987 réponses à ce sujet

[jbrand2002uk]

Having a Voiced character is still roleplaying its just shows that your imagination is limited by your inability to adapt and as many have said the Wardens 1000 yard stare just completely broke any immersion unless your a ventriloquist as only they can speak without moving your lips hence why a 1st person perspective is more immersive in a dialogue scene as you cant see that your PC's lips aren't moving when you speak. and since all of DAO's dialogue scenes are viewing your PC in the 3rd person how is it any less of an interactive movie.

There were six choices of intent in DA2's dialogue plus the investigate option if you bothered to actually look there were 2 variations on each of the Blue,Purple and red icons depending on the intent of said choice, and you cant actually define the character yourself as the dialogue between your PC isnt written by you.

All you get to do is pick the direction and each option was pre written with an intent by the script writer hence the subtle change in the NPC's response which also has an intent allready determined by the script writer which wasnt you the individual, so the freedom of choice is an illusion, even in DAO you dont choose what happens next you simply direct it

[Pasquale1234]

jbrand2002uk wrote...
 a 1st person perspective is more immersive in a dialogue scene as you cant see that your PC's lips aren't moving when you speak. and since all of DAO's dialogue scenes are viewing your PC in the 3rd person how is it any less of an interactive movie.

Many of the scenes in DAO were over the Warden's shoulder.  Not entirely first-person, but much better than having to watch and listen to Hawke deliver the lines - which is just like watching a movie.

jbrand2002uk wrote...
even in DAO you dont choose what happens next you simply direct it

Offhand, I can't think of any occasions where the Warden said or did something that I did not direct said Warden to do.  That happened frequently with Hawke.

[jbrand2002uk]

My point being is that choice is only an illusion you don't have completely free choice in either game you can only choose from the pre determined options you are given and each choice has a pre determined intent as does each corresponding answer even on the over the shoulder viewpoint you mention you can still see that neither The Wardens jaw or lips actually move hence it broke the immersion because clearly your PC is supposed to be saying something but niether his lips, jaw or throat muscles move to reflect this.

Regardless of perspective both games are like interactive movies since you cant write the script yourself only ever choosing from a list of pre determined options so its still interactive movie just like the Dungeon and Dragon books from many years ago

[Pasquale1234]

jbrand2002uk wrote...
 The Wardens jaw or lips actually move hence it broke the immersion because clearly your PC is supposed to be saying something but niether his lips, jaw or throat muscles move to reflect this.

Never noticed, and don't care.  I'm not looking at the Warden during those over-the-shoulder shots, I'm looking at what the Warden is seeing, typically the other character with whom the Warden is having a conversation.  Just like IRL.

That is unavoidable with Hawke, unless you close your eyes and plug your ears every time Hawke speaks.

[SerraAdvocate]

I understand there's no going back on this, but I actually regret the improvements in graphics since the BG/NWN era. You can do a lot more with dialogue when the graphics aren't good enough to zoom in on a character's face and actually watch his or her lips move as they speak.

Now everything has to be voiced - the NPCs; the player character. It is becoming more cinematic - and that's less a consequence a change in style and more a consequence of improvements in graphics technology, IMO.

[jbrand2002uk]

That really my point for the best part of a decade the technology has been available for a characters mouth to move when they speak while some games have done lipsynching better than others by the time DAO game out this was commonplace in games from multiple genres played in the 3rd person perspective.

So why it wasnt done in DAO is beyond me because during conversations when you could see The Wardens Face or part of it and he was supposed to be speaking he just stood there like his/her jaw had been wired shut.Which ruined all the immersion because when you speak at the very least your lips move and last time i looked the Warden wasnt a ventriloquist was he ?

The lack of a voice didnt bother me just the fact he didnt even move his lips when he/she is supposed to be speaking, just stands there with the 100 yard stare while waving his arms about and shrugging his shoulders, i mean if they can make arms and fingers move surely its not too much to ask for at least the lips to move when they speak even if you cant hear a voice

[Nette]

Pasquale1234 wrote...

