885 réponses à ce sujet

[upsettingshorts]

Plus we have to think about all those horribly injured kittens and damaged plate glass windows.

[Ortaya Alevli]

TJPags wrote...

Ever say something to someone as a joke, and they misinterpret it?  Or have the same happen in an email or a text?

I see those in-game situations you describe the same way.

The other day I attempted to make a satiric post concerning those "EAWare lost their souls dun dun dun" folks and people were like "Jesus, not this again..." And this was the edited reply, mind you.

BUT. In this example, it's the audience misunderstanding the writer/speaker. In the silent protagonist problem, even I can't figure out what the hell my character means, for chrissake.

Hell of a difference.

[Dave of Canada]

TJPags wrote...

Ever say something to someone as a joke, and they misinterpret it? Or have the same happen in an email or a text?

Yes, it's happened in email / text. However, it's because there is no tone in what I say.

"I hate you" with an angry tone is very different than saying "I hate you" while smiling and giggling. When I tell somebody I hate them, they shouldn't go going "LOL GOOD JOKE". This person is supposed to be me, or so I'm told, and I can't even know what the hell I'm meaning.

I see those in-game situations you describe the same way.

So you're filling in the problems with your own thoughts and imagination? How could their be flaws in such a system?

Modifié par Dave of Canada, 20 novembre 2010 - 06:28 .

[Jshay512]

TJPags wrote...

Jshay512 wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Jshay512 wrote...
It seems that a lot of people agree with me. That is not to say I don't trust bioware and they can sure make a great game so i bet the game will be good no matter or the VA is. I am going to preorder the game no matter what because i want the SE.

Keep in mind that the popularity (or relative unpopularity) of a particular feature or approach on these forums is not necessarily representative of the gaming public, or even Bioware's fanbase at large. 

Think of these boards as just one narrow, unpaid focus group.  Bioware may - and likely does - take note of what we say, but I would hardly call consensus on the forums unassailable public desire for change (or against change).  

I know man. I doubt it would be that hard though to make it so you can turn off the voice actor's voice and keep everyone else. I don't know for sure though because i am not a programmer.

See, the thing with turning off the PC's voice - or any other voices - is that the company spent money on that . . . which is a waste if everyone turns it off, no?

Then again if someone decided they didn't like the voice actor and did not buy the game is worse. I know they spent the money but I mean whats worth it more having a few people buy the game and turn off the voice acting or have a few people decide not to play the game. -I am saying a few people but i really don't know how many people would buy or not buy the game- 

[upsettingshorts]

Not to speak for him, but I imagine Sylvius the Mad would say those flaws are a feature because they introduce doubt - which is his creative playground. Removing doubt makes that playground smaller and more confined.

That's just my summary of the impression I get from him though, don't take my word for it.

I bring it up because I think that the general point of flaws introducing doubt is a solid one that can't be dismissed simply because it endorses "flaws." In this specific instance I disagree, but I'm not sure that I always would.

Just throwing that out there.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 20 novembre 2010 - 06:31 .

[TJPags]

Dave of Canada wrote...

TJPags wrote...

Ever say something to someone as a joke, and they misinterpret it? Or have the same happen in an email or a text?

Yes, it's happened in email / text. However, it's because there is no tone in what I say.

"I hate you" with an angry tone is very different than saying "I hate you" while smiling and giggling. When I tell somebody I hate them, they shouldn't go going "LOL GOOD JOKE". This person is supposed to be me, or so I'm told, and I can't even know what the hell I'm meaning.

I see those in-game situations you describe the same way.

So you're filling in the problems with your own thoughts and imagination? How could their be flaws in such a system?

It's happened to me while speaking, so I completely understand it.  I've said something as a joke, and been told my tone sounded serious . . .and the reverse, etc.

For your second point, I don't think I understand you.  Are you saying I'm introducing a flaw into the game with my attitude/preference/explanation?  I don't think I am.  I think I'm rationalizing a potential problem in-game with an explanation based on my real life experiences.

Or have I misunderstood you?

[philbo1965uk]

Dave of Canada wrote...

philbo1965uk wrote...

The industry has a philosophy of fear...always change !   as change even for change sake means upwards....standing still can only mean you go down,get left behind. It isn't true of course but thats the perception.

It IS true. Japanese game developers are dying because they refuse to change, they refuse to "get with the times".

People on these forums firmly believe that Baldur's Gate 2 is the most amazing thing ever, however the sales of Baldur's Gate 2 wouldn't be enough to keep Bioware going in today's world. You can only cater to a niche audience for so long before you need to change things.

