885 réponses à ce sujet

[KLUME777]

Voices for PC for me are totally not worth it for:
1) It takes resources better spent elsewhere
2) I don't like voice PC anyway (especially the cringe-worthy love scenes)

I like taking control of my own character a lot more than being puppeteer of Biowares Character.

So far, DA2 is a disappointment to me because of Voice PC and locked Character clothes. So far.

Modifié par KLUME777, 20 novembre 2010 - 11:11 .

[Stick668]

chiliztri wrote...

I see the potential to have more interaction with companions if they were perhaps only voiced during certain parts

Another thing I thought of:

Depending on the setting, there are ways of increasing character interaction with low resource impact. Bloodlines and Deus Ex (and Alpha Protocol, I'd guess) had email that expanded on your relationships. ME2 had the somewhat hilarious data profiles in Shadow Broker. In BG2, there was Irenicus' journal which lampshaded his unwillingness to publicly explain his plans. The Witcher had a long-distance letter correspondance, not that it was hugely interactive.

All of these are mostly-text insertions that don't require twelve people's work, and none of them turn face-to-face conversations into silent chat rooms.

Mind you, an in-game chat-room conversation might be awesome. But setting-wise, harder to pull off in DA. (Also, if you start flaming mages, they may respond in literal kind. And the dwarven ban-hammers are not metaphorical.)

Modifié par Stick668, 20 novembre 2010 - 11:30 .

[Estel78]

I prefer a voiced PC, it's much better for the dramaturgy of the dialog scenes, it makes you an active participant instead of the mute bystander.

[chiliztri]

Stick668 wrote...
It's interesting... the "only infrequent voice interjections" of BG2 didn't bother me in the slightest. I guess it was a step up from what I was used to. But at the time I got to NWN2, the occasional text-only NPC convo felt jarring.

That's my problem with it, really. You get potentially more exchanges at the cost of... seamlessness.

(I mean, I wouldn't mind Planescape: Torment-level of interaction with full voice, but... Wait, actually, I would mind, since full voice PS:T would be the talkiest thing ever. It works as literature, but I'm not sure it'd work as theatre. If you see what I mean.)

Erm. Where was I? Oh yes. More interaction good! Not breaking gameplay flow? Also good.

I'm doing another NWN2 playthrough right now, and I'm not finding text-only conversations jarring, surprisingly. If anything I have a newfound enjoyment as I can read much faster than they can speak lines. It can be a bit daunting if you've gotten used to having everything fully-voiced, and the constant switching from cutscene conversations to the text-only dialogue box.

Immersion really is based on your personal taste. What one may find immersion breaking, another will have no problem with. Also, PsT is best left unvoiced...unless you are the sort who likes audio books

Stick668 wrote...

Another thing I thought of:

Depending on the setting, there are
ways of increasing character interaction with low resource impact.
Bloodlines and Deus Ex (and Alpha Protocol, I'd guess) had email that
expanded on your relationships. ME2 had the somewhat hilarious data
profiles in Shadow Broker. In BG2, there was Irenicus' journal which
lampshaded his unwillingness to publicly explain his plans. The Witcher
had a long-distance letter correspondance, not that it was hugely
interactive.

All of these are mostly-text insertions that don't
require twelve people's work, and none of them turn face-to-face
conversations into silent chat rooms.

Mind you, an in-game
chat-room conversation might be awesome. But setting-wise, harder to
pull off in DA. (Also, if you start flaming mages, they may respond in
literal kind. And the dwarven ban-hammers are not metaphorical.)

Hmm, that is an interesting concept that I think is not fully utilized. I see a problem with it in the DA setting as it seems it would take a very long time for letters to get where they are going, if they ever get them at all. If you are constantly traveling(I'm assuming we would be) it would be hard to receive letters. I don't believe they have a reliable post or something?

Modifié par chiliztri, 20 novembre 2010 - 11:52 .

[Estel78]

Jshay512 wrote...

Does anyone know if they will have a way to make it so you can mute your characters voice yet keep everyone else's?