Nette wrote...
I still felt that Hawke was my character, sure I felt that way about the warden to but I still feel...idk "more" for Hawke. I created them both how I wanted them but Hawke comes alive in a whole different way because she has a voice. And about the VA being limited by budget...sure some (most probably) games have those limitations but I don't see Bioware doing that anytime soon, their games has ALOT of dialouge in them and they're known for the great casting of VAs. I don't think they would mess that up just to save a few bucks.

For many of us who prefer the non-voiced protagonist, it has nothing to do with the quality of the VA.  It has everything to do with role-playing versus watching an interactive movie.  The more I see and hear the protag on the screen, the less I am able to see the world through her eyes and put myself in her shoes.  Watching a movie is a very different experience from actually taking part in one (role-playing).

Replayability is also a factor, but then I guess that would always be a factor with a preset character like Hawke.  The point is, every single Hawke you might want to try to play will deliver the same line in exactly the same way as any other Hawke who delivered that line.

The Warden has often been called a blank slate - which, to me, is a very good thing.  It means that I can define a character concept and see the world, other characters, events, the entire journey - through the eyes of that character.  That, to me, is what role-playing is all about.

That said, I do understand that some people really do prefer to watch and hear the protag acting out everything on screen.  It is an entirely different experience than role-playing, imho.

It's still roleplaying. The MC doesn't need to be mute for it to be an RPG, and saying it's an interactive movie is kinda insulting to the creators, and the players. You make it sound like we just sit on our asses doing nothing but watch and that's not the case. And DA2 certainly doesn't fit the description of an interactive movie, I have played that kind of game. Heavy Rain is in my opinion a much more suitable game for that description (and I think Quantic Dream intended for it to be seen that way to) and it's nothing like DA2.

And the replayability in DA2 is quite good. And what you said about different Hawkes saying the exact same thing in all playthroughs is not true. Sure if you play the exact same way, choosing the exact same conversation options, then yes it will be the same as the other times (obviously), but Hawke changes her tone depending on your choises.
If you choose to play Hawke as a joker, never taking anything seriously, then her responses will reflect that in most of her conversations. Same goes for aggressive Hawke, even her funny responses sound a little more intimidating than usual. I was quite (happily) surprised when I realised this after a few playthroughs.

[RagingCyclone]

jbrand2002uk wrote...

That really my point for the best part of a decade the technology has been available for a characters mouth to move when they speak while some games have done lipsynching better than others by the time DAO game out this was commonplace in games from multiple genres played in the 3rd person perspective.

So why it wasnt done in DAO is beyond me because during conversations when you could see The Wardens Face or part of it and he was supposed to be speaking he just stood there like his/her jaw had been wired shut.Which ruined all the immersion because when you speak at the very least your lips move and last time i looked the Warden wasnt a ventriloquist was he ?

The lack of a voice didnt bother me just the fact he didnt even move his lips when he/she is supposed to be speaking, just stands there with the 100 yard stare while waving his arms about and shrugging his shoulders, i mean if they can make arms and fingers move surely its not too much to ask for at least the lips to move when they speak even if you cant hear a voice

Why wasn't it done? Because newer is not always better.  Sometimes newer goes in the wrong direction, and sometimes a step back is needed to correct a mistake. Not saying that is the case with the DA series (devs already stated not stepping back), but you keep hounding that the style was old and stale...that's your preference. Some like myself prefer the silent over the voiced. You say you lose immersion with silent, I say silent is more immersive. You say voiced is more immersive, I say I feel like a director shouting "action" when I select an option. It's a matter of taste and preference in style.  See the difference here? It isn't lack of imagination or intelligence or any other contrived explanation other than the simple fact that some people like to play their protagonists differently than others. 

[LordKinoda]

I would argue that each dialogue option in DA:O had an implied intent. You might want to roleplay the line as being said one way or the other, but the writer had a clear tone and intent in mind when he wrote the line and that intent and tone are matched by the corresponding NPC response. In fact, it has been shown before that a vast number of the conversations in DA:O can be broken down to the three primary tones.

