It's certainly directed at some other people though.

Please, then, don't quote me when doing that because it looks like you're replying to me and I didn't do or say anything to deserve that type of sarcasm.

of course fluff is cheaper and in-depth content is more expensive.  That is my main concerned about a voiced protagonist -- it makes the in-depth content even more expensive so it stands to reason there would be less of it.  I hope I'm wrong.  I would love to have the same depth as Origins, less fluff, etc.