400 réponses à ce sujet

[AmstradHero]

Zjarcal wrote...

Filament wrote...

AmstradHero wrote...

Except that to many, this is the essence of roleplaying. As I stated above, it allows the player to imagine the character delivering that line as they choose. They are roleplaying a character, with all the nuance of persona, attitude and intonation of voice that entails.

That is the very upside of a silent protagonist that you're missing.

Considering that it seems pretty clear what intent the line has in context of the conversation and the response it received, I can't say I buy that Sylvius argument about the benefit of the silent protagonist. I'm only imagining the line being delivered in one way because it's only intended to be delivered in one way. The devs have stated as such. That the game allowed people to imagine the lines being delivered in other ways was largely an accident. A serendipitious accident for some players, maybe, but not for me personally.

And no, it's not because I lack imagination. I can imagine other ways a dialog option could be intended to be delivered. But I don't accept those deliveries as having any value when I know the options are not the intended to be delivered that way.

This.

For example in Return to Ostagar, I want to leave Cailan's body in there. I imagine that I say something like "he's dead, there's no point in wasting time, let's move on". I can also imagine that I add a sad tone to it and everything else you want, to make it sound like I'm not disrespecting his memory, but companions will always react shocked and disgusted because everyone interprets what I just said as "hur hur, let the darkspawn keep their trophy".

Just for the record, I'm not sayng it's wrong to imagine whatever you want with the silent PC, but it's something that just doesn't work for me. But I won't criticize anyone who chooses to do that.

To be clear, I don't disagree with what you're saying here. I don't agree with Sylvius on this, because I've had exactly the same discussion and we wholeheartedly disagreed. The line is only ever interpreted in a single way by a NPC, and it's not possible for anything else to happen within the bounds of pre-written dialogue.

A line has a "general intent" - there's an overall impression that a particular line will give to an NPC - typically that will fall into a friendly, neutral or antagonistic category. However, that doesn't mean that individual players can't imagine the line being delivered slightly differently within the bounds of those categories.

I know that I can't have a protagonist deliver that line and not sound like a cold-hearted character, because that's not the type of line it is. In this regard, the icons actually provide a good measure of the "tone" of a line. For me, it's the combination of meta-knowledge and roleplaying that combine to let me create a customised character.

Players generally know the "intent" of a line to a degree based on the wording - it's up to the writers to give player responses that are relatively clear in this regard. I can't ever pick the bottom response in a dialogue intending it as a sarcastic "good" response, which is what Sylvius advocated in one discussion I had on this issue. However, as a player I am free to create a nuance of intonation or attitude for my character within the boundaries of that overall intent of that line to enhance the roleplay of my character.

With Hawke, Shepard or Thorton, each player's choice of line is
delivered in exactly the same way to get exactly the same response.  But the way I imagine my aggressive Warden protagonist intimidates someone might be entirely different to the way another player imagines their Warden intimidating the same NPC with exactly the same line of dialogue, even though the result is the same. Thus my Warden will have a slightly different persona to your Warden because of those small nuances, even if we've picked exactly the same dialogue choices throughout the entire game.

Modifié par AmstradHero, 22 août 2011 - 01:53 .

[RagingCyclone]

@Dave of Canada (can't use the quote function, Steam is not cooperating) I agree which is why I can write stories about my warden to fill in those lines that are missing from the game, and expand my silent pc for my personal edification. But I have never been able to make a connection to a voiced pc to do any kind of writing for him/her. It's those subtle nuances for me that a voiced PC takes away from my own imagination.

[Morroian]

RagingCyclone wrote...

@Dave of Canada I always took those non-voiced scenarios of yours as misunderstandings which happen to people all of the time in all walks of life.

I agree this is largely a personal thing, I reacted the same way as Dave does to it occurring in DAO. Others react as you do, mileage varies.

However it does occur to me, with the gameplay mechanics being used by Bioware whereby the way Hawke responds has an affect on the friendship/rivalry scores, that how the line is delivered should be completely under the control of the player.

[Hatchetman77]

I pick race, hands down

Modifié par Hatchetman77, 22 août 2011 - 03:06 .

[Zjarcal]

AmstradHero wrote...