Nice to see that I'm not alone in this realization, heh. I mentioned this very same thing a few pages back in this thread.

Even so, thats 6 intents. DAO has infinite intents, because it isn't limited to having a set intent with an emoticon, just whatever the conversation calls for, absolute freedom. Of coarse, only a maximum of 6 options can be said, but the 3-6 lines with intent in this part of the cvonvetsation are entirely different in the next part of the conversation, and so on. DA2 has only 6 to work with, and its mostly just good, funny, bad. I disliked the sarcastic intent because it felt like it was too shoehorned and forced, just because they have an intent option to be funny there. In DAO, the funny lines didn't at all feel forced or shoehorned to me.

^Read the above quote. The intents are HARDLY infinite, heh. It just seems like it has a lot more because the the icons are not present as I said. In fact, I'm currently playing DAO, I'll give a deeper analyzing of the tree to pull intents out the lines, and their placing as well (to see if the "good guy" lines fall into the top slots "bad guy" bottom and so on and so forth).

[LordKinoda]

Now let's remind ourselves of the 6 options present in DA2. They are: diplomatic, sarcastic, direct, helpful, charming, and aggresive.

After the Warden's first darkspawn dream.

It seemed so real... (Diplomatic)
It must of been something I ate. (Sarcasm)
Why are you bothering me ? I'm fine. (Aggresive)

The archdemon ? Is that the dragon ? (Diplomatic)
Why didn't Duncan just tell everyone that ? (Direct)
Are these dreams going to happen alot ? (Diplomatic)

I'm not frieghtened. (Aggresive)
Any other surprises I should know about ? (Sarcasm)
You could of told me earlier. (Direct)
Thank you Alistair. I appreciate it. (Diplomatic)


-Do you want to talk about Duncan ?

I just thought you might want to talk. (Diplomatic)
That doesn't mean I don't mourn his loss. (Helpful)
He was like a father to you, I understand. (Helpful)
Good. I don't want you falling apart again. (Aggresive)

No harm done Alistair. (Helpful)
There's no need to apologize. (Diplomatic)
Yes, well, let's forget about it. (Direct)
Just don't let it happen again. (Aggresive)

What about the other grey wardens ? (Helpful)
He had you. (Diplomatic)
That's an excellent idea. (Helpful)
I doubt you'll get the chance. (Aggresive)

No, I understand completely. (Diplomatic)
He saved your life by sending you to the tower. (Helpful)
Yes, that is stupid. You'd be dead. (Aggresive)

I've lost enough to know what you're going through. (Helpful)
No, not really. Not since I went to the tower. (Diplomatic)
I'd rather not talk about it to be honest. (Direct)

Anytime Alistair. (Helpful)
Maybe I'll go to Highever with you. When you go. (Helpful)
He was a friend of mine too. (Diplomatic)
Yes, well, just don't tell anyone. (Direct)
Let's get going. (Diplomatic)

-I have a question.

Why did you come to Fereldan ? (Diplomatic)

What was the question. (Diplomatic)
You came all this way for that ? (Sarcasm)
What was the answer ? (Diplomatic)

Don't you have to report back then ? (Helpful)
What's an arishok ? (Diplomatic)
Why would the qunari care about the Blight ? (Direct)

Why does he care about the Blight ? (Diplomatic)
So he's your king ? (Diplomatic)
Did you find an answer to his question ? (Diplomatic)

Don't you have to report back then ? (Helpful)
What was the answer ? (Diplomatic)
Why would the qunari care about the Blight ? (Direct)

So what are you still doing here then ? (Direct)
When are you going to do that ? (Diplomatic)
Well, I can see you're right on top of that. (Sarcasm)

Why not ? (Diplomatic)
I'm sorry. (Diplomatic)
Well you can stay with us. (Helpful)

-So life in the wilds must of been very lonely

And did they speak back ? (Sarcasm)
And that seemed normal to you ? (Sarcasm)
But eventually you left ? (Diplomatic)
That sounds wonderful. (Helpful)

