406 réponses à ce sujet

[Urazz]

iampool wrote...

Im playing Dead Space (the first one), and im just f**ing hating Isaac isn't voiced, it just makes him looks so stupid.
That didn't happen to me in DAO tho since those are total different games, but im starting to realize why would someone want a fully voiced hero.

Yes, and he's voiced in the second one and I find to be better.  Some games can pull it off without a voiced PC but in general it tends to turn into a better experience storywise with a voiced PC in my opinion.

[Altima Darkspells]

Urazz wrote...

iampool wrote...

Im playing Dead Space (the first one), and im just f**ing hating Isaac isn't voiced, it just makes him looks so stupid.
That didn't happen to me in DAO tho since those are total different games, but im starting to realize why would someone want a fully voiced hero.

Yes, and he's voiced in the second one and I find to be better.  Some games can pull it off without a voiced PC but in general it tends to turn into a better experience storywise with a voiced PC in my opinion.

Well, there is a bit of a difference between playing someone else's static, established character--especially in a non-RPG genre--than playing as your own made character.

And Isaac's grunts from Dead Space were so much sexier than the ones in the sequel.  Though the cursing was cathargic.

[Sylvius the Mad]

All else being equal, I have no objection to a voiced protagonist.  So I'll happily accept one as soon as a game is designed such that the voice leaves all else equal.

To be acceptable, the implementation of the voice cannot do either of the following:

- Limit the player's freedom to assign tone to spoken lines.
- Limit the player's ability to choose what the character says.

If those two things can remain as they were with a silent protagonist, then, and only then, will I accept one.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Dave of Canada wrote...

I guess the non-voiced character is also a minigame with the logic in this thread, as often than not I had to guess the tone of a few phrases and how it would be interpreted by the NPC.

I insist that you were doing it backward.

You should never guess the tone of a line your haracter is going to deliver, because you're the person who should be deciding that tone on the first place.  If you're waiting for the game to tell you how your character is going to say something, then you're not doing your job as player.

[tmp7704]

Dave of Canada wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...
I probably responded that I don't like seeing the line before I hear it because I'm unable to resist reading it to myself (in my head) and then hearing it again, and the repetition kills me.

Same here, I'm going to be frustrated throughout Deus Ex: HR and I'm just going to wonder why they bothered at all.

Out of curiosity, if you enable subtitles in the game do you skip the voiced dialogue as soon as you read the words on the screen? Or do you still watch the presentation and listen to the delivery/tone etc even though you already know what's going to be said.

[Dhiro]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

All else being equal, I have no objection to a voiced protagonist.  So I'll happily accept one as soon as a game is designed such that the voice leaves all else equal.

To be acceptable, the implementation of the voice cannot do either of the following:

- Limit the player's freedom to assign tone to spoken lines.
- Limit the player's ability to choose what the character says.

If those two things can remain as they were with a silent protagonist, then, and only then, will I accept one.

I think Bioware have, at the very least, the right intention with the mood indicator. Of course, many people didn't liked the "shut up, you do as I say" line, but if they could match the tone exactly with the indicador and have a way to show what the character will say word by word I think that would let most of the anti-voiced protagonists at easy.

Or not, because they're anti-voiced protagonists and all that. Still, that seems a nice way to go.

Edit: Typos, sillyDhiro, so silly.

Modifié par Dhiro, 31 janvier 2011 - 08:20 .

[Dave of Canada]

tmp7704 wrote...

Out of curiosity, if you enable subtitles in the game do you skip the voiced dialogue as soon as you read the words on the screen? Or do you still watch the presentation and listen to the delivery/tone etc even though you already know what's going to be said.

I turn on the subtitles but don't actively read them unless I didn't hear a word (then I look up and find out what word I missed) or didn't understand a term the character is saying (such was the case with my first playthrough when I wasn't familiar with certain words). If I play another playthrough that's speed running, I read the subtitles (as to stay with the narrative instead of being lost in it) and skip to the next one once I've finished reading.

[upsettingshorts]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

I insist that you were doing it backward.

You should never guess the tone of a line your haracter is going to deliver, because you're the person who should be deciding that tone on the first place.  If you're waiting for the game to tell you how your character is going to say something, then you're not doing your job as player.

That's just your assumptions talking.  I forgot how you typically put it, but I'm basically going with the usual "incompatibile approaches" argument here anyway, that you've heard before.  The cat.  Dave recognizes the cat is in the box.  

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 31 janvier 2011 - 08:26 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

Dhiro wrote...

I think Bioware have, at the very least, the right intention with the mood indicator.

I'll grant that.  The mood indicator will, at the least, allow us to avoid really awful line deliveries in a way that ME never did allow.

I still think it's miles behind the unvoiced line, though, where the player could have his PC deliver the dialogue option he selected however he wanted.

