650 réponses à ce sujet

[Tommy6860]

Shadow of Light Dragon wrote...

In Exile wrote...

Shadow of Light Dragon wrote...

Hm. Think of it like this. You've heard all the character voices from DA2, yes? If you read a book about them where they are talking, could you imagine them in your mind speaking as they do in the game?

No. Unless they'd be saying lines from the game, and I remembered those lines they said.

It's no different than that. Could be a light, shy voice, a deep raspy one, gutteral, gravelly, musical, lilting, tenor, baritone, accented, the list goes on. Once you've got the voice in your mind you give it to the character.

Maybe it's a roleplaying skill, I don't know.

What I'm trying to explain is that I don't have voices in mind. Even when I read. And I read very often.

Well if you can't then you can't, I guess. If you need/desire a protag voice then that's fine. I, on the other hand, would like an option to turn it off if it must be included in the game since I can imagine my own just fine.

<snarky> I call them "mind games" :-)

[In Exile]

Shadow of Light Dragon wrote...

Well if you can't then you can't, I guess. If you need/desire a protag voice then that's fine. I, on the other hand, would like an option to turn it off if it must be included in the game since I can imagine my own just fine.

DA2 failed in important ways to allow for an active protagonist, and that's more important to me than voice. I was just pointing out that I can't actually have more depth in voice choice with silent VO (the opposite gender voice). For me it would be a loss, not a gain.

Modifié par In Exile, 27 mai 2011 - 04:20 .

[Shadow of Light Dragon]

In Exile wrote...

Shadow of Light Dragon wrote...

Well if you can't then you can't, I guess. If you need/desire a protag voice then that's fine. I, on the other hand, would like an option to turn it off if it must be included in the game since I can imagine my own just fine.

DA2 failed in important ways to allow for an active protagonist, and that's more important to me than voice. I was just pointing out that I can't actually have more depth in voice choice with silent VO (the opposite gender voice). For me it would be a loss, not a gain.

I don't recall you pointing anything out to me personally except the fact you have trouble imagining a PC voice. So all my replies to you addressed that subject and nothing more.

Where DA2 fails and how is not a discussion I want to get into in yet another thread just now, so that's all from me here.

[lobi]

BP20125810 wrote...

From what I know, the voiced main charachter was one of the reason DA2 had only a human PC.  Would you be willing to ditch that for more replayability and customization in DA3, at the loss of not having a voiced protagonist?

In a heartbeat. Voiced main char was the root cause of my inability to 'be' Hawk and contributed to the lack of immersion, that and being able to spam the heart for romance success. Icons work like glitching, it steals the challenge of uncertainty.

[Dangerfoot]

There would be no point in removing the voiced conversations if they kept the 0.5 font size.

But yes, the voiced options are seriously limiting and kind of awful. Every single "direct" choice is generally also an anti-mage choice, so my aggressive, Templar-hating blood mage is pretty impossible to RP most of the time. And again, the font size is beyond retarded on every level.

[Dianjabla]

BP20125810 wrote...

From what I know, the voiced main charachter was one of the reason DA2 had only a human PC.  Would you be willing to ditch that for more replayability and customization in DA3, at the loss of not having a voiced protagonist?

Yes. Dear God YES.

I care not for hearing what my character says so much as actually being able to choose said character and especially have some actual control over what they say. I actually liked what my imagination came up with for my Wardens voice much better than the voice actor for Hawke. No offense to the guy that did it (honestly, I'm not bagging you), it just added that little bit more disconnection from the character. And no, I don't know why that didn't do the same for Shepard. Maybe because I had some choice in his background - just 3 options for each of 2 choices in a background can make all the difference in the world.

I followed DA from Bioware first announcing it's development, preordered it but then didn't get to play DAO until I had DA2 on preorder. Loved DAO & DAA and then went straight from that into DA2. I imagine my reaction was probably akin to a starwars fan who had seen the original movies when they first came out watching episode 1 and hearing Jarjar binks or whatever that abominations name was. (Not actually a star wars fan myself, I just really hate that thing.) It wasn't what I thought I was getting.

It went from everything I liked in an RPG in DAO, to... I don't know what DA2 was. I'm not sure I'd classify it as an RPG myself. CRPGS are to me (the good ones at least) an epic story in which you decide the actions of the hero an thus influence the outcome of the story. There's fighting things and taking their stuff inbetween, but that's just the vehicle for the story, not the story itself. In DAO you did this - your descisions shaped Ferelden for decades to come. You could choose not to fight things but to talk your way around obstacles. In DA2, playing as Hawke you just got screwed. Time and time again. In fact, everyone in Kirkwall pretty much got shafted by the end. Nothing you did seemed to affect or change anything much beyond the option of spit or no spit on the devils pitch fork. Except maybe how you dealt with the Arishok. But that was really just a set up for how & why Hawke's supposed to matter at the end of the game, and in the end you felt like you didn't. But I digress.

