885 réponses à ce sujet

[upsettingshorts]

I 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.

I have cut down on the quote to make it more clear I was responding to a general idea, though.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 22 novembre 2010 - 01:56 .

[ejoslin]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

I 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.

I have cut down on the quote to make it more clear I was responding to a general idea, though.

It's just jarring when trying to be respectful of people who have an opposing view point and trying to get a point across to be given that.  Why not snark at people who actually say things like that instead?

*grin* And i will say yet again!  In-depth content is expensive.  Voice actors are expensive.  Fluff is cheap.  this has nothing to do with evilness or whether games should make money or whatever.  i think DAO had far too much fluff.  I would love it if DA2 was going to be shorter because they cut the fluff and left in all the same depth of character interaction.  But given economic realities, while they may cut some fluff, since they're making the in-depth content even more expensive because of a voiced protagonist, it's not too likely we'll have the same amount there.

But we can hope.

Modifié par ejoslin, 22 novembre 2010 - 02:01 .

[Ziggeh]

Maria Caliban wrote...

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.

google says 800,000,but if, as y ou say, that's codex and such it wouldn't be a good comparison point.

ejoslin wrote...

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.

This is more of a general point than a response to you, and I'm sure you already know this and it's more a turn of phrase than a literal interpretation, but I'm pedantic.

Can we stop talking about the budget as if they have exactly the same figure as Origins, and that increases in voice work will result in it, inevitably being shorter than Origins was? Otherwise I'll start responding that the money can come from all they saved due to the engine and world lore being done already.

Modifié par ziggehunderslash, 22 novembre 2010 - 02:01 .

[upsettingshorts]

[quote]ejoslin wrote...
It's just jarring when trying to be respectful of people who have an opposing view point and trying to get a point across to be given that.  Why not snark at people who actually say things like that instead?[/quote]

I do.  I don't apologize when I do it to them, though.

[quote]ejoslin wrote...
Voice actors are expensive.  Fluff is cheap.  this has nothing to do with evilness or whether games should make money or whatever.[/quote]

That was kind of my point and kind of the reason your point inspired me.  Electronic Arts is a big company, who knows how much money they've funneled Bioware's way for just that purpose.  What if their sound budget and team was just increased to accomodate a voiced protagonist?  We don't know.  We can't know really.

[quote]ejoslin wrote...
But given economic realities, while they may cut some fluff, since they're making the in-depth content even more expensive because of a voiced protagonist, it's not too likely we'll have the same amount there.[/quote]

We don't know the economic realities.  We only have assumptions, theories, and ideas.  That's without getting into a debate over what constitutes fluff versus depth in the first place - an issue that is likely to be contentious.

e]ziggehunderslash wrote...
Otherwise I'll start responding that the money can come from all they saved due to the engine and world lore being done already.[/quote]

There's that too.  But since we don't have numbers, all that's gonna do is potentially alter some of the theories and allow us to create new assumptions.  We still don't know enough to actually, I mean really, have much of a point one way or the other.

Maybe it's simply shorter because they want more people to finish the game.  I have no earthly idea why.  Neither does anyone else who isn't working at Bioware.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 22 novembre 2010 - 02:06 .

[ejoslin]

ziggehunderslash wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

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.

google says 800,000,but if, as y ou say, that's codex and such it wouldn't be a good comparison point.

ejoslin wrote...

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.

This is more of a general point than a response to you, and I'm sure you already know this and it's more a turn of phrase than a literal interpretation, but I'm pedantic.

Can we stop talking about the budget as if they have exactly the same figure as Origins, and that increases in voice work will result in it, inevitably being shorter than Origins was? Otherwise I'll start responding that the money can come from all they saved due to the engine and world lore being done already.

I have no clue what the budget it.  I would assume since the engine was basically built, a huge expense of DAO will not be there for DA2.  It's possible that there's double the money for DA2 available.  That would be fantastic.

Now, if I were a game producer, I would include as much fluff as I could get away with, along with more fulfilling content.  It makes for a longer game with less expense.  