No way that'll be in. It'd be awkward seeing him talk but not hearing his voice and since the dialog wheel features paraphrases you'd have no way of knowing what he actually said (well, without subtitles).

[ptibog]

Estel78 wrote...

 it makes you an active participant instead of the mute bystander.

it makes Shepard/Hawke an active participant, you are just a spectator.

[Sir JK]

KLUME777 wrote...
1) It takes resources better spent elsewhere

I just wish to adress this argument for a moment, because I think it's reasoning is a bit flawed. The people working on the PC voiceacting will be people working with audio, actors and to a small extent animators (but they'd work on dialogue animations regardless). Unless you argue that they should focus on more npc voiceacting instead they don't actually take manpower from any other feature of the game (since the people doing it are specialised in audio). If they didn't do the PC voiceover they wouldn't be doing anything at all. So PC voiceover does not detract any manpower from other features.

The PC voiceover will be worked on alongside other features and such will not limit the time spent on other features. They will have the same deadlines and time constraints as all other departments and will not drag anyone else down or impair on any other feature. It won't take any longer to make just because there's a PC voice.

Budgetary reasons does sound like a big one at first, but remember that the PC voiceacting will be part of the voiceacting budget which will be a part of the audio budget. All in all the two actors doing PC voices will not be that much more expensive than any other major npc, which in turn is just a part of the much bigger audio budget. Even if the PC voiceover budget is indeed cut from the audio budget. Would it make a significant difference? All other departments still have the same timelimit. Providing them with more money won't give them more time to provide that much more content.
Hiring additional programmers (or others) for the money hits two problems: 1) My father, who works with software development at a rather high level, often talks about this one. There's a myth that more programmers will produce content quicker. It is only true up to a certain point, after that additional programmers will start to detract from the process due to the entire thing needing more organisation and more testing. Bioware's departments are probably not understaffed. 2) Does a voiceactor cost that much more than a programmer, artist, animator, writer and whatnot per hour? Probably not.
Overall, the PC Voiceover budget is very unlikely to be enough to expand the timelimit.

So which resources does a PC voiceover detract from other features? Manpower and time are separate. The budget would have to be huge to be able to affect the project as a whole and individual departments are unlikely to benefit unless the time is expanded.

Note: I did not take the emotion tracking thing into account since I don't understand what developing it entails.

2) I don't like voice PC anyway (especially the cringe-worthy love scenes)

This is however a perfectly valid argument

[Stick668]

Estel78 wrote...

it makes you an active participant instead of the mute bystander.

ptibog wrote...

it makes Shepard/Hawke an active participant, you are just a spectator.

In that case, so does the PC performing any action over which you do not have complete control. 

"Why do you swing like that? Aim for its darn underbelly! Stop with the combat barks, I never pressed a button! Smile now. Now, dangit! And don't blink so much."

Player control will always be an abstraction. The exact degree of abstraction you are comfortable with doesn't really change this.

chiliztri wrote...

Immersion really is based on your personal taste. What one may find immersion breaking, another will have no problem with.

Ever-so-muchly agreed.

(The trouble starts when people treat "immersion" as an objectively quantifiable thing tied to My Pet Feature.)

Modifié par Stick668, 20 novembre 2010 - 12:17 .

[Estel78]

ptibog wrote...

Estel78 wrote...

 it makes you an active participant instead of the mute bystander.

it makes Shepard/Hawke an active participant, you are just a spectator.

It makes no difference to me as far as being that character goes.

[Atakuma]

yes

[Esbatty]

I like Mark Meer's voice, its very matter-of-fact as Shepard. And I've grown up with and therefore simply adore Jennifer Hale's voice, her voice is PERFECT for my canon Shepard.

The dude from Alpha Protocol is AWESOME. Whoever did the voice, as I play a "Suave" Michael Thorton, just nails the kind of responses I'd want coming from my ex-freelance secret agent. Not only can you see the eye-rolling but you can hear it when talking sh*t to terrorists.

