557 réponses à ce sujet

[In Exile]

Realmzmaster wrote...

So where does that leave Bioware. It seems that many gamers who want the silent protagonist and an equal number seem to want a voiced protagonist. Bioware will not be able to please everyone.
Bioware appears to be leaning in the direction of voiced protagonist. So is it a moot point?

I'm going to use the argument that those who hate ME-style games use:

There are plenty of games with silent protagonists (e.g. Bestheda games). Why not let Bestheda make silent protagonists, and allow Bioware to make voiced protagonists? 

[Eurhetemec]

Realmzmaster wrote...

So where does that leave Bioware. It seems that many gamers who want the silent protagonist and an equal number seem to want a voiced protagonist. Bioware will not be able to please everyone.
Bioware appears to be leaning in the direction of voiced protagonist. So is it a moot point?

Please don't make the mistake of confusing "angry people on the DA2 forums" with "gamers" as a whole or even "people who buy BioWare products".

If you ask voiced vs. non-voiced in the ME1/2/3 forums, you will get a zillion people saying "Voiced, are you crazy?!". Here, you get 50/50 because lots of professional DA2 haters post here (inexplicably). In the DA:O forums, if there's anyone still there, I'd be it'd be "Non-voiced, are you crazy?" as people who are still playing DA:O must necessarily like that.

If you ask on other gaming sites, you typically get a strong preference for voiced protagonists, whatever the genre.

So BioWare are going with what market research shows works. When DA:O was being designed, I don't think they'd even really considered a voiced protagonist, not until quite late in development.

[Pasquale1234]

Realmzmaster wrote...

So where does that leave Bioware. It seems that many gamers who want the silent protagonist and an equal number seem to want a voiced protagonist. Bioware will not be able to please everyone.
Bioware appears to be leaning in the direction of voiced protagonist. So is it a moot point?

Great questions, and I do not envy them making those choices - but I also do not understand their impetus for the genre shift from DAO to DA2 in the first place.  If they do not return at least some of the elements that players preferred from DAO, I would not expect the franchise to have a very rosy future.

[Realmzmaster]

Eurhetemec wrote...

Realmzmaster wrote...

So where does that leave Bioware. It seems that many gamers who want the silent protagonist and an equal number seem to want a voiced protagonist. Bioware will not be able to please everyone.
Bioware appears to be leaning in the direction of voiced protagonist. So is it a moot point?

Please don't make the mistake of confusing "angry people on the DA2 forums" with "gamers" as a whole or even "people who buy BioWare products".

If you ask voiced vs. non-voiced in the ME1/2/3 forums, you will get a zillion people saying "Voiced, are you crazy?!". Here, you get 50/50 because lots of professional DA2 haters post here (inexplicably). In the DA:O forums, if there's anyone still there, I'd be it'd be "Non-voiced, are you crazy?" as people who are still playing DA:O must necessarily like that.

If you ask on other gaming sites, you typically get a strong preference for voiced protagonists, whatever the genre.

So BioWare are going with what market research shows works. When DA:O was being designed, I don't think they'd even really considered a voiced protagonist, not until quite late in development.

I never mistake the voices here for gamers as a whole. The developers are however listening to the voices on this board. The other point is that ME (correct me if I am wrong) was always voiced with a set character (Shephard) which is different because DAO was slient with basically six set characters.
So people who liked DAO enjoyed the silent protangist much like the previous Bioware games (Baldur's Gate I & II. also including the Black Isle games Icewind Dale I & II and Planscape Torment based on the Infinity engine along with other series like MIght & Magic, Ultimas or Wizardry).

I prefer the voiced protangist, but I have no problem with the silent. Bioware has stated that the voiced protangist is the way it will go. The point is how much disappointment will it cause?

Modifié par Realmzmaster, 25 juillet 2011 - 07:28 .

[SilentK]

If they continue with the voiced char then it will be happy happy joy joy for me. Hope that there will be some way to make the voiced char a little more appealing for those who prefer a silent char.

[tfive24]

Realmzmaster wrote...

So where does that leave Bioware. It seems that many gamers who want the silent protagonist and an equal number seem to want a voiced protagonist. Bioware will not be able to please everyone.
Bioware appears to be leaning in the direction of voiced protagonist. So is it a moot point?

If Bioware continues to go in the voiced protagonist direction, then i will not be buying their games then. No big deal to me, I loved 3 of 5 games i have from them and I'm cool with that.

[tfive24]

In Exile wrote...

Realmzmaster wrote...