With Hawke, Shepard or Thorton, each player's choice of line is delivered in exactly the same way to get exactly the same response.  But the way I imagine my aggressive Warden protagonist intimidates someone might be entirely different to the way another player imagines their Warden intimidating the same NPC with exactly the same line of dialogue, even though the result is the same. Thus my Warden will have a slightly different persona to your Warden because of those small nuances, even if we've picked exactly the same dialogue choices throughout the entire game.

That I can understand, that since with a silent protagonist you're filling in all the blanks, you can imagine different ways of saying the same thing, while a voiced protagonist will always deliver a particular line in the exact same way.

Thing is, and this is just me, I can imagine extra details on top of what's already presented in the game, in terms of line delivery or actions performed by our character. So even with a voiced protagonist, if I feel a particular line delivery or action should also involve an extra quirk or something, I have no problem imagining it on top of what's already shown on screen.

At this point someone could say "if you're going to imagine those quirks, why not just do without the rest and just imagine everything with a silent character". I can see why someone would say that, but first of all, it's not something I do often as I am almost always satisfied with the way things play out. It's something I would only do if I was really displeased with what was presented on screen or if I really felt my character could benefit from the extra bit of imagination (say imagining that after saying something sarcastic, my character also scoffed, I can imagine the scoff being added after the line is delivered).

Second, I personally enjoy it much better if I can at least see a basic scene or line delivery for what I intended my character to do or say. For example, if I'm declaring love to my LI, I want to at least hear the words "I love you" coming out of my character's mouth, even if that delivery didn't include everything I wanted, it's much more enjoyable for me than simply watching my character say nothing.

Of course this is all just a personal thing of mine, I get that it's not something others want to do or consider ideal in any way.

EDIT: And just to clarify before it sounds like I'm contradicting myself, anything I imagine remains in tune with the intent of the line or scene.

Modifié par Zjarcal, 22 août 2011 - 02:54 .

[JonathonPR]

Choose race over voice in rpgs. I am here to role play.

Modifié par JonathonPR, 22 août 2011 - 02:51 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

If they keep the voice, I wish they would make set protagonists, with a set personality. The middle ground thing is not working for me, except with Mike Thorton.

[guitarmouse]

I want both, a mixture or something like that

[TheBlackBaron]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

If they keep the voice, I wish they would make set protagonists, with a set personality. The middle ground thing is not working for me, except with Mike Thorton.

Aside from having a set personality, this. 

I certainly don't hate the concept of a voiced protaganist - I think ME2 is Bioware's finest game, and Shepard being voiced doesn't detract from that at all (quite the opposite, in fact). If it works for the story being told, great. I just don't want to see it all the time. 

[Texhnolyze101]

Silent please.

[LukaCrosszeria]

miskatonica wrote...

I'll admit: I preferred having a voiced protagonist just because it made party banter pretty enjoyable!

I don't mind if it was all the same voice with different races, but I'm sure people would have issues that their character doesn't sound like they imagined them to? It's hard to get a happy medium with these things.

Definitely the voiced protagonist. DA2 got me hooked on it, I love listening to sarcastic male Hawke talk It makes conversations more natural, party banter more enjoyable. I would've loved for the Warden to have had a voice too.

I wouldn't have an issue with a human or elf protagonist having the same voice, though I suppose for a dwarf they'd have to change the voice.

Modifié par LukaCrosszeria, 22 août 2011 - 10:28 .

[edeheusch]

Giubba1985 wrote...

xkg wrote...

Giubba1985 wrote...

xkg wrote...

^
Yeah combine both polls results (your and Hello there) and the conclusion is clear.
Looks like listening to voiced protagonist isn't more enjoyable than having choice of multiple races.
Oh well I am not surprised at all.

What? that basicaly there is 50/50 split between the two "faction" ?

Yeah more like for the silent protagonist, BUT ...

... but even with 50/50 (equal) split my statement "isn't more enjoyable" is still valid isn't it ?

Yes i'll say " silent is enjoable as voiced " so it means BW is screwed up.
Considering that community reaction to change is this , i cannot see how they can solve this without generating a tantrum of gigantinc proportion from half of their community

By removing the paraphrase system, and making a voiced protagonist but with an option to turn his voice off.

Such an option should not be so hard to implement and should satisfy the people that really prefer the silent protagonist.

The more I think about it the more I think it is the way to go as they have already stated that they will not come back to the silent protagonist but as about half of the community seems to prefer the silent protagonist.

Modifié par edeheusch, 22 août 2011 - 12:02 .

[Persephone]

edeheusch wrote...