Modifié par Esbatty, 20 novembre 2010 - 12:50 .

[Urazz]

Jshay512 wrote...

Yeah sorry back to the topic though. Characters and their voices. Does anyone know if they will have a way to make it so you can mute your characters voice yet keep everyone else's?

Alot of games usually have a volume level for voices seperated from the sound.  You can always turn that down if you want but you will probably want to have subtitles on so you know what is going to be said.

[SirGladiator]

We've got two really good examples of recent games and the whole 'voice or no voice' thing. In Fallout New Vegas you don't have voice, in Fable 3 you do. Overall, while obviously they're different games altogether with their own unique plusses and minuses, I'd say from my experience with both games the evidence suggests that the 'no voice' route was the more fun one. Listening to everybody else's voices, while keeping the player silent really does make it more 'you', than when you're hearing somebody else talking for you. Having said that, I enjoyed ME and ME2, and I'm sure DA2 will be plenty fun as well. Possibly all that they really need is a better voice actress than Fable 3 had, who knows. Its all speculation anyway, time will tell soon enough .

[Urazz]

Estel78 wrote...

I prefer a voiced PC, it's much better for the dramaturgy of the dialog scenes, it makes you an active participant instead of the mute bystander.

Agreed!  That's what killed some of the scenes for me in Dragon Age: Origins or at least killed the mood of the scene.  I.E. Some of the scenes in the various origins would've been much better with a voiced pc.  The human noble origin would've felt more heartbreaking when you leave your parents to their death, the City Elf origin where you find Shianni has been pretty much raped by Vaughn and his thugs, etc.

Modifié par Urazz, 20 novembre 2010 - 02:06 .

[Aldandil]

Sir JK wrote...

KLUME777 wrote...
1) It takes resources better spent elsewhere

I just wish to adress this argument for a moment, because I think it's reasoning is a bit flawed. The people working on the PC voiceacting will be people working with audio, actors and to a small extent animators (but they'd work on dialogue animations regardless). Unless you argue that they should focus on more npc voiceacting instead they don't actually take manpower from any other feature of the game (since the people doing it are specialised in audio). If they didn't do the PC voiceover they wouldn't be doing anything at all. So PC voiceover does not detract any manpower from other features.

The PC voiceover will be worked on alongside other features and such will not limit the time spent on other features. They will have the same deadlines and time constraints as all other departments and will not drag anyone else down or impair on any other feature. It won't take any longer to make just because there's a PC voice.

Budgetary reasons does sound like a big one at first, but remember that the PC voiceacting will be part of the voiceacting budget which will be a part of the audio budget. All in all the two actors doing PC voices will not be that much more expensive than any other major npc, which in turn is just a part of the much bigger audio budget. Even if the PC voiceover budget is indeed cut from the audio budget. Would it make a significant difference? All other departments still have the same timelimit. Providing them with more money won't give them more time to provide that much more content.
Hiring additional programmers (or others) for the money hits two problems: 1) My father, who works with software development at a rather high level, often talks about this one. There's a myth that more programmers will produce content quicker. It is only true up to a certain point, after that additional programmers will start to detract from the process due to the entire thing needing more organisation and more testing. Bioware's departments are probably not understaffed. 2) Does a voiceactor cost that much more than a programmer, artist, animator, writer and whatnot per hour? Probably not.
Overall, the PC Voiceover budget is very unlikely to be enough to expand the timelimit.

So which resources does a PC voiceover detract from other features? Manpower and time are separate. The budget would have to be huge to be able to affect the project as a whole and individual departments are unlikely to benefit unless the time is expanded.

Note: I did not take the emotion tracking thing into account since I don't understand what developing it entails.

You definitely have a point, but it should be pointed out that the PC have quite a lot of lines. The PC takes part in almost every single dialogue, and has normally more than one possible line for every response of the NPC. It's not as much as all other voice acting, but it is significantly more than any other single NPC. And it's going to have to be recorded twice, for the two genders.
The size of the game is also something to be considered.
Stan Woo, a reliable source of knowledge if ever there was one , said that the length of DA:O would have been cut in half with a voiced PC. That might have been an exaggeration, but I'm sure it does make a difference. Still, I like having a voiced PC, so it's not like it's the end of the world.