So where does that leave Bioware. It seems that many gamers who want the silent protagonist and an equal number seem to want a voiced protagonist. Bioware will not be able to please everyone.
Bioware appears to be leaning in the direction of voiced protagonist. So is it a moot point?

I'm going to use the argument that those who hate ME-style games use:

There are plenty of games with silent protagonists (e.g. Bestheda games). Why not let Bestheda make silent protagonists, and allow Bioware to make voiced protagonists? 

The only reason why I tolerant the Voice over on ME is because it was the closest thing i would get to a  star wars rpg on consoles . 

[TheRgreenM]

I Like To Hear My Character, But If A Voiced Character Means Less Conversation Choices Then I Can Do Without. (My Opinion XD)

[tfive24]

SilentK wrote...

If they continue with the voiced char then it will be happy happy joy joy for me. Hope that there will be some way to make the voiced char a little more appealing for those who prefer a silent char.

How coud they do it? I voice toggle will not work, because it would be the same problems. 

[erynnar]

Eurhetemec wrote...

Realmzmaster wrote...

So where does that leave Bioware. It seems that many gamers who want the silent protagonist and an equal number seem to want a voiced protagonist. Bioware will not be able to please everyone.
Bioware appears to be leaning in the direction of voiced protagonist. So is it a moot point?

Please don't make the mistake of confusing "angry people on the DA2 forums" with "gamers" as a whole or even "people who buy BioWare products".

If you ask voiced vs. non-voiced in the ME1/2/3 forums, you will get a zillion people saying "Voiced, are you crazy?!". Here, you get 50/50 because lots of professional DA2 haters post here (inexplicably). In the DA:O forums, if there's anyone still there, I'd be it'd be "Non-voiced, are you crazy?" as people who are still playing DA:O must necessarily like that.

If you ask on other gaming sites, you typically get a strong preference for voiced protagonists, whatever the genre.

So BioWare are going with what market research shows works. When DA:O was being designed, I don't think they'd even really considered a voiced protagonist, not until quite late in development.

Actually, the good doctors did consider it. They did a great interiew on why they kept the silent protagonist and it actually fits with the reasons  most people who prefer it. Dragooglordz had the article link some where and if I can find it I will post it for you. So, yes, they did look at it.

And would you kindly stop insulting people who don't like DA2, that would be nice. I don't go insulting people who love it as "professional cheerleaders."

[SilentK]

tfive24 wrote...

SilentK wrote...

If they continue with the voiced char then it will be happy happy joy joy for me. Hope that there will be some way to make the voiced char a little more appealing for those who prefer a silent char.

How coud they do it? I voice toggle will not work, because it would be the same problems. 

I don't know really, from what I have read so far a lot of people seem to miss reading the entire line of text. Perhaps if you could read more of the entire line if you highlighted that choice and you could toggle to silent? Hmm... I agree. This is difficult. I really like it this way, yay for voice and wheel, but it's sad to know that there are unhappy players out there.

Modifié par SilentK, 25 juillet 2011 - 07:53 .

[In Exile]

erynnar wrote...
Actually, the good doctors did consider it. They did a great interiew on why they kept the silent protagonist and it actually fits with the reasons  most people who prefer it. Dragooglordz had the article link some where and if I can find it I will post it for you. So, yes, they did look at it. 

Bioware are masters of double talk. 

They presented the dialogue wheel as the next evolution of dialogue and the way that players will finally control their characters personna more fully (with the paraphrase representing 'half-formed thoughts') and went players didn't feel like they connected with that, they turned around and invented "1st vs. 3rd person" storytelling as a distinction and had DA:O sell silent VO. 

Then they went back to VO for DA2, and had all new doubletalk. 

[Reidbynature]

A voiced performance can really suck you into the story and game unlike a silent protagonist where it's more of what you read into the character you're playing. Both have ups and downs, but I enjoy hearing the lines I've chosen acted out.

But if it meant getting a more RPG like game and/or related to space they need on the disc then I would drop it in a second.

[LobselVith8]

RinpocheSchnozberry wrote...

Discussion is immaterial. Voiced is here to stay. It's not 1980 anymore.

/thread

1980? The Fallout games don't have voiced protagonists. The Half-Life series doesn't have Gordon Freeman providing a voice. I can do without choosing a line from the dialogue wheel and having the voiced protagonist say something completely different than what I wanted him to say, which I found to be a problem with the voiced Hawke.

[phaonica]

In Exile wrote...