So you were a theif ? (Aggresive)
I can't imagine Flemeth was pleased. (Direct)
What happened next ? (Diplomatic)

But you were just a child. (Diplomatic)
I have a hard time picturing you heartbroken. (Sarcasm)
Flemeth was right, no doubt. (Direct)

I feel sorry for you. (Helpful)
But you don't need to live that way any longer. (Diplomatic)
They made you stronger didn't they ? (Direct)
Those are harsh lessons to teach a child. (Diplomatic)

Notice how I can apply any of the six intents from DA2. Infinite intents in DAO eh ? Yeah. As I said before, it just SEEMED like it had more because there aren't any icons to tell you so. Granted that 'charming' didn't get used in this sampling, but that's irrelevant because currently there aren't options for me to flirt with companions. I could do this with ALL the dialog in the game if I wanted to, I think this sampling here suffices though.

Please, pull a sampling out yourself to prove me wrong. I want to see these limitless intents you claim are there.

[KLUME777]

LordKinoda wrote...

Even so, thats 6 intents. DAO has infinite intents, because it isn't limited to having a set intent with an emoticon, just whatever the conversation calls for, absolute freedom. Of coarse, only a maximum of 6 options can be said, but the 3-6 lines with intent in this part of the cvonvetsation are entirely different in the next part of the conversation, and so on. DA2 has only 6 to work with, and its mostly just good, funny, bad. I disliked the sarcastic intent because it felt like it was too shoehorned and forced, just because they have an intent option to be funny there. In DAO, the funny lines didn't at all feel forced or shoehorned to me.

^Read the above quote. The intents are HARDLY infinite, heh. It just seems like it has a lot more because the the icons are not present as I said. In fact, I'm currently playing DAO, I'll give a deeper analyzing of the tree to pull intents out the lines, and their placing as well (to see if the "good guy" lines fall into the top slots "bad guy" bottom and so on and so forth).

Actually, i was refering to the writers intent when i said that. The writer is not bound by needing a diplomatic option simply because its on the wheel. He can use all of the infinite intents at any time, anywhere on the conversation. DA2 has 6, total, DAO has infinite because its not bound by the wheel or the emoticons.

[KLUME777]

LordKinoda wrote...

Now let's remind ourselves of the 6 options present in DA2. They are: diplomatic, sarcastic, direct, helpful, charming, and aggresive.

After the Warden's first darkspawn dream.

It seemed so real... (Diplomatic)
It must of been something I ate. (Sarcasm)
Why are you bothering me ? I'm fine. (Aggresive)

The archdemon ? Is that the dragon ? (Diplomatic)
Why didn't Duncan just tell everyone that ? (Direct)
Are these dreams going to happen alot ? (Diplomatic)

I'm not frieghtened. (Aggresive)
Any other surprises I should know about ? (Sarcasm)
You could of told me earlier. (Direct)
Thank you Alistair. I appreciate it. (Diplomatic)

First, how is the first option diplomatic? Its not, and the first aggressive isn't aggresive either, the Warden is being reclusive. The direct option is not direct, its questioning, in fact, all of those options don't fit the intent you gave them at all. Also, you put more diplomatics on the middle, something that wouldn't be allowed because of the wheel, plus there are 4 options on the bottom, which automatically makes it superior to the Wheel, seeing as how investigate is just questions to get exposition, not any active dialogue, unlike the tree.

-Do you want to talk about Duncan ?

I just thought you might want to talk. (Diplomatic)
That doesn't mean I don't mourn his loss. (Helpful)
He was like a father to you, I understand. (Helpful)
Good. I don't want you falling apart again. (Aggresive)

No harm done Alistair. (Helpful)
There's no need to apologize. (Diplomatic)
Yes, well, let's forget about it. (Direct)
Just don't let it happen again. (Aggresive)

What about the other grey wardens ? (Helpful)
He had you. (Diplomatic)
That's an excellent idea. (Helpful)
I doubt you'll get the chance. (Aggresive)

No, I understand completely. (Diplomatic)
He saved your life by sending you to the tower. (Helpful)
Yes, that is stupid. You'd be dead. (Aggresive)

I've lost enough to know what you're going through. (Helpful)
No, not really. Not since I went to the tower. (Diplomatic)
I'd rather not talk about it to be honest. (Direct)

Anytime Alistair. (Helpful)
Maybe I'll go to Highever with you. When you go. (Helpful)
He was a friend of mine too. (Diplomatic)
Yes, well, just don't tell anyone. (Direct)
Let's get going. (Diplomatic)

-I have a question.