[Dave of Canada]

I wouldn't have been a great fan of voices (I was "meh") until I played Fable 3 where they added a voiced protagonist, I felt a lot more tied with the characters I met around and discussed with (namely, Sir Walter Beck) and my character occasionally talking with them about stuff made me feel like my character was alive rather than a mute who just likes dancing and doing thumbs up.

If they add that sort of connection through party banter and such, I'll feel like Hawke is more alive in the world and become more attached to them.

[nightcobra]

Dave of Canada wrote...

I wouldn't have been a great fan of voices (I was "meh") until I played Fable 3 where they added a voiced protagonist, I felt a lot more tied with the characters I met around and discussed with (namely, Sir Walter Beck) and my character occasionally talking with them about stuff made me feel like my character was alive rather than a mute who just likes dancing and doing thumbs up.

If they add that sort of connection through party banter and such, I'll feel like Hawke is more alive in the world and become more attached to them.

aaah, walter...

BAAALS!!!

Modifié par nightcobra8928, 20 novembre 2010 - 02:22 .

[Gtdef]

I thought that the warden in DAO was an idiot. I thought that a lot of times when you could solve a quest with multiple paths, the lines were getting mixed up and half of them were not appropriate for the situation. I felt they lacked character.

Now the writers have to write the dialogues in a different manner, and polish them for every possible outcome. Also they have to add more depth. I don't think that they are going to pay an actor to say "yes you are right" slightly different each time in 5 dialogue sequences with morrigan. The only game I've ever played with mute lines that were just awesome, was NWN2: MOTB.

That kalacha guy could be smart, aggressive or a good listener, and when you had the option to be charismatic or intelligent, the lines were really charismatic, or intelligent. I was smiling the smile of satisfaction for the whole ride.

So I'm pretty excited for voice-over, especially if it's of the same quality that it was on ME2 and Alpha Protocol. I understand that these games take place in modern/future ages and it's easier to write funny and "at your face" lines while being consistent. But since we've heard a lot about fighting like a spartan, well, I hope for some references ^^. Angry Hawke ftw.

Modifié par Gtdef, 20 novembre 2010 - 02:22 .

[Sir JK]

Aldandil wrote...
You definitely have a point, but it should be pointed out that the PC have quite a lot of lines. The PC takes part in almost every single dialogue, and has normally more than one possible line for every response of the NPC. It's not as much as all other voice acting, but it is significantly more than any other single NPC. And it's going to have to be recorded twice, for the two genders.

Oh absolutely. Compared to any other voiceover the PC one(s) would be by far the greatest. However, also remember than many "minor" voiceactors (including some companion and villain voiceactors) will also be doing several roles, unlike the PC voiceactors.
Even so however, I have trouble imagining any voiceactor costing much more than an animator, a programmer, a writer and whatnot. And definantely not so much that the entire project can afford some extra time if money is not spent on them.

The size of the game is also something to be considered.
Stan Woo, a reliable source of knowledge if ever there was one , said that the length of DA:O would have been cut in half with a voiced PC. That might have been an exaggeration, but I'm sure it does make a difference. Still, I like having a voiced PC, so it's not like it's the end of the world.

Hmm, he said that? I must've missed that. I'll take your word for it though, so no need to dig up a quote for me.

But thinking it through it seems reasonable... I'd imagine it's primarily due to all the origins though. It wouldn't be 2 main actors, but 6... or more. Origins is a massive beast due to them after all.