That's interesting, because it's the lack of a voice that separates me from my character. The character can't be me (though characters I design have elements of me) but for them to be characters they need to be alive within the gameworld, and the distinction between PC and NPC via voice & cinematics makes this impossible without VO (unless we went back to pure text). 

I only barely acknowledge that the warden is even a "character". I see the warden as an in-game extension of myself, and NPCs react to what I imagine, with the help of the in game dialog lines to get my intention across.

The difference - for me - is that DA2 shows the restrictions that the PC is under. So I know, for example, how Hawke is sarcastic or diplomatic, and what it means for Hawke to be either, so I can then build my beliefs & reactions relative to what the game allows me to do.

I don't feel like I need to know *how* Hawke is sarcastic or diplomatic. If I choose a sarcastic tone from a list of tone indicator icons, and the NPC I'm speaking to responds in a way that validates that I was sarcastic, the actual voiced line does not need to exist, for me, because in my head, I'll fill in how the line was delivered.

 If I cannot control misunderstandings it stops being my character.

To me, it doesn't doesn't seem like Voice is what is required in order to avoiding misunderstandings, but rather having more control over the delivered tone is all that is required. I still think that Voice is not required to indicate tone.

But why do you not tell yourself that the tone has to be fixed for every line, because the developers have to know what tone any line is being said with so they can craft a response? If you're going to appeal to design, then why don't you see how the design invalidates your playstyle?

It is possible to write an NPC reaction that accounts for different tones. For example, if an NPC is mad at you, and you say something like... "I know what I'm doing." You can say it like , <_<,,,, and the NPC could respond <_< no matter what and it would make sense. It is possible to write reactions in such a way that account for various tone deliveries from a single line.

[phaonica]

In Exile wrote...

erynnar wrote...
Actually, the good doctors did consider it. They did a great interiew on why they kept the silent protagonist and it actually fits with the reasons  most people who prefer it. Dragooglordz had the article link some where and if I can find it I will post it for you. So, yes, they did look at it. 

Bioware are masters of double talk. 

They presented the dialogue wheel as the next evolution of dialogue and the way that players will finally control their characters personna more fully (with the paraphrase representing 'half-formed thoughts') and went players didn't feel like they connected with that, they turned around and invented "1st vs. 3rd person" storytelling as a distinction and had DA:O sell silent VO. 

Then they went back to VO for DA2, and had all new doubletalk. 

It does seem like doubletalk:

ABOUT DAO:

"BioWare Tells Us 'Dragon Age' Stuff -- Explains Lack Of Voice, Presence of Origins, Hints At Dragons And Console Versions"

An interview between MTV Multiplayer and BioWare co-founder Greg Zeschuk

http://multiplayerbl...nsole-versions/

Multiplayer: If people's last point of reference for BioWare is "Mass Effect," they may recall the quality of the voice acting and the fact that you could even choose the gender of your character and have a separate voice track to listen to. Also, the conversation was triggered by mood and not knowing the line that the character would deliver. In "Dragon Age" it seemed that your lead character has no voice and you're literally selecting what line you say next rather than picking the emotion. So how should people interpret that you guys have undone some of the things you did in "Mass Effect," and why is there a difference?

Zeschuk: So the way the voice and the voice of the protagonist works: Our belief, and the reason we make a wide variety of games at BioWare (we actually have a quite a few in development), they come in different flavors. "Mass Effect" is incredibly cinematic and flowed a certain way based on the protagonist's voice and the way we did the dialogue system. When we looked at "Dragon Age" we sat back and thought we wanted the player to reflect their own inner voice. This was a very conscious decision. It actually harkens back to our roots and it's actually what we've done in all our games up until "Mass Effect." And things like "KOTOR" have been pretty well-loved by the fans. There's a lot of choices in this game about how you portray yourself and how you experience it. We wanted players to have an additional sense of -- even though I'm picking a line -- I'm the one saying it in my head.

ABOUT DA2:

"Gamescom 2010: Interview with Fernando Melo"

http://dragonage.wik...h_Fernando_Melo

Can you tell us more about the changes in Dragon Age 2 that were influenced by the Mass Effect series?