Edit: Ok, yes. It is an RPG, actually a good one if I think of it more as a tragedy than classic heroic adventure. I'd say akin to Ice & Fire, but really the only thing they have in common is that everyone seems to get screwed in the end. Rob Stark won every battle but lost the war. If I could just get past the dread of having to grind waves I'd play it again & do something different.

Ok back on topic. If you're going to take away so many options and possible back grounds for your character that have an influence on the story, at least make what few choices you have left matter. If you choose to be a mage, let there be consequences for casting magic in front of a Templar. Let there be 3 almost entirely different paths available now that your choice of class is all that's left. Let said paths have some cross over and some mutually exclusive quests and resolutions available. Let there be some consequence to your choice of character beyond a few token alternate bits of conversation. Hell, give us multiple starting points like there were in Origins AND do all the above. As it stands, DA2 took a lot away from its predecessor in regards to customisation and only gave the irritation of VA in return.

Modifié par Dianjabla, 30 mai 2011 - 09:59 .

[RangerSG]

Dalira Montanti wrote...

I think a voice player would work for da3 with multi races take sims for example you can pick a voice set and set the pitch to how you want it maybe we should have something similar in da3 with multi races

Apples and Oranges. There's no way you could do that for 40hrs of voiced dialogue. That's entirely different than Sims characters saying "Zug-Zug!" to each other.

[RangerSG]

Dalira Montanti wrote...

it was just an idea geez dont bite my head of "mugi ki lo"

I didn't know I had, I was just illustrating the point.

But I did suggest earlier where they do with the MC something like they did in Baldur's Gate 2 with the NPCs: they voiced the first line or so, and then left the rest to be read. I think that might minimize the amount of hours of VO they'd have to do. *shrug*

[Arppis]

BP20125810 wrote...

From what I know, the voiced main charachter was one of the reason DA2 had only a human PC.  Would you be willing to ditch that for more replayability and customization in DA3, at the loss of not having a voiced protagonist?

I don't care either way. I always play "human male warrior" -combo. Yeah, I'm boring like that. So, bring it on, either way you want it, Bioware.

[TheStrand221]

Bioware should find unemployed actors who can muster a decent VO, and pay them peanuts to fulfill all of our desires for selectable VO for our PCs.

I'm somewhat serious.

[YohkoOhno]

Bioware should find unemployed actors who can muster a decent VO, and pay them peanuts to fulfill all of our desires for selectable VO for our PCs.

The world doesn't work that way. Voice actors have what's known as a "scale" wage, which means you can't get them any lower. Why should people "work for free". Exploiting people is not a good thing.

[Sylvius the Mad]

TheStrand221 wrote...

Bioware should find unemployed actors who can muster a decent VO, and pay them peanuts to fulfill all of our desires for selectable VO for our PCs.

I'm somewhat serious.

They should still let us turn the PC voice off completely without forcing us to turn off all of the voices along with it.

They would need to package their cutscene audio files differently for this to work, though.

[Sylvius the Mad]

YohkoOhno wrote...

Why should people "work for free". Exploiting people is not a good thing.

It wouldn't be free.  It would be for a wage they were willing to accept.

Forcing people to be unemployed because the minimum wage for their work is higher than their work is worth to an employer is not a good thing.

[YohkoOhno]

The point is the reason why Hollywood has a guild system (union) and the concept of "scale pay". You will not find a lot of vocal talent willing to "break down" the scale system. Any vocal talent of sufficient caliber realizes this and will not work for "under" a certain wage.

Even the unemployed in this field know enough that they are not willing to compromise on this level and would rather find other non-vocal work instead. (Not to mention if they belong to a union like SAG they can end up being removed from the talent pool).

My point is most people with vocal talent, which is as rare as people with artistic talent (drawing), know enough not to lowball themselves.

[In Exile]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
It wouldn't be free.  It would be for a wage they were willing to accept.

Forcing people to be unemployed because the minimum wage for their work is higher than their work is worth to an employer is not a good thing.

The problem is the imbalance of power. The interest of the employee is to do the least work for the greatest pay. The interest of the employeer is pay the least for the most work.

Everything else becomes coercion, and each individual employee is not as powerful as the corporation.

[Blastback]

Luke Barrett wrote...

Somewhat related question:

Could this frustration with the voiced protaganist be somewhat alleviated if we were more specific with our chat options? My understanding of some of the issues with this is that the paraphrase text (the small text you pick from the wheel) wasn't closely related enough to what Hawke actually said. Would this be less of a problem if we were much more stringent with the paraphased text relative to what is actually said? This is much easier to accomplish than completely reinventing the wheel (I love when puns just appear by accident!)

Some, sure, the idea of not knowing what my character is going to do or say when I select my option isin my opinion, a very bad one.  But player voice has some other problems. 

First, there is always the danger of having a voice that the player really doesn't want.  The wrong voice could easily ruin the game for some players. 