Pointing out that a voiced protagonist costs more than a silent one is a no brainer -- it's far more expensive.  Now, it's possible that the budget will allow for this and allow for just as much in depth character development and conversations, just as meaningful friendships and love relationships, and if so, fantastic.

 Dollar for dollar, since a voiced protagonist is more expensive, no matter WHAT the budget is, you'd be able to get a lot more in-depth content with a silent protagonist.  It doesn't matter what the exact numbers are.  A unvoiced protagonist is just cheaper.  

That is not saying that DA2 won't be fantastic, and that there will be enough there and more even with a voiced protagonist.  more is not always better.  I'm just hoping as much in-depth content as DAO.  

Modifié par ejoslin, 22 novembre 2010 - 02:07 .

[TheRevanchist]

ziggehunderslash wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

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.

google says 800,000,but if, as y ou say, that's codex and such it wouldn't be a good comparison point.

ejoslin wrote...

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.

This is more of a general point than a response to you, and I'm sure you already know this and it's more a turn of phrase than a literal interpretation, but I'm pedantic.

Can we stop talking about the budget as if they have exactly the same figure as Origins, and that increases in voice work will result in it, inevitably being shorter than Origins was? Otherwise I'll start responding that the money can come from all they saved due to the engine and world lore being done already.

That's not counting the fact that Gaider already saod at PAX their budget is much bigger this time around and they STILL went over...they went over budget for DAO as well...but I agree it's pointless to debate the funding.

[Ortaya Alevli]

I get the feeling that budget is using as an excuse for more than it actually accounts for.

[Maria Caliban]

ziggehunderslash wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

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.

google says 800,000,but if, as y ou say, that's codex and such it wouldn't be a good comparison point.

However, I was wrong.

David Sims:
Just as a point of accuracy, it's 800,000 words of dialogue, for both Dragon Age and Planescape Torment. 800,000 lines would be truly massive, way beyond even BG2.

A bit more specific.

Dragon Age contains 742,000 words of dialogue, and 202,000 words of non-conversational text that were translated into eight languages besides English

* Words of dialogue in Dragon Age: Origins: 790,856 (The average novel has 80,000 – 100,000 words.)
* Lines of character dialogue: 68,260 (The average movie has 3,000 lines of dialogue.)

All we now need is for a developer to tell us how many words of dialogue are in DA 2 and we can see how much a voice protagonist costs us.

Modifié par Maria Caliban, 22 novembre 2010 - 02:33 .

[Apollo Starflare]

I very much doubt they are going to cut out the DA2 equivilent of, say, the Brecillian Forest and keep, for example, the Mage's Collective quests instead - just because they are cheaper. Going to the example so many people here love (ME2) Bioware pumped in a lot of non-fluff into that game, despite it's shorter length. Obviously I don't see DA2 having 'comanion missions' in that way, but I'm sure the bulk of the content will be taken up by equally non-fluffy content.



*ahem* Fluff.

[ejoslin]

Apollo Starflare wrote...

I very much doubt they are going to cut out the DA2 equivilent of, say, the Brecillian Forest and keep, for example, the Mage's Collective quests instead - just because they are cheaper. Going to the example so many people here love (ME2) Bioware pumped in a lot of non-fluff into that game, despite it's shorter length. Obviously I don't see DA2 having 'comanion missions' in that way, but I'm sure the bulk of the content will be taken up by equally non-fluffy content.

*ahem* Fluff.

Oh, I hope so.  if you put in too much filler content, people get upset.  But i also don't believe that DA2 is shorter because they cut out all the fluff and left in all the good stuff.  There will probably still be fluff as well as good, in-depth story and character interaction.  I'm just hoping for the same amount of character interaction as was in DAO.  Or even more, because i'm that way!

I've never played me2, so i can't comment on that.

[Ortaya Alevli]

What's wrong with fluffy content?

[Brockololly]

ejoslin wrote..
I have no clue what the budget it.  I would assume since the engine was basically built, a huge expense of DAO will not be there for DA2.  It's possible that there's double the money for DA2 available.  That would be fantastic.