Well, probably the closest one will be the conversation wheel. I think it was something that we saw was very successful in Mass Effect, it was a great mechanic to use, we wanted to use that. One of the things that we saw is that it’s not always obvious, not only in Mass Effect, but in other games that use similar conversation systems, even in Dragon Age: Origins at times, what the tone, intent of the line is based on just the text of the option. So we introduced the icons that tell you what tone you should expect from the line. The player will also play an integral part in shaping Hawke, the hero of Dragon Age 2. If you’re constantly picking a sarcastic response, diplomatic response, aggressive response, over the course of the game, when you meet a character and make an introduction even before you actually have any choices in dialogue or if you’re in the middle of combat and he’s doing his combat call-outs, all of this will start to reflect the character you’re making Hawke to be. It’s a very clever system and I think people will feel, along with the player voice, that these are going to add a lot of character to Hawke.

I think the way we make games hasn’t changed. We’re trying to evolve Dragon Age a little bit, not radically change it. There’s a lot of misconceptions in terms of the changes we’re introducing. You’ve had a chance to see the game now, and you realized that the changes are quite subtle. The players who played Origins are going to feel at home. The BioWare style of gameplay is very much present.

Can you tell us what advantages there are of focusing on a more defined character instead of giving the player more choice in defining the character?

I think it’s kind of deceptive. I actually believe that by having a focus on a single character, such as Hawke, you’re actually going to find more options, because what we do is revolve the story around what the character is, what he or she is doing and what impact they’re having on the world. And really, much like Origins, the story of Dragon Age is more about what you as a player are doing to the world, what changes you are making to the world through these very important characters. In Origins, it was very important to us to give you an introduction to the different races and cultures. With Dragon Age 2, there is some importance to Hawke being a human character. And I think we can actually customize the choices you are going to be making along the way and give you much more depth in that character. So I hope people will see that it’s actually a deeper experience and will actually see even more customization than they could before, where we had to allow for such a wide range of characters. 

Modifié par phaonica, 25 juillet 2011 - 09:18 .

[lobi]

SilentK wrote...

lobi wrote...

SilentK wrote...

lobi wrote...

The potential in games for the player to be creative and involved in the game space in a meaningful way is not going to happen if Developers are allowed to continue locking players into a one track movie script with pre-developed player characters which is what is happening with the DA franchaise.
Mass Effect has been like this from the beginning, ok that's acceptable. But trying to turn Dragon age into another Mass effect is reprehensible and motivated soley by the desire for profit. The room players had to create their individualised player char within the game space has been diminished.
Those that want to call this progress technological or otherwise are in my opinion, foolish.

Hmmm  I don't agree with you here   =)    I have loved all my Shepards and Hawkes and very much feel that they are different people. You may prefer to play a silent char but for me, I love my voiced alts. Hmm...  I think it's a little harsh to call it foolish perhaps. We all just prefer different things.

I call foolish on the willingness to let Devs off the hook when it comes to a diminishing the scope for individuality in a pre-existing franchaise which enjoyed it's popularity due to said scope for individuality.
I do not like cheesburgers made with processed cheese that taste the same in china as they do in kentucky. Some do. If they had always been that way fine. but if it was changed as soon as it was popular for an inferior product pandering to a mass taste for the safety and security of the generic just to make more filthy lucre I am the type to anger.

lol, bitter much    =)     I guess it's easier for me to be in a general happy mood. I really really like the voice and the wheel so after work I get to play around with a game that makes me happy. Hmmm... I find it a little easier to try to get into how others feel about silent-voiced when the posts are a bit less... I don't know... flamey perhaps. But no worries. Have a good time in the thread    =)

Bitter? Hell yes I am bitter! When you play do you consider the convieniance of product consumption more important than the actual art of digital creation when it comes to gaming?.
There was not as much room for the imagination to play in within DA2's structure as there was in Origins and voiced protagonist had a lot to do with that.
The money grubbers at bioware would have been fully aware of this. 
There are a lot of unthinking mentally lazy gamers, who are prepared to suck up whatever tripe comes out of a Developer as long as they do not ask that the consumer actually put some thought into considering the merits of their artistic direction over the glitter of their hype.
It was a crime against art what they did  to an iP that showed a glimmer of it's potential with the Origins release.
Mass Effect was it's own animal from day one but, they changed the Origins ip. They changed Origins from something that gave a lot of room for a players mind to be creative within, to, a prison for the imagination. Voiced protagonist was one of the elements put the game on rails for a lot of the original fan base.
Mass Effect is entertaining fluff, and I love that it is. However, I like to involve my imagination when playing and, fluff entertaining or no will not always suffice.
I make no apologies for feeling passionate about the issue of 'dumbing down games' to put them within reach of those prepared to simply consume without regard or critical thought. I like to use my imagination, it's how I stretch my mind, when it's been sitting in the one spot too long.