But, DA2 will be the first game ever where the NPCs have actually been able to react to a line delivery over which I actually had some control, so we'll see if that makes up for it.

Of course, many people didn't liked the "shut up, you do as you say" line, but if they could match the tone exactly with the indicador and have a way to show what the character will say word by word I think that would let most of the anti-voiced protagonists at easy.

They need to define what the intent icons mean.  If they put that in the game's documentation so we'll actually know the scope of what "aggressive" or "friendly" entails, then perhaps we'll have a better time with it.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

That's just your assumptions talking.  I forgot how you typically put it, but I'm basically going with the usual "incomptabile approaches" argument here anyway, that you've heard before.

I think the reason I most want to play DA2 is so that we can actually look at how the dialogue system works and where it succeeds and where it fails.

Those failures (if there are any) will make for very interesting discussions.

The cat.  Dave recognizes the cat is in the box.

I still maintain that the presence of the cat in the box is unknowable.

[upsettingshorts]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

I still maintain that the presence of the cat in the box is unknowable.

And I still maintain that such a position is nonsensical.  The cat may be alive or dead, that we don't know.  But someone put it in there.  

In any case, that's why these arguments typically go on for pages and often get nowhere.

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Those failures (if there are any) will make for very interesting discussions.

That I can't argue with.

[Dhiro]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Dhiro wrote...

I think Bioware have, at the very least, the right intention with the mood indicator.

I'll grant that.  The mood indicator will, at the least, allow us to avoid really awful line deliveries in a way that ME never did allow.

I still think it's miles behind the unvoiced line, though, where the player could have his PC deliver the dialogue option he selected however he wanted.

But, DA2 will be the first game ever where the NPCs have actually been able to react to a line delivery over which I actually had some control, so we'll see if that makes up for it.

Of course, many people didn't liked the "shut up, you do as you say" line, but if they could match the tone exactly with the indicador and have a way to show what the character will say word by word I think that would let most of the anti-voiced protagonists at easy.

They need to define what the intent icons mean.  If they put that in the game's documentation so we'll actually know the scope of what "aggressive" or "friendly" entails, then perhaps we'll have a better time with it.

Hmm. Maybe it would be a good idea if we could put the mouse in the icon and get a little description. Of course, taking the mouse of the option would make the icon disappear. They could also try to make it very obvious. If I'm not mistaken, the symbol of diplomatic is a type of leaf, no? To be honest, I would never relate a leaf to being diplomatic.

I like to think it's better than Mass Effect's wheel, but it still have some way to go before it's better than DA: O's. I liked to imagine the voice of my characters in my head and I could pretty much deliver a line with any emotion - a character that it's very better would show it even when saying something 'nice'. I think I'll lost this in DA II.

[In Exile]

tmp7704 wrote...
I don't know what sort of conversations you're usually having, but most of mine do pretty much boil down to the standing/sitting and talking with gestures stuff rather than groping one another or standing up to dramatically survey collection of firearms on the wall every five minutes, e.g.

Sitting in various idosyncratic postures is a rather major one, pacing around while another person is talking happens, there's even the incredible walking and talking at the same time trick that is very, very common. Not to mention the number of times people randomly fidget with things around them. Sometimes one of us is going to do something totally crazy like lie down while the other sits.

Sure, me and my friend might sit and talk, but I might be twirling a pencil around and he might be smoking. Or he could be drinking water, or eating.

Most conversations I've had involve people interacting with the world physically, not standing/sitting straight as an arrow and talking.

I don't know where the bold comes from, other than an attempt on your part to be pejorative.

TheMadCat wrote...
Sure, but how often do we need to have
characters have a physical interaction while simultaneously talking and
why is that an insurmountable obstacle?

Like I described above . With each other? Not so often. With the environment? Pretty often.

It's not an insurmountable obstacle, but it is an obstacle and it requires an explanation of how we can do it, not just a claim we can.

TheMadCat wrote..
When you need the characters to make
physical contact you do it through short little cutscenes, the NPC's can
have the conversation and emotional expressions with the shot being
taken over the PC's shoulder or hell you can even show the PC's face and
give him animated expressions without having him actually "speaking" a
word in the shot. Once the interaction and the PC needs to "speak" you
revert back to first person. Not really difficult, just need to be
creative.

But it is difficult. Let's look at two things:

1) Physical Contact through cut-scene or facial expressions

The complain here is obvious: why is my PC a particular kind of emotion I might not want my PC to have? If Morrigain calls me handsome, why is the camera showing my PC smirking instead of being disgusted?

The same with contact. Maybe I want my PC to be terrified of physical contact - why is my PC reacting a certain way?

If the complaint against VO is that it predefines the PC, then the same applies to gestures or actions in a cut-scene. 