Nostalgia can only get one so far before it becomes stale and bland.

Yes ...sorry Dave.

It was my fault I agree it was a little sloppy and vague.

I didn't mean we should all be still playing BG.

What I meant can be best highlighted with another franchise.Lets say the Call of Duty franchise.Aside from the improvement in graphics the game is huge and has essentially kept the same formula as it's a winning and popular format....when other new and imaginative FPS's are falling off the radar.
It will remain the same until the customer considers it stale and boring.So you can be assured it's good for a few more iterations yet without any major change !

I accept some of it is publisher driven, ie.. cut development time , get it out the door, make me something else that's shiny and NEW. New sells and old is stale.
But I believe developers at the moment that strive to create the perfect franchise, the BIG one .Often in their obligation to contract  miss the fact... they already did.Instead of developing and fine tuning a winning formula they drop it or change it so fundamentally its a completely different IP. They change for the sake of change because if they don't they will be left behind and someone else will overtake them.

A boom and bust policy if you will.It doesn't matter if its buggy or ****e..lets dump it on the gamer and onwards and upwards..which is a delusion that has been directly responsible for the demise of our platform.


In short the communites are saying "great game, we want to buy into this and support you" and devs are giving us the /facepalm..."sorry...casual gamer wants a 5 hour game and jump in right out of the box "

This market doesn't exist...it's fictitious.
 



I've strayed off topic  ..so my apologies to other patrons

[Dave of Canada]

TJPags wrote...

For your second point, I don't think I understand you.  Are you saying I'm introducing a flaw into the game with my attitude/preference/explanation?  I don't think I am.  I think I'm rationalizing a potential problem in-game with an explanation based on my real life experiences.

When you look upon the game and rationalize everything from a real life perspective, it's simple to look at it and go "Oh look, it's because of X or X". However, this can't really work in a game perspective where the writers have written a specific intention for that line and how it'll react. More so when you can't explain yourself afterwards because of the limitations of such systems.

I can understand when the line is taken differently from the character context, such as Morrigan hating you for showing affectionate lines or something. However, when I tell Alistair or something that I hate them and they go "Oh hardy har har" (with + approval) or something I'm just sitting here going... "Wait, what?", especially when at times those type of lines are sometimes considered insulting or offensive to them.

However, if it's rationalized as something in real life, how can I be sure any of these lines mean what I think they mean? The system gets more confusing, the average player won't sit there and feel the same as you and the flaws of the system can simply be handwaived.

[TJPags]

Dave of Canada wrote...

TJPags wrote...

For your second point, I don't think I understand you.  Are you saying I'm introducing a flaw into the game with my attitude/preference/explanation?  I don't think I am.  I think I'm rationalizing a potential problem in-game with an explanation based on my real life experiences.

When you look upon the game and rationalize everything from a real life perspective, it's simple to look at it and go "Oh look, it's because of X or X". However, this can't really work in a game perspective where the writers have written a specific intention for that line and how it'll react. More so when you can't explain yourself afterwards because of the limitations of such systems.

I can understand when the line is taken differently from the character context, such as Morrigan hating you for showing affectionate lines or something. However, when I tell Alistair or something that I hate them and they go "Oh hardy har har" (with + approval) or something I'm just sitting here going... "Wait, what?", especially when at times those type of lines are sometimes considered insulting or offensive to them.

However, if it's rationalized as something in real life, how can I be sure any of these lines mean what I think they mean? The system gets more confusing, the average player won't sit there and feel the same as you and the flaws of the system can simply be handwaived.

Ahhhh.  I understand now.

That, I think, is a flaw of any game - after all, they can only write so many lines - whether voiced or not - and many times in many games I find myself looking at choices and thinking - I'd say none of those!!!! 

They choose lines, and choose to give them an inflection, which - if not voiced - you don't know in advance.  Now I understand.  No real answer to that, except to just do a handwave and make the best of it, I guess.

[In Exile]

The issue when you starting introducing imaginary content is drawing the line. Why just insert this one scene of Alistair? Why not simply revive Duncan from the dead (or say he never died in the first place) and is just chilling with the party? Alistair says he's dead, but Alistair could just be crazy, just like he misunderstands.

[philbo1965uk]

Dave of Canada wrote...