Modifié par lobi, 25 juillet 2011 - 11:05 .

[erynnar]

In Exile wrote...

erynnar wrote...
Actually, the good doctors did consider it. They did a great interiew on why they kept the silent protagonist and it actually fits with the reasons  most people who prefer it. Dragooglordz had the article link some where and if I can find it I will post it for you. So, yes, they did look at it. 

Bioware are masters of double talk. 

They presented the dialogue wheel as the next evolution of dialogue and the way that players will finally control their characters personna more fully (with the paraphrase representing 'half-formed thoughts') and went players didn't feel like they connected with that, they turned around and invented "1st vs. 3rd person" storytelling as a distinction and had DA:O sell silent VO. 

Then they went back to VO for DA2, and had all new doubletalk. 

Why does doubletalk always remind me of the "Push Me Pull You" from Dr. Doolittle? ROFL! *HUGS Ex*

[erynnar]

phaonica wrote...

In Exile wrote...

erynnar wrote...
Actually, the good doctors did consider it. They did a great interiew on why they kept the silent protagonist and it actually fits with the reasons  most people who prefer it. Dragooglordz had the article link some where and if I can find it I will post it for you. So, yes, they did look at it. 

Bioware are masters of double talk. 

They presented the dialogue wheel as the next evolution of dialogue and the way that players will finally control their characters personna more fully (with the paraphrase representing 'half-formed thoughts') and went players didn't feel like they connected with that, they turned around and invented "1st vs. 3rd person" storytelling as a distinction and had DA:O sell silent VO. 

Then they went back to VO for DA2, and had all new doubletalk. 

It does seem like doubletalk:

ABOUT DAO:

"BioWare Tells Us 'Dragon Age' Stuff -- Explains Lack Of Voice, Presence of Origins, Hints At Dragons And Console Versions"

An interview between MTV Multiplayer and BioWare co-founder Greg Zeschuk

http://multiplayerbl...nsole-versions/

Multiplayer: If people's last point of reference for BioWare is "Mass Effect," they may recall the quality of the voice acting and the fact that you could even choose the gender of your character and have a separate voice track to listen to. Also, the conversation was triggered by mood and not knowing the line that the character would deliver. In "Dragon Age" it seemed that your lead character has no voice and you're literally selecting what line you say next rather than picking the emotion. So how should people interpret that you guys have undone some of the things you did in "Mass Effect," and why is there a difference?

Zeschuk: So the way the voice and the voice of the protagonist works: Our belief, and the reason we make a wide variety of games at BioWare (we actually have a quite a few in development), they come in different flavors. "Mass Effect" is incredibly cinematic and flowed a certain way based on the protagonist's voice and the way we did the dialogue system. When we looked at "Dragon Age" we sat back and thought we wanted the player to reflect their own inner voice. This was a very conscious decision. It actually harkens back to our roots and it's actually what we've done in all our games up until "Mass Effect." And things like "KOTOR" have been pretty well-loved by the fans. There's a lot of choices in this game about how you portray yourself and how you experience it. We wanted players to have an additional sense of -- even though I'm picking a line -- I'm the one saying it in my head.

ABOUT DA2:

"Gamescom 2010: Interview with Fernando Melo"

http://dragonage.wik...h_Fernando_Melo

Can you tell us more about the changes in Dragon Age 2 that were influenced by the Mass Effect series?


Well, probably the closest one will be the conversation wheel. I think it was something that we saw was very successful in Mass Effect, it was a great mechanic to use, we wanted to use that. One of the things that we saw is that it’s not always obvious, not only in Mass Effect, but in other games that use similar conversation systems, even in Dragon Age: Origins at times, what the tone, intent of the line is based on just the text of the option. So we introduced the icons that tell you what tone you should expect from the line. The player will also play an integral part in shaping Hawke, the hero of Dragon Age 2. If you’re constantly picking a sarcastic response, diplomatic response, aggressive response, over the course of the game, when you meet a character and make an introduction even before you actually have any choices in dialogue or if you’re in the middle of combat and he’s doing his combat call-outs, all of this will start to reflect the character you’re making Hawke to be. It’s a very clever system and I think people will feel, along with the player voice, that these are going to add a lot of character to Hawke.

I think the way we make games hasn’t changed. We’re trying to evolve Dragon Age a little bit, not radically change it. There’s a lot of misconceptions in terms of the changes we’re introducing. You’ve had a chance to see the game now, and you realized that the changes are quite subtle. The players who played Origins are going to feel at home. The BioWare style of gameplay is very much present.