Second, in conjuction with the fixed last name, I've always been unable to view my different Shepards and Hawkes as actual diffrent characters.  Their personality might be diffrent, but the second they start talking, any illusion of them not being the same person is killed.

Third, the silent PC allows for the player to imagine for themselves how the PC delivers a line of dialoge.  When I threaten some one, am I shouiting in their face?  Or am I speaking calm and softly?  With a silent PC, you could imagine your character doing whichever was more appropriate for them.  Player voice kills that.

[draken-heart]

 why stop at the protagonist? Why not just remove Voice acting in general and just have the words they would say pop up on screen, with the only Voices being companions when they actually talk to you ala NWN series.

[Sylvius the Mad]

YohkoOhno wrote...

The point is the reason why Hollywood has a guild system (union) and the concept of "scale pay". You will not find a lot of vocal talent willing to "break down" the scale system. Any vocal talent of sufficient caliber realizes this and will not work for "under" a certain wage.

Even the unemployed in this field know enough that they are not willing to compromise on this level and would rather find other non-vocal work instead. (Not to mention if they belong to a union like SAG they can end up being removed from the talent pool).

My point is most people with vocal talent, which is as rare as people with artistic talent (drawing), know enough not to lowball themselves.

This is true.  Workers tend to try to avoid reducing the market value of their services.

In Exile wrote...

The problem is the imbalance of power. The interest of the employee is to do the least work for the greatest pay. The interest of the employeer is pay the least for the most work.

Everything else becomes coercion, and each individual employee is not as powerful as the corporation.

That's what collective bargaining is for.  However, membership in the collective also needs to be voluntary, else the collective gains coercive power over the individuals as well, and I don't see how that's better than the problem the collective was trying to solve in the first place.

Anyway, we've gone well off-topic.  I won't respond to this further.

Suffice it to say that I don't support adding more voices with cheap talent either, because I think the voices themselves are the problem.  Not voicing the PC is, I think, miles better than voicing the PC.

[draken-heart]

 then why not make DA3 almost exactly like NWN, no voice for any character and have what thay would say just appear on screen

that would make the series all the better if you can't hear anyone talking

Modifié par draken-heart, 27 mai 2011 - 11:13 .

[RangerSG]

draken-heart wrote...

 why stop at the protagonist? Why not just remove Voice acting in general and just have the words they would say pop up on screen, with the only Voices being companions when they actually talk to you ala NWN series.

The protagonist is the only issue because that's the only persona the PLAYER develops directly. I'm not responsible for the identity of the tavern crowd.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Blastback wrote...

First, there is always the danger of having a voice that the player really doesn't want.  The wrong voice could easily ruin the game for some players. 

MaleShep.  The male Shepard voice in ME only suited characters I would never play.

You can't be that aggressive all of the time without being a caricature.  Duke Nukem is a good example of such a caricature.

Second, in conjuction with the fixed last name, I've always been unable to view my different Shepards and Hawkes as actual diffrent characters.  Their personality might be diffrent, but the second they start talking, any illusion of them not being the same person is killed.

They could have improved that significantly in DA2, I think, by having the name that displays floating over Hawke's head be the first name the player chose.  After all, Bethany and Carver aren't identified by theuir last names.  Why is Hawke identified by his?

Granted, I also think having a fixed last name is a bad idea (mostly because it prevents me from naming my character "Sylvius the Mad"), but even a fixed last name doesn't need to be as invasive as DA2's was.

Third, the silent PC allows for the player to imagine for themselves how the PC delivers a line of dialoge.  When I threaten some one, am I shouiting in their face?  Or am I speaking calm and softly?  With a silent PC, you could imagine your character doing whichever was more appropriate for them.  Player voice kills that.

Exactly.  Even with the same intent behind the line, and the same response from the NPC, having the line delivered in a different way might suit the character much better.

That's a terrific example, by the way.  If your character threatens by shouting, or with a slow meancing deadpan, that matters.  But voicing the PC denies us that level of control.

[Sylvius the Mad]

draken-heart wrote...

 why stop at the protagonist? Why not just remove Voice acting in general and just have the words they would say pop up on screen, with the only Voices being companions when they actually talk to you ala NWN series.

That would be my preference.  I don't really see how voicing all of the NPC lines is valuable.

Yes, the cinematic conversations work better that way, but I don't see those as valuable either.

[draken-heart]

 in essece the warden was a premade character too, we just chose what type of premade he/she was

IF bioware wanted us to have total development of the character there would have been no origin to choose from, intead we would have created the origin

srry just being logical here

plus we got to project our personality on both Hawke and the Warden (and Shepard if you want to go there) so in that light they are still our characters

the PC being voiced has no bearing on how we play that character. different characters=different worlds=different personalities

so i am ok with a voiced protagonist as long as i can choose that character in another game to think and act differently and the last one 

Modifié par draken-heart, 27 mai 2011 - 11:30 .