Giubba1985 wrote...

xkg wrote...

Giubba1985 wrote...

xkg wrote...

^
Yeah combine both polls results (your and Hello there) and the conclusion is clear.
Looks like listening to voiced protagonist isn't more enjoyable than having choice of multiple races.
Oh well I am not surprised at all.

What? that basicaly there is 50/50 split between the two "faction" ?

Yeah more like for the silent protagonist, BUT ...

... but even with 50/50 (equal) split my statement "isn't more enjoyable" is still valid isn't it ?

Yes i'll say " silent is enjoable as voiced " so it means BW is screwed up.
Considering that community reaction to change is this , i cannot see how they can solve this without generating a tantrum of gigantinc proportion from half of their community

By removing the paraphrase system, and making a voiced protagonist but with an option to turn his voice off.

But wouldn't it be weird to watch cinematics of your character speaking, yet without a voice? Or do you mean that if the voice is turned off, you want an over the shoulder perspective exclusively? (Except during scenes where your character doesn't speak but does things ala kiss a LI, react to a revelation)

[Tommy6860]

AmstradHero wrote...

Tommy6860 wrote...

AmstradHero wrote...
Regardless, it is a fact that a voiced protagonist allows less latitude in the delivery of an individual protagonist dialogue line than an unvoiced one. To deny this is to admit to a personal lack of imagination and roleplaying ability.

The only contention I have is the one line I highlighted. I cannot tell someone else what role playing means to them, when in fact, the very same table can be turned on me.

A fair call, and that line potentially does come across a little harsh.  As such, allow me to clarify.

I'd argue that roleplaying is essentially the ability to craft a persona of my choosing to go through an adventure. A voiced protagonist offers less flexibility to create a deep and complex personality, because there's not the flexibility of line delivery for everything my protagonists "say".  I'm playing a "role" of my own creation.

WIth a voiced protagonist, I'm playing a "role", but it's more akin to me directing someone else's character. A voiced protagonist feels more like I am combining elements of two or three distinct pre-defined personalities in order to create my own interpretation of the character created by the designers.

I'll bring up the Witcher as a case in point because I never felt like I got to roleplay in that game. I got to choose to be "douchebag Geralt killing person A" or "douchebag Geralt killing person B". By having a pre-defined protagonist with a single pre-defined personality, I got to make choices, but I never got to roleplay. As the player, I was making the choice of what Geralt should do, but he was the one making the decision because whatever choice I made, he was providing the rationale and motivation for that choice.

This is why I favour the unvoiced protagonist in terms of roleplaying depth. For presentation, a voiced protagonist wins hands down over an unvoiced protagonist, and I still love playing well crafted RPGs with voiced protagonists. However, they can never match an unvoiced protagonist in terms of allowing the player freedom to create a character with a complex personality.

I agree with all of this . I liked TW, really I did, but it was only a one play-game for me, because I was stuck with only one choice for a character. It is the reason why I am not too keen to TW2, despite the raving reviews from some of my forumite friends here who like the same style of RPGs as I do, and they liked it. I am just a bit more hardcore.

But take Mass Effect for example. I game I absolutely loved, though ME2 was a serious let-down for me, but at least the story carried over well in it with some of the ancillary aspects that my ME save transfers brought into the game. Anyway, though ME uses a VP, the story (maybe the best I have ever expereinced) was so good and the choices I made had impact, that I felt great with it. ME2, not so much because they removed much of the RPG aspect that ME has. Still though, an SP with rich engaging dialogue is what drives me in RPGs, along with a well written story.

[Tommy6860]

Zjarcal wrote...

Filament wrote...

AmstradHero wrote...

Except that to many, this is the essence of roleplaying. As I stated above, it allows the player to imagine the character delivering that line as they choose. They are roleplaying a character, with all the nuance of persona, attitude and intonation of voice that entails.

That is the very upside of a silent protagonist that you're missing.

Considering that it seems pretty clear what intent the line has in context of the conversation and the response it received, I can't say I buy that Sylvius argument about the benefit of the silent protagonist. I'm only imagining the line being delivered in one way because it's only intended to be delivered in one way. The devs have stated as such. That the game allowed people to imagine the lines being delivered in other ways was largely an accident. A serendipitious accident for some players, maybe, but not for me personally.