2) The schizoid camera cuts

It's easy to say that ''in principle'' the camera can just show the PC in a 3rd person view while some interaction is going on, but to avoid the camera jumping around like crazy, then interactions have to be reduced. You can certainly script the NPCs to act in lots of natural ways (that just requires a lot of zots per conversation) but the PC is (in first person) is just reduced to a screen that's at the right height for the posture.

[Killjoy Cutter]

There was nothing wrong non-VOed main character in DA:O / DA:OA.  It allowed for a broader range of responses (not limited by VO storage / pay limits), and allowed the player to imagine what their characters sound like individually, instead of all of them sounding the same.

[tmp7704]

Dave of Canada wrote...

I turn on the subtitles but don't actively read them unless I didn't hear a word (then I look up and find out what word I missed) or didn't understand a term the character is saying (such was the case with my first playthrough when I wasn't familiar with certain words). If I play another playthrough that's speed running, I read the subtitles (as to stay with the narrative instead of being lost in it) and skip to the next one once I've finished reading.

Ah, interesting. I play with the subtitles enabled and generally read them in advance since my grasp on spoken english is pretty low, but still watch the complete scenes both for the better sense of conversation flow and well, since it can be as good way to get more familiar with spoken english as any.

[Killjoy Cutter]

tmp7704 wrote...

Dave of Canada wrote...

I turn on the subtitles but don't actively read them unless I didn't hear a word (then I look up and find out what word I missed) or didn't understand a term the character is saying (such was the case with my first playthrough when I wasn't familiar with certain words). If I play another playthrough that's speed running, I read the subtitles (as to stay with the narrative instead of being lost in it) and skip to the next one once I've finished reading.

Ah, interesting. I play with the subtitles enabled and generally read them in advance since my grasp on spoken english is pretty low, but still watch the complete scenes both for the better sense of conversation flow and well, since it can be as good way to get more familiar with spoken english as any.

I play with them on so I don't miss anything, and the only language I actually know is English...

[Sylvius the Mad]

Dhiro wrote...

Hmm. Maybe it would be a good idea if we could put the mouse in the icon and get a little description. Of course, taking the mouse of the option would make the icon disappear. They could also try to make it very obvious. If I'm not mistaken, the symbol of diplomatic is a type of leaf, no? To be honest, I would never relate a leaf to being diplomatic.

I like to think it's better than Mass Effect's wheel, but it still have some way to go before it's better than DA: O's. I liked to imagine the voice of my characters in my head and I could pretty much deliver a line with any emotion - a character that it's very better would show it even when saying something 'nice'. I think I'll lost this in DA II.

My greatest fear is still the paraphrase system.  I need to know, before choose an option, whether the resulting line contains any assertions, and exactly what they contain.

But that's not a problem with the voice, per se.

Upsettingshorts wrote...

And I still maintain that such a position is nonsensical.  The cat may be alive or dead, that we don't know.  But someone put it in there. 

And this is why we disagree.  You think that because we saw someone put it in the box, and that we've been observing the box the whole time, and that we haven't seen the cat leave the box, means that we know there's a cat in the box.

It's that syllogism to which I'm objecting.

[Sylvius the Mad]

tmp7704 wrote...

Dave of Canada wrote...

I turn on the subtitles but don't actively read them unless I didn't hear a word (then I look up and find out what word I missed) or didn't understand a term the character is saying (such was the case with my first playthrough when I wasn't familiar with certain words). If I play another playthrough that's speed running, I read the subtitles (as to stay with the narrative instead of being lost in it) and skip to the next one once I've finished reading.

Ah, interesting. I play with the subtitles enabled and generally read them in advance since my grasp on spoken english is pretty low, but still watch the complete scenes both for the better sense of conversation flow and well, since it can be as good way to get more familiar with spoken english as any.

I play with the subtitles on, and routinely skip the spoken deliveries because I find dramatic pauses endlessly irritating.  I even complain when people do it in the real world.  They'll pause for effect, and I'll take that opportunity to point out that they're doing it.

Since I can't object in-game, I simply don't let it happen.

[Sylvius the Mad]

In Exile wrote...

If the complaint against VO is that it predefines the PC, then the same applies to gestures or actions in a cut-scene. 

No argument there.

[In Exile]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
I insist that you were doing it backward.

You should never guess the tone of a line your haracter is going to deliver, because you're the person who should be deciding that tone on the first place.  If you're waiting for the game to tell you how your character is going to say something, then you're not doing your job as player.

As I have said many times:  the problem here is that you value something in conversation that not everyone else values.

To you what you say is the most important thing. Even if I fail to understand every single word you've said, even if I do the exact opposite of what you want, so long as you are convinced that you have expressed yourself in the clearest possible way by your own standard you think: it worked out perfectly.