Many times in Origins I'd read a line, choose it and the character would take it completely differently because the way I read the line isn't the same as the intention of the writers. Voiced or no, we're limited by what the writers give us. At least with this wheel and voiced system, we're able to get the intention of the line and can choose it instead of being surprised why what I thought was a hateful comment would be a joke or what I thought was me being nice was sarcastic and insulting.

That's very true and noticeable.As you identify.. it is a writing problem that could easily be addressed.
 
"Do you want to eat it ?" (j/k...insult..flirt) I don't need a wheel of fortune and hear Al Pacino , giving voice to me , playing him being me...a cerebral confusion.

IMO opinion a mute PC allows me to fully immerse myself into the character.When I'm asking the questions or giving reply I do so with my own voice and if the writing is clear with the correct emotional context.

VA for other characters actually enhance the experience and bring them to life..for the reasons you state, intention of line,wit,sarcasm etc.

I don't buy games with a voiced protaganist so that's a no sale for me.Unless of course they use Tim Allen

[Jshay512]

I don't really get why people say they need a VO to get wit and flirting and that stuff... I can easily see the wit in just the words. Maybe they needs a couple more words but I mean that isn't that much more work.

[philbo1965uk]

TJPags wrote...

Dave of Canada wrote...

TJPags wrote...

For your second point, I don't think I understand you.  Are you saying I'm introducing a flaw into the game with my attitude/preference/explanation?  I don't think I am.  I think I'm rationalizing a potential problem in-game with an explanation based on my real life experiences.

When you look upon the game and rationalize everything from a real life perspective, it's simple to look at it and go "Oh look, it's because of X or X". However, this can't really work in a game perspective where the writers have written a specific intention for that line and how it'll react. More so when you can't explain yourself afterwards because of the limitations of such systems.

I can understand when the line is taken differently from the character context, such as Morrigan hating you for showing affectionate lines or something. However, when I tell Alistair or something that I hate them and they go "Oh hardy har har" (with + approval) or something I'm just sitting here going... "Wait, what?", especially when at times those type of lines are sometimes considered insulting or offensive to them.

However, if it's rationalized as something in real life, how can I be sure any of these lines mean what I think they mean? The system gets more confusing, the average player won't sit there and feel the same as you and the flaws of the system can simply be handwaived.

Ahhhh.  I understand now.

That, I think, is a flaw of any game - after all, they can only write so many lines - whether voiced or not - and many times in many games I find myself looking at choices and thinking - I'd say none of those!!!! 

They choose lines, and choose to give them an inflection, which - if not voiced - you don't know in advance.  Now I understand.  No real answer to that, except to just do a handwave and make the best of it, I guess.

It merely requires a ( ) at the end of the multi choice.

(persuasion)
(J/k ) 
(Insult)

The fact you are restricted with reply and that you may not chose to say either....is not an issue as a VA won't give you additional choice of discussion.

VA bring characters to life ...and as such in answer to the OP...IMO worth it.

But VA playing me...playing him.... it's not needed nor particularly wanted.Therefore, its wastefull of money that could be spent on other areas of the game.

Sure I accept some like the idea ...but their opinion as such is invalid as it excludes the majority of customers.RPG's have always and continue to be popular without a PC VA...creating an environment which caters to the minority which risks a 'No Sale' ......Is like doing away with the bicycle and trying to only sell unicycles...its bad business.

[Ortaya Alevli]

Jshay512 wrote...

I don't really get why people say they need a VO to get wit and flirting and that stuff... I can easily see the wit in just the words. Maybe they needs a couple more words but I mean that isn't that much more work.

[upsettingshorts]

philbo1965uk wrote...
Sure I accept some like the idea ...but their opinion as such is invalid as it excludes the majority of customers.RPG's have always and continue to be popular without a PC VA...creating an environment which caters to the minority which risks a 'No Sale' ......Is like doing away with the bicycle and trying to only sell unicycles...its bad business.

I don't even know where to start with this.  Oh, I know:

"Who the hell wants to hear actors talk?" -- H. M. Warner, Warner Bros, 1927.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 20 novembre 2010 - 07:43 .

[philbo1965uk]

Jshay512 wrote...

I don't really get why people say they need a VO to get wit and flirting and that stuff... I can easily see the wit in just the words. Maybe they needs a couple more words but I mean that isn't that much more work.

You don't...it's never been a prerequiste of an RPG

They are just saying they would like it so and fair enough.But when Devs cater to the few...it excludes many customers ,which is why we must beat them up with sticks and force them to eat doggypoop.

[Atakuma]

Ignore me:?

Modifié par Atakuma, 20 novembre 2010 - 07:54 .