And yet, they seemingly did have to do a lot of work on the tech behind the engine and with the whole visual "hot rod samurai" redesign for DA2, they basically tossed out or otherwise had to dedicate resources into "amping up" any existing model, like the darkspawn, and all that. Its not like BG2 where they just went right into it with stable technology and created content and added more everything.

[DPB]

ejoslin wrote...

 I'm just hoping for the same amount of character interaction as was in DAO.  Or even more, because i'm that way!

Well, I seem to remember reading somewhere that David Gaider said that the amount of companion dialogue is about the same as DAO. No idea where I heard that though.

[TheRevanchist]

ejoslin wrote...

ziggehunderslash wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

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.

google says 800,000,but if, as y ou say, that's codex and such it wouldn't be a good comparison point.

ejoslin wrote...

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.

This is more of a general point than a response to you, and I'm sure you already know this and it's more a turn of phrase than a literal interpretation, but I'm pedantic.

Can we stop talking about the budget as if they have exactly the same figure as Origins, and that increases in voice work will result in it, inevitably being shorter than Origins was? Otherwise I'll start responding that the money can come from all they saved due to the engine and world lore being done already.

I have no clue what the budget it.  I would assume since the engine was basically built, a huge expense of DAO will not be there for DA2.  It's possible that there's double the money for DA2 available.  That would be fantastic.

Now, if I were a game producer, I would include as much fluff as I could get away with, along with more fulfilling content.  It makes for a longer game with less expense.  

Pointing out that a voiced protagonist costs more than a silent one is a no brainer -- it's far more expensive.  Now, it's possible that the budget will allow for this and allow for just as much in depth character development and conversations, just as meaningful friendships and love relationships, and if so, fantastic.

 Dollar for dollar, since a voiced protagonist is more expensive, no matter WHAT the budget is, you'd be able to get a lot more in-depth content with a silent protagonist.  It doesn't matter what the exact numbers are.  A unvoiced protagonist is just cheaper.  

That is not saying that DA2 won't be fantastic, and that there will be enough there and more even with a voiced protagonist.  more is not always better.  I'm just hoping as much in-depth content as DAO.  

Of course it's cheaper only an idiot would dispute that. However...like Mr. Gaider said at PAX "As long as you enjoy the ride I don't think the length really matters" and I agree completely. I have finished ME1 probably over 40 times (lost count after 36, the first 26 being back to back) ME2 about 15-20 times and DAO about 15-20. I replayed ME1 the most mainly due to it's length, it was just long enough to satisfy me while not being too long for me to say "ok I need to take a break before I do this again" like DAO and ME2 does. The length of a game means absolutly nothing to be as long as I enjoy the ride. 

[mr_luga]

My biggest problem with voice actors, is what we are currently seeing, no alternative races. Only humans. Since the cost is too big for like 6 voice actors for all races and genders.



That's the issue with voices. What it adds, dosnt make up for what you lose in my opinion

[Atakuma]

mr_luga wrote...

My biggest problem with voice actors, is what we are currently seeing, no alternative races. Only humans. Since the cost is too big for like 6 voice actors for all races and genders.

That's the issue with voices. What it adds, dosnt make up for what you lose in my opinion

You are assuming race and origins were going to be a constant thing in the series.

Modifié par Atakuma, 22 novembre 2010 - 02:33 .

[TheRevanchist]

mr_luga wrote...

My biggest problem with voice actors, is what we are currently seeing, no alternative races. Only humans. Since the cost is too big for like 6 voice actors for all races and genders.

That's the issue with voices. What it adds, dosnt make up for what you lose in my opinion

VO does not mean it will forever be "Humans". It depends on what type of story Bioware wants to tell what type of protagonist you get. Gaider said this himself at PAX. People seem to think Hawke was made BECAUSE of VO which simply isn't true...it's quite the oppisite in fact.

[steelfire_dragon]

no its not worth it

[Apollo Starflare]

ejoslin wrote...

Apollo Starflare wrote...

I very much doubt they are going to cut out the DA2 equivilent of, say, the Brecillian Forest and keep, for example, the Mage's Collective quests instead - just because they are cheaper. Going to the example so many people here love (ME2) Bioware pumped in a lot of non-fluff into that game, despite it's shorter length. Obviously I don't see DA2 having 'comanion missions' in that way, but I'm sure the bulk of the content will be taken up by equally non-fluffy content.

*ahem* Fluff.

Oh, I hope so.  if you put in too much filler content, people get upset.  But i also don't believe that DA2 is shorter because they cut out all the fluff and left in all the good stuff.  There will probably still be fluff as well as good, in-depth story and character interaction.  I'm just hoping for the same amount of character interaction as was in DAO.  Or even more, because i'm that way!

I've never played me2, so i can't comment on that.

Oh I'm sure there will be fluff. ME2 had fluff. Every RPG under the sun has had fluffy content in there somewhere* at some point! The thing is I found there was not only less content that could be considered 'fluff' in ME2 but that it was also less in your face. I can quite happily ignore 80% of the fluff in ME2 without my compulsion to complete everything cuts in. Like it often does in DAO and ME1, with mindless fluff covered filler fluff that fluffs up my mind with fluff. So yeah I hope DA2 has less fluff but still some fluff to enjoy in between the non-fluff**.

*I havn't actually played every RPG under the sun to confirm this.

**Saying fluff is strangely addictive.

[Maria Caliban]

mr_luga wrote...

My biggest problem with voice actors, is what we are currently seeing, no alternative races. Only humans.

As I said previously, if there were no PCVO in Dragon Age 2, you would still only be able to play a human with a single origin.

Whether this continues to the next game is questionable.

[MerinTB]

IMO?

No.

[Nerivant]

Maria Caliban wrote...

mr_luga wrote...

My biggest problem with voice actors, is what we are currently seeing, no alternative races. Only humans.

As I said previously, if there were no PCVO in Dragon Age 2, you would still only be able to play a human with a single origin.

Whether this continues to the next game is questionable.

This just about sums it up.

[tmp7704]

Maria Caliban wrote...

* Lines of character dialogue: 68,260 (The average movie has 3,000 lines of dialogue.)

All we now need is for a developer to tell us how many words of dialogue are in DA 2 and we can see how much a voice protagonist costs us.

I expect it to be over 9000.

[TheRevanchist]

Maria Caliban wrote...

mr_luga wrote...

My biggest problem with voice actors, is what we are currently seeing, no alternative races. Only humans.

As I said previously, if there were no PCVO in Dragon Age 2, you would still only be able to play a human with a single origin.

Whether this continues to the next game is questionable.

Exactly...VO does not affect the character...its the other way around. Bioware was going to tell the story of Hawke regardless of VO or not. So they simply decided to add a VO since they have only one character to worry about rather then 6 different origins.

Many of you need to go watch Mr. Gaider's PAX interviews again I think for he explains all of this. The PC changes depending on the story Bioware is telling. If they write a story about reuniteing Kal Sharock with Orzammar you'll play a Dwarf. If they write a story about discovering Arlathan, guess what you'll play an elf. VO was not the reason for one race choice. They added VO as a result of one PC, since they don't have to divide the protagonist budget amoung 5 other origins and the removale of hours of empty fluff because if you make a 60+ hour game filled mainly with fluff. the VO for that would be ten times more then a 30+ hour game with alot less fluff.

Modifié par kylecouch, 22 novembre 2010 - 02:59 .

[ErichHartmann]

Brockololly wrote...


And yet, they seemingly did have to do a lot of work on the tech behind the engine and with the whole visual "hot rod samurai" redesign for DA2, they basically tossed out or otherwise had to dedicate resources into "amping up" any existing model, like the darkspawn, and all that. Its not like BG2 where they just went right into it with stable technology and created content and added more everything.

Yes it is.  DAO's engine is stable technology that is being visually upgraded for DAII and the art direction is not that radically different.  And some people prefer BGI over II.  The loss of open exploration for a more linear experience with BGII turns them off.  Too bad if you don't like it.