Can you tell us what advantages there are of focusing on a more defined character instead of giving the player more choice in defining the character?

I think it’s kind of deceptive. I actually believe that by having a focus on a single character, such as Hawke, you’re actually going to find more options, because what we do is revolve the story around what the character is, what he or she is doing and what impact they’re having on the world. And really, much like Origins, the story of Dragon Age is more about what you as a player are doing to the world, what changes you are making to the world through these very important characters. In Origins, it was very important to us to give you an introduction to the different races and cultures. With Dragon Age 2, there is some importance to Hawke being a human character. And I think we can actually customize the choices you are going to be making along the way and give you much more depth in that character. So I hope people will see that it’s actually a deeper experience and will actually see even more customization than they could before, where we had to allow for such a wide range of characters. 

Thanks to you and Ex!  UGH! Double talk indeed. Yes popular for MASS EFFECT. I didn't want an Mass Effect in Medieval armor. I like DA as DA and ME as ME , thanks so much BioWare, maybe you could keep them, you know...different? *rolls eyes*

[Tirfan]

^ No! Every game has to fit in the same mold. We can't have different games catering to different people can we? That would be crazy.

[JasmoVT]

The risk is the genre wanders too far in the direction of simply being cinema and ceasing to be role playing. While I enjoyed DA2 I found the voice actingthe main character made it too much cinema and too little role playing. Unfortunately I fear that is the direction the media is going. Not sure how many more of these games I will buy. If I simply want to watch a movie there are better choices than a $60 game.

[Shazzie]

In Exile wrote...

Shazzie wrote...
Now, I've happily played games with voiced protagonists, but they were never my character.

That's interesting, because it's only the PC's with VO & custom faces (i.e. Shepard & Hawke) who have ever felt like my characters. VO gives me the right set of actions, the right type of active character, the correct script and an idea of intention & action that lets a character be under my control, instead of the control of the writer. Whereas silent VO just gives me a fixed line, and then tells me to try and guess what the intent behind that line is.

And this is why trying to please everybody is impossible, hah!    Just like my reactions are so foreign to you, I am completely unable to fathom how a not only pre-scripted text line but a pre-voiced and pre-scripted line can feel remotely under your control... to me, that's the definition of 'under the control of the writer', whereas non-voiced lets me feel like I have some small control. At least, for me, when I can't hear it, my imagination can place the emphasis and tone and emotion. I don't 'guess' what the intent is, I provide it, and that's what makes the character 'mine'. With voice, I feel like I'm in interactive cinema, and I'm just sitting back and watching the movie...err, game... play out. I never get invested, because I don't feel like I'm required to.

phaonica wrote...
ABOUT DA2:

"Gamescom 2010: Interview with Fernando Melo"

http://dragonage.wik...h_Fernando_Melo
....
I think the way we make games hasn’t changed. We’re trying to evolve Dragon Age a little bit, not radically change it. There’s a lot of misconceptions in terms of the changes we’re introducing. You’ve had a chance to see the game now, and you realized that the changes are quite subtle. The players who played Origins are going to feel at home. The BioWare style of gameplay is very much present.

Huh. That quote is odd, because, to me, 'radically change it' is exactly what they did.  It wasn't any one particular change that made me feel like that- not even the voiced protagonist change, though that was a major one- but all of it taken together. DA2 felt more like 'DA Rebooted' than 'DA Evolved', to me. I'm not saying reboots are bad things, (I've seen plenty good and plenty bad, so it's a neutral term to me), just that I TOTALLY wasn't expecting one, with DA2.

Modifié par Shazzie, 25 juillet 2011 - 09:55 .

[Morroian]

JasmoVT wrote...

The risk is the genre wanders too far in the direction of simply being cinema and ceasing to be role playing.

Actually it caters to a different type of role playing. 1st vs 3rd person role playing, Bioware may have made that distinction themselves but I think it is a valid one.

Modifié par Morroian, 25 juillet 2011 - 10:45 .

[S Seraff]

voiced although i would like to be able to modulate the pitch

[lobi]

Morroian wrote...

JasmoVT wrote...

The risk is the genre wanders too far in the direction of simply being cinema and ceasing to be role playing.

Actually it caters to a different type of role playing. 1st vs 3rd person role playing, Bioware may have made that distinction themselves but I think it is a valid one.

Which when extrapolated does in fact reinforce JasmoVT's point.

Modifié par lobi, 25 juillet 2011 - 11:08 .