Whereas for other people it is the effect that matters. What is being said is less important than what the other person thinks is being said. The other person's state of mind is obviously unknowable, but their behaviour isn't, and so convesation is a matter of constantly tweaking and otherwise altering what you are saying untl you have the desired effect.

In the real world, you can try to speak to people both ways. With the former, you just try to be as clear as possible. With the latter, you keep the conversation going, making minor corrections until by any measurable standard from your PoV it sees the other person has understood.

A game is not the same as the real world. In a game, you have a limited number of things that can be said. You, Sylvius, solve this problem with no VO by actually thinking that the line as written is not what the character says; since what is being said (in your mind) is exactly what you want, then the problem is solved.

For the latter view, though, the problem is different. What is being said is not a big deal. Where it a real conversation, a person would say something like ''No, you misunderstood, actually..'' and eventually there would be some understanding. But this can't happen in a game. You have your line, and the NPC reacts, and that's it.

You're trying to push your standard of ''good conversation'' on others, and until we get this out in the open, it's not happening.

I don't think the problem is whether or not the cat is in the box, so much as a debate over what the precise laws of nature are (to jump into shorts's analogy for a second).

[Dhiro]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Dhiro wrote...

Hmm. Maybe it would be a good idea if we could put the mouse in the icon and get a little description. Of course, taking the mouse of the option would make the icon disappear. They could also try to make it very obvious. If I'm not mistaken, the symbol of diplomatic is a type of leaf, no? To be honest, I would never relate a leaf to being diplomatic.

I like to think it's better than Mass Effect's wheel, but it still have some way to go before it's better than DA: O's. I liked to imagine the voice of my characters in my head and I could pretty much deliver a line with any emotion - a character that it's very better would show it even when saying something 'nice'. I think I'll lost this in DA II.

My greatest fear is still the paraphrase system.  I need to know, before choose an option, whether the resulting line contains any assertions, and exactly what they contain.

But that's not a problem with the voice, per se.

I thought about that, too, and I'd like to know what Hawke will say. Repetition it's not really a problem to me, so I wouldn't mind having Hawke saying what I just read. A very low price to pay, IMO. I think that if we could have a toggle, players that don't want to read the whole phrase wouldn't need to, and everybody would be happy.

In a extent.

[Lord Gremlin]

Silent PC is important for role-playing when player is supposed to associate him/herself with the PC. Naturally, you're supposed to imagine PC speaking with your voice.



Just an example. To explain that technology is not an issue here.

[the_one_54321]

Faust1979 wrote...
It's 2011 a mute hero was fine in the 80s and 90s when games and hardware didn't have a lot of power. But it's 2011 now. It's time to leave the mute hero in the past. Games need to grow and change not stay in the past. Dragon Age is one fun game but the mute hero is a relic of the past. 

I disagree entirely. I think your mistake lies in equating "mute hero" to "relic of the past." A mute hero still has somthing to offer. I may be happy to see a speaking hero just as much. But in brining up what "needs to happen" what really does need to be acknowledged is that there is no better or worse between a mute hero and a speaking hero. They just present different dynamics in the game.

[Dave of Canada]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

You should never guess the tone of a line your haracter is going to deliver, because you're the person who should be deciding that tone on the first place.  If you're waiting for the game to tell you how your character is going to say something, then you're not doing your job as player.

Hypothetical scenario, Alistair approaches me in camp to talk about cheese and the following options show up.

1. Cheese is absolutely disgusting.
2. I love cheese!
3. How about I shove that cheese down your throat?

The game is giving me the sign that the third option is aggressive, it's the way the writer intended it to be be. Though what happens when there's an option that's slightly harder to tell if it's a joke, aggressive or simply rude?

What if there was an option that you couldn't tell if it's aggressive? You thought it was a joke, you pick it and suddenly Alistair is angry with you because you just insulted him. Is that the player's fault or the writer's fault? You'd say it's the player's fault, they shouldn't play in the sandbox that they've been provided.

Not to say your opinion is wrong, it's your opinion and I don't think like that. However, most people would argue that the sandbox they've been provided should be defined, not played out with imaginary lines. It is not the player's fault for not reading the line in an intended tone, nor is it the writer's fault because writers cannot make it so every line in the game can be read in every tone.

I know your reasoning, Sylvius. I can respect it, though when Alistair gets furious at me for something I said which I suspected was a joke, it loses it's impact when the next answers that I can give him are (for example) to quit crying, to shut up or to end the conversation. There's nothing that can make me go "Oh hey, I was kidding." (actually, some options do but the majority do not) that can help me prove my point that it was intended to be a joke.

So it's my preference that the tone of the line should be written down, as if to remove confusion. I'd honestly consider having no paraphrase and simply a tone icon (sort of similar to Alpha Protocol) to be an improvement over the unvoiced protagonist. Though I'm not the only one who thinks it and I'm hardly the majority who believes this.