Why did you come to Fereldan ? (Diplomatic)

What was the question. (Diplomatic)
You came all this way for that ? (Sarcasm)
What was the answer ? (Diplomatic)

Don't you have to report back then ? (Helpful)
What's an arishok ? (Diplomatic)
Why would the qunari care about the Blight ? (Direct)

Why does he care about the Blight ? (Diplomatic)
So he's your king ? (Diplomatic)
Did you find an answer to his question ? (Diplomatic)

Don't you have to report back then ? (Helpful)
What was the answer ? (Diplomatic)
Why would the qunari care about the Blight ? (Direct)

So what are you still doing here then ? (Direct)
When are you going to do that ? (Diplomatic)
Well, I can see you're right on top of that. (Sarcasm)

Why not ? (Diplomatic)
I'm sorry. (Diplomatic)
Well you can stay with us. (Helpful)

-So life in the wilds must of been very lonely

And did they speak back ? (Sarcasm)
And that seemed normal to you ? (Sarcasm)
But eventually you left ? (Diplomatic)
That sounds wonderful. (Helpful)

So you were a theif ? (Aggresive)
I can't imagine Flemeth was pleased. (Direct)
What happened next ? (Diplomatic)

But you were just a child. (Diplomatic)
I have a hard time picturing you heartbroken. (Sarcasm)
Flemeth was right, no doubt. (Direct)

I feel sorry for you. (Helpful)
But you don't need to live that way any longer. (Diplomatic)
They made you stronger didn't they ? (Direct)
Those are harsh lessons to teach a child. (Diplomatic)

Notice how I can apply any of the six intents from DA2. Infinite intents in DAO eh ? Yeah. As I said before, it just SEEMED like it had more because there aren't any icons to tell you so. Granted that 'charming' didn't get used in this sampling, but that's irrelevant because currently there aren't options for me to flirt with companions. I could do this with ALL the dialog in the game if I wanted to, I think this sampling here suffices though.

Please, pull a sampling out yourself to prove me wrong. I want to see these limitless intents you claim are there.

Most of your intents are wrong or barely apply, plus, there are multiple of the same intent on the same line, something thats impossible in DA2, and there are also a lot more than DA2's usual 3 options + investigate.

In fact, the above just proves that there are more intents than 6, because many of the options don't fit the intents you gave, because there are more than 6. It also proves its better because you even listed the same intent twice on a line, and more than 3 options, which DA2 can't do.

Modifié par KLUME777, 25 septembre 2011 - 05:20 .

[LordKinoda]

First, how is the first option diplomatic? Its not, and the first aggressive isn't aggresive either, the Warden is being reclusive. The direct option is not direct, its questioning, in fact, all of those options don't fit the intent you gave them at all.

I would hardly call that line reclusive, but to each his own, and in the end irrelevant because Alistair only replies a certain way to the line. I was more applying DA2's intents to DAO lines to show they're not too far apart. Sure some of them can skew a little more to another intent, but it's still basically similar.

Also, you put more diplomatics on the middle, something that wouldn't be allowed because of the wheel

Oh indeed. But the wheel has the investigative questions more on the left side to open up new strands as opposed to just throwing every line together in one lump.

plus there are 4 options on the bottom, which automatically makes it superior to the Wheel, seeing as how investigate is just questions to get exposition, not any active dialogue, unlike the tree.

Not always. As I said, sometimes they just open up new strands, it's not always exposition.

It also proves its better because you even listed the same intent twice on a line, and more than 3 options, which DA2 can't do.