[upsettingshorts]

philbo1965uk wrote...

You don't...it's never been a prerequiste of an RPG

They are just saying they would like it so and fair enough.But when Devs cater to the few...it excludes many customers ,which is why we must beat them up with sticks and force them to eat doggypoop.

"Because it's always been that way" is the worst justification for continuing anything, ever.

What are the benefits and drawbacks of a voiceover protagonist vs. a silent protagonist vs. no voices at all?  That's a valid discussion.  Dismissing an opinion as invalid is not only rude, but counterproductive.

Atakuma wrote...
Lets try not to pretend our opinions are in the majority here, it makes you sound self important.

See, what I imagine would be particularly insightful would be to post a hypothetical question to philbo1965uk:

If it could be proven beyond a reasonable doubt that a voiced over protagonist is the preference of the majority, would you propose silencing your now minority opinion as an invalid and narrow one? 

And any attempts to undermine the premise of the hypothetical will earn a stern finger wag from yours truly.  

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 20 novembre 2010 - 07:47 .

[Jshay512]

Ortaya Alevli wrote...

Jshay512 wrote...

I don't really get why people say they need a VO to get wit and flirting and that stuff... I can easily see the wit in just the words. Maybe they needs a couple more words but I mean that isn't that much more work.

Ok... I kinda get where u are coming from but i mean you can do the same thing without voice actors. I mean dragon age wasn't bad without the VO. Not to say DA2 won't be good with it.

[upsettingshorts]

Jshay512 wrote...
Ok... I kinda get where u are coming from but i mean you can do the same thing without voice actors. I mean dragon age wasn't bad without the VO. Not to say DA2 won't be good with it.

In something with a narrator, sure.  Like:

And he roared with barely contained rage, "I will end you."

Is different than the typical CRPG display of "I will end you." 

[Ortaya Alevli]

Jshay512 wrote...

Ortaya Alevli wrote...

Jshay512 wrote...

I don't really get why people say they need a VO to get wit and flirting and that stuff... I can easily see the wit in just the words. Maybe they needs a couple more words but I mean that isn't that much more work.

Ok... I kinda get where u are coming from but i mean you can do the same thing without voice actors. I mean dragon age wasn't bad without the VO. Not to say DA2 won't be good with it.

I disagree. The whole point of my post was that you cannot do the same thing without voice actors.

[philbo1965uk]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

philbo1965uk wrote...
Sure I accept some like the idea ...but their opinion as such is invalid as it excludes the majority of customers.RPG's have always and continue to be popular without a PC VA...creating an environment which caters to the minority which risks a 'No Sale' ......Is like doing away with the bicycle and trying to only sell unicycles...its bad business.

I don't even know where to start with this.  Oh, I know:

"Who the hell wants to hear actors talk?" -- H. M. Warner, Warner Bros, 1927.

It was humour ..perhaps I should have used a VA

I'd try again though...it's nothing to do with a few dinosaurs that dig their feet in , fearing change . No doubt that they exists a few gamers that would like to see ME meets COD meets Dragon Age game...Is this the direction you'd like to see Bioware go in ?

Oh wait rumour has it they are !

[philbo1965uk]

Ortaya Alevli wrote...

Jshay512 wrote...

Ortaya Alevli wrote...

Jshay512 wrote...

I don't really get why people say they need a VO to get wit and flirting and that stuff... I can easily see the wit in just the words. Maybe they needs a couple more words but I mean that isn't that much more work.

Ok... I kinda get where u are coming from but i mean you can do the same thing without voice actors. I mean dragon age wasn't bad without the VO. Not to say DA2 won't be good with it.

I disagree. The whole point of my post was that you cannot do the same thing without voice actors.

Hmmm..but they have been doing it that way for  two decades seems to have gone well enough

[upsettingshorts]

philbo1965uk wrote...
It was humour ..perhaps I should have used a VA

Hah, mission accomplished.

philbo1965uk wrote...
Hmmm..but they have been doing it that way for  two decades seems to have gone well enough

/shrug

I've been playing CRPGs for two decades and I feel like a fully voiced (protagonist included) game improves my experience.  The lack of it always struck me as a limitation of the medium, not some genre standard.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 20 novembre 2010 - 07:53 .

[Ortaya Alevli]

philbo1965uk wrote...

Hmmm..but they have been doing it that way for  two decades seems to have gone well enough

Humanity had been doing well enough for ages until sliced bread was invented.

You're making NO sense, dude. NO sense.