And no, it's not because I lack imagination. I can imagine other ways a dialog option could be intended to be delivered. But I don't accept those deliveries as having any value when I know the options are not the intended to be delivered that way.

Just for the record, I'm not sayng it's wrong to imagine whatever you want with the silent PC, but it's something that just doesn't work for me. But I won't criticize anyone who chooses to do that.

And this is why I have so much respect for you, in spite of our differences.

[Tommy6860]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

If they keep the voice, I wish they would make set protagonists, with a set personality. The middle ground thing is not working for me, except with Mike Thorton.

This^ would be a great start if keeping with the VP..

[Aeowyn]

I will say that while I enjoyed playing the Warden, watching the back of her head 90% of the game did not make me feel included in the game at all. It felt like my Warden was watching a scene from afar. The only times we did see the Warden's face, it was blank, not showing the emotion that I as a player would imagine her to show, and while I enjoyed DAO immensely, it felt quite jarring to go back to play my Warden after having spent months playing ME1&2 and DA2.
I feel more connected to Shepard and Hawke than I will ever do with my Warden, because those characters felt more alive and wasn't just a blank face.
However, I do NOT want a set personality for my protagonist like KoP suggested. I can still roleplay my Shepard and Hawke, and they both have two backgrounds and personalities that I made for them.
To answer the OPs question, for me it's a difficult choice. While I enjoy a voiced proganist over a silent one, I would also like the ability to play other races.

Edit to add: There were times when my Shepard and Hawke reacted in ways that I did not want them to act. But it didn't bother me as much as the blank faced, silent Warden.

Modifié par Aeowyn, 22 août 2011 - 12:56 .

[leggywillow]

Aeowyn wrote...

I will say that while I enjoyed playing the Warden, watching the back of her head 90% of the game did not make me feel included in the game at all. It felt like my Warden was watching a scene from afar. The only times we did see the Warden's face, it was blank, not showing the emotion that I as a player would imagine her to show, and while I enjoyed DAO immensely, it felt quite jarring to go back to play my Warden after having spent months playing ME1&2 and DA2.
I feel more connected to Shepard and Hawke than I will ever do with my Warden, because those characters felt more alive and wasn't just a blank face.
However, I do NOT want a set personality for my protagonist like KoP suggested. I can still roleplay my Shepard and Hawke, and they both have two backgrounds and personalities that I made for them.
To answer the OPs question, for me it's a difficult choice. While I enjoy a voiced proganist over a silent one, I would also like the ability to play other races.

Edit to add: There were times when my Shepard and Hawke reacted in ways that I did not want them to act. But it didn't bother me as much as the blank faced, silent Warden.

This.  I am really, really loving the middle ground between "blank slate of nothing" like the Warden/Lone Wanderer/Courier/etc and a set protagonist like (I assume) The Witcher guy.  I do think Hawke went perhaps a bit too far in the "set protagonist" direction, given the very pre-determined background we have.  At least with Shepard we can choose a background and psych profile and generally fill in the blanks in our imaginations.  But I happen to enjoy games where the protagonist isn't an entirely blank slate.  I like being given a base to work from.

[Xewaka]

Aeowyn wrote...
Edit to add: There were times when my Shepard and Hawke reacted in ways that I did not want them to act. But it didn't bother me as much as the blank faced, silent Warden.

If they act in ways you didn't want them to act, how can they still be your character?
This is a grave problem Dragon Age 2 (and, in a lesser quantinty, the Mass Effect series) has: it doesn't correctly set up the player's frame of mind by mishandling player expectations. Should I expect to build my character? Should I expect to simply direct theirs? The game doesn't make up his mind and the player is continuously being pulled off the flow. I might be starting to feel like the character is my own for the game to suddenly slap me in the wrist and yell: "NO! Bad player! Character is ours!"

[Zjarcal]

Xewaka wrote...

Aeowyn wrote...
Edit to add: There were times when my Shepard and Hawke reacted in ways that I did not want them to act. But it didn't bother me as much as the blank faced, silent Warden.

If they act in ways you didn't want them to act, how can they still be your character?

Well, in DAO my warden was forced to do some things I wouldn't want her to do because the plot demanded it, yet I still considered her my character. To me that's no different than the occasional surprise from a voiced PC.

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

If they keep the voice, I wish they would make set protagonists, with a set personality. The middle ground thing is not working for me, except with Mike Thorton.

If you mean set protagonist like The Witcher where we can't even pick our gender, no thanks. Actually remove the thanks, just NO. This is about the only thing that could turn me off the series.

If you meant something else, then I don't know.

Aeowyn wrote...

However, I do NOT want a set personality for my protagonist like KoP suggested. I can still roleplay my Shepard and Hawke, and they both have two backgrounds and personalities that I made for them.

Indeed. If it was a set protagonist with a truly defined background (sort of like what the books do for Geralt), that would eliminate any chance of me ever feeling the character was mine in any way.

To answer the OPs question, for me it's a difficult choice. While I enjoy a voiced proganist over a silent one, I would also like the ability to play other races. 

While I don't care much for the races, I do support their inclusion if only so that those who want them don't feel alienated. I suppose they could do multiple races and have them all with the same voice if they could find a VA that was fitting. I mean, while the dalish had their unique accents, the city elves and dwarves didn't really had any unique accent that would make it weird for them to have the same voice as a human.

[RagingCyclone]

Zjarcal wrote...
While I don't care much for the races, I do support their inclusion if only so that those who want them don't feel alienated. I suppose they could do multiple races and have them all with the same voice if they could find a VA that was fitting. I mean, while the dalish had their unique accents, the city elves and dwarves didn't really had any unique accent that would make it weird for them to have the same voice as a human.

Simple fix for the bolded part...just because that Dalish clan had those accents does not mean every clan has the same accent.

Modifié par RagingCyclone, 22 août 2011 - 02:55 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

Zjarcal wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

If they keep the voice, I wish they would make set protagonists, with a set personality. The middle ground thing is not working for me, except with Mike Thorton.

If you mean set protagonist like The Witcher where we can't even pick our gender, no thanks. Actually remove the thanks, just NO. This is about the only thing that could turn me off the series.

If you meant something else, then I don't know.

The way I am thinking it could be done, is have two origins, one a male and the other a female. Ideally, both should be in the story already, so as to not waste ressources on VA 50% won't hear.  That way, people can pick their gender as well. The Origin can be much more extensive than just gender, it could be social / racial bg, personal experience...etc. So two set characters.

The only potential problem with that is class. Not sure how the mage class can be integrated in those origins. In principle, I would not mind having one PC be warrior / rogue and the other PC be strictly a mage, if it's also included in the story itself. But I can see the complications with that.

Just a suggestion / personal preference of course. I find myself being unable to truly RP Shepard and Hawke, and unable to care about them as characters because they are not set. So it's an awkward middle for me. Although that may be because of the execution of the two (and the story they are in), because like I said, I really like playing Mike Thorton, but that's mostly because he can be a magnificent bastard, so...

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 22 août 2011 - 03:15 .

[Persephone]

RagingCyclone wrote...

Zjarcal wrote...
While I don't care much for the races, I do support their inclusion if only so that those who want them don't feel alienated. I suppose they could do multiple races and have them all with the same voice if they could find a VA that was fitting. I mean, while the dalish had their unique accents, the city elves and dwarves didn't really had any unique accent that would make it weird for them to have the same voice as a human.

Simple fix for the bolded part...just because that Dalish clan had those accents does not mean every clan has the same accent.

Or hire a VO actor who can do accents. They do exist, Audible.com features the work of hundreds of them. :happy:

[Zanallen]

RagingCyclone wrote...

Simple fix for the bolded part...just because that Dalish clan had those accents does not mean every clan has the same accent.

Especially if the game is set somewhere where a specific accent is the norm.

[Persephone]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Zjarcal wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

If they keep the voice, I wish they would make set protagonists, with a set personality. The middle ground thing is not working for me, except with Mike Thorton.

If you mean set protagonist like The Witcher where we can't even pick our gender, no thanks. Actually remove the thanks, just NO. This is about the only thing that could turn me off the series.

If you meant something else, then I don't know.

The way I am thinking it could be done, is have two origins, one a male and the other a female. Ideally, both should be in the story already, so as to not waste ressources on VA 50% won't hear.  That way, people can pick their gender as well. The Origin can be much more extensive than just gender, it could be social / racial bg, personal experience...etc. So two set characters.

The only potential problem with that is class. Not sure how the mage class can be integrated in those origins. In principle, I would not mind having one PC be warrior / rogue and the other PC be strictly a mage, if it's also included in the story itself. But I can see the complications with that.

Definitely a great idea. *Persephone approves +100*