It's actually more overkill than anything. No reason to write another line when it still means the same thing and the NPC will still respond the same. The dialog wheel isn't perfect as I've said, but I'm more than willing to deal with it's faults if it means I get a voiced protagonist.

Actually, i was refering to the writers intent when i said that. The writer is not bound by needing a diplomatic option simply because its on the wheel. He can use all of the infinite intents at any time, anywhere on the conversation. DA2 has 6, total, DAO has infinite because its not bound by the wheel or the emoticons.

You are completely ignoring what I, and the other poster said in that quote. IT DOESN'T MATTER what intent you want to put on a line because the NPC's only respond a certain way to it. Period. Why is that hard to understand ? You are not the only person who doesn't comprehend this apparently. Adding your own idiosyncrasies to the Warden is all well and good for fan fiction, but it just can't matter for the game because the writers can't account for each and every player's personal choice. Hence the inherent limitation as making the NPC's respond only a certain way to a given line.

Modifié par LordKinoda, 25 septembre 2011 - 06:08 .

[KLUME777]

LordKinoda wrote...

Actually, i was refering to the writers intent when i said that. The writer is not bound by needing a diplomatic option simply because its on the wheel. He can use all of the infinite intents at any time, anywhere on the conversation. DA2 has 6, total, DAO has infinite because its not bound by the wheel or the emoticons.

You are completely ignoring what I, and the other poster said in that quote. IT DOESN'T MATTER what intent you want to put on a line because the NPC's only respond a certain way to it. Period. Why is that hard to understand ? You are not the only person who doesn't comprehend this apparently. Adding your own idiosyncrasies to the Warden is all well and good for fan fiction, but it just can't matter for the game because the writers can't account for each and every player's personal choice. Hence the inherent limitation as making the NPC's respond only a certain way to a given line.

See underlined.

I was refering to the writers (ie. David Gaider) intent for the line they write. Perhaps they feel this dialogue options need a defensive intent, but they can't have that in DA2, yet they can in DAO because it isnt bound by 6 intents. And no, the investigate option is mostly exposition. DAO often has more than 4 lines than DA2 uses investigate for anything other than exposition. And what you said about 4 being too many is bullcrap. DAO's dialogue is all quality dialogue, and more=better.

[Aradace]

Actually KLUME, Im not sure if your previous post was mentioning this or not but, you DO realize there are more than 3 "intents" in DA2's system right?  Because your post on the matter could go either way.  Just in case YOU actually know but others dont, allow me to actually post all SIX "intents" in the DA2 system:

*Helpful/Good
*Diplomatic
*Snarky/Sarcastic
*Charming
*Rude/Direct
*Agressive.

Again, I may have read your post wrong on the matter but it seemed to me that you were trying to claim that DA2s system only has 3 "intents" as you call them in the dialog tree when in fact that is completely untrue.  If not, then I read it wrong which wouldnt be the first time lol

Edit: Actually, I see that you did mention something about that so yea, it's more for the folks who think there are ONLY 3.  Regardless, Origins dialog tree being superior is far from being a universal fact.  Now, if they did DA2s more like it was in Deus Ex: HR, then yea, I think alot more people would have been "happier" with it.

Modifié par Aradace, 25 septembre 2011 - 12:54 .

[jbrand2002uk]

Bigger isnt always better you can be the biggest hardest most muscular man in the universe yet you can still be floored by a midget punching you in the nuts enough said

Modifié par jbrand2002uk, 25 septembre 2011 - 12:54 .

[KLUME777]

jbrand2002uk wrote...

Bigger isnt always better you can be the biggest hardest most muscular man in the universe yet you can still be floored by a midget punching you in the nuts enough said

Thats why i said DAO had quality dialogue made better by my imagined voice, so more of that quality dialogue=better in DAO's case.

[Pasquale1234]

Nette wrote...

Pasquale1234 wrote...