I'm not going to deny that PC voiceacting probably makes one opt for a slightly shorter game since it's extra work getting it all into it (yes, I'm aware this sounds like I'm contradicting my earlier statement. But I'm not, so bear with me for a while).
But mind that a voice that can carry a emotion and a tone needs to say less with words as well (since the tone says it for you). A sarcastic line can be shorter since the tone will indicate it's sarcasm (to clarify: with a voice you could sarcastically say "that's a great idea". The same line without a tone would have to include a unambigous exaggeration that it was sarcasm for you to understand that). The emotion in the voice can also be used to greater effect to build up a mood than words themselves can (...as classically used in Bioware games. Literature handles it completely different). So a voice doesn't need as much as unvoiced does either.
That said, yes. It probably could be longer if unvoiced. But it wouldn't necessarily be longer.

But I'm convinced that voice or not you make the game as long as you need it to be. You don't make it shorter that you need just because there's a new voice involved.

[TMZuk]

Full VO is a waste of money, a waste of disc-space and a waste of game.

Why? Well the first is obvious; it costs a lot of money that could easily be spend on something better.

The second is obvious too, they take up a lot of disc-space.

The third: What if I hate the voice? I hate Mark Meer's acting. I can't stand it, it makes me cringe my toes. Thank god Jennifer Haley did a better job, but still, she too made me wince more than once in ME2. The same with companions. If Wynne's lines had been written instead of spoken aloud, I might not had her killed in every playthrough except the first.

I am playing Drakensang at the moment, and I am not missing full VO one bit. I can read, thank you very much.

Furthermore, as each line has to be acted and recorded, it by simple logic reduces the amount of text you can have in a game, thus how many options you have in each situation. Until a method is invented that'll make VO a lot cheaper and a lot more customizable, don't go there.

I m certain that VO is the sole reason that we are stuck with one player-race instead of three.

Modifié par TMZuk, 20 novembre 2010 - 02:46 .

[hexaligned]

I'd rather have an extra 50% game length than a voiced PC, which essentially is what it comes down to. Also as others have said some voice actors make some games unplayable for me, I haven't been able to play a maleshep yet, (well not for more than 5 mins at a time anyways)

[Sir JK]

relhart wrote...

I'd rather have an extra 50% game length than a voiced PC...

Just one quick remark about this; There's absolutely nothing that says you'd get an extra 50% game length if there were no PC voiceover. Nothing at all. The game might not be a single second longer without a voice for all we know.

That statement is akin to a: I'd rather have 100,000 dollars than a gold necklace. While the gold necklace does indeed cost money, there is no indication at all it is worth that much money.

So please, don't just assume that cutting the PC voiceover would translate to more quality gamelength. It's a baseless assumtion.

[TMZuk]

Sir JK wrote...

relhart wrote...

I'd rather have an extra 50% game length than a voiced PC...

Just one quick remark about this; There's absolutely nothing that says you'd get an extra 50% game length if there were no PC voiceover. Nothing at all. The game might not be a single second longer without a voice for all we know.

That statement is akin to a: I'd rather have 100,000 dollars than a gold necklace. While the gold necklace does indeed cost money, there is no indication at all it is worth that much money.

So please, don't just assume that cutting the PC voiceover would translate to more quality gamelength. It's a baseless assumtion.

It is NOT baseless assumption that VO costs money and takes up space, and therefore acts as a limitation on how much content you can have. While that does not mean that there would automaticly be more content if there was no VO, it certainly does mean that if the money and space is NOT wasted on VO, they can be used on content instead.

[Dave of Canada]

relhart wrote...

I'd rather have an extra 50% game length than a voiced PC, which essentially is what it comes down to.

Not really. Origins had six voice actors to worry about and that's a lot of money, of course it would've cut around 50% of the game because if they had all six voice actors do every line in the game that the Warden does... I don't want to imagine that.

Hawke's voice acting is probably still very expensive due to the whole personality and main character bit, however it probably isn't enough that they removed "50% game length" because of it.

The chances of DA2 ever being as long as DA:O is a pipe dream, voice acting or no.

Modifié par Dave of Canada, 20 novembre 2010 - 03:22 .

[DarthCaine]

double post

Modifié par DarthCaine, 20 novembre 2010 - 03:31 .