Nette wrote...
I still felt that Hawke was my character, sure I felt that way about the warden to but I still feel...idk "more" for Hawke. I created them both how I wanted them but Hawke comes alive in a whole different way because she has a voice. And about the VA being limited by budget...sure some (most probably) games have those limitations but I don't see Bioware doing that anytime soon, their games has ALOT of dialouge in them and they're known for the great casting of VAs. I don't think they would mess that up just to save a few bucks.

For many of us who prefer the non-voiced protagonist, it has nothing to do with the quality of the VA.  It has everything to do with role-playing versus watching an interactive movie.  The more I see and hear the protag on the screen, the less I am able to see the world through her eyes and put myself in her shoes.  Watching a movie is a very different experience from actually taking part in one (role-playing).

Replayability is also a factor, but then I guess that would always be a factor with a preset character like Hawke.  The point is, every single Hawke you might want to try to play will deliver the same line in exactly the same way as any other Hawke who delivered that line.

The Warden has often been called a blank slate - which, to me, is a very good thing.  It means that I can define a character concept and see the world, other characters, events, the entire journey - through the eyes of that character.  That, to me, is what role-playing is all about.

That said, I do understand that some people really do prefer to watch and hear the protag acting out everything on screen.  It is an entirely different experience than role-playing, imho.

It's still roleplaying. The MC doesn't need to be mute for it to be an RPG, and saying it's an interactive movie is kinda insulting to the creators, and the players. You make it sound like we just sit on our asses doing nothing but watch and that's not the case. And DA2 certainly doesn't fit the description of an interactive movie, I have played that kind of game. Heavy Rain is in my opinion a much more suitable game for that description (and I think Quantic Dream intended for it to be seen that way to) and it's nothing like DA2.

Sorry if you feel insulted; that was certainly not my intention.  This thread is specifically about voiced protag, though, and I was not addressing any other aspects of playing the game.

It is, however, true that during every dialog, the player chooses a response and then watches and listens to Hawke deliver the chosen response.  There are times when Hawke will continue the conversation without any further prompting from the player.  In my playthrough, I also found some occasions where merely clicking on an NPC would cause Hawke to say something to that NPC.  I feel that "interactive movie" is an accurate description of the way dialog is handled.

And the replayability in DA2 is quite good. And what you said about different Hawkes saying the exact same thing in all playthroughs is not true. Sure if you play the exact same way, choosing the exact same conversation options, then yes it will be the same as the other times (obviously), but Hawke changes her tone depending on your choises.
If you choose to play Hawke as a joker, never taking anything seriously, then her responses will reflect that in most of her conversations. Same goes for aggressive Hawke, even her funny responses sound a little more intimidating than usual. I was quite (happily) surprised when I realised this after a few playthroughs.

I was not as appreciative of that as you seem to be, because I felt it placed additional restrictions on how the player can choose to respond to any given situation.  There are times when, for example, a person who is typically assertive / aggressive might prefer to be diplomatic in a given situation, and I feel that limiting those options restricts role-playing.

My original statement "every single Hawke you might want to try to play will deliver the same
line in exactly the same way as any other Hawke who delivered that line." is accurate.

[Oopsieoops]

LordKinoda wrote...
You are completely ignoring what I, and the other poster said in that quote. IT DOESN'T MATTER what intent you want to put on a line because the NPC's only respond a certain way to it. Period. Why is that hard to understand ?

Why is it so hard to understand that how the NPC reacts is completely immaterial? Any conversation in which the listener perfectly interprets the speaker's intent is unrealistic, and IMO quite frankly boring.

[esper]

Oopsieoops wrote...

LordKinoda wrote...
You are completely ignoring what I, and the other poster said in that quote. IT DOESN'T MATTER what intent you want to put on a line because the NPC's only respond a certain way to it. Period. Why is that hard to understand ?

Why is it so hard to understand that how the NPC reacts is completely immaterial? Any conversation in which the listener perfectly interprets the speaker's intent is unrealistic, and IMO quite frankly boring.

Yes, but it gets equally boring if he the listner never gets the character right.

[Maconbar]

Oopsieoops wrote...

LordKinoda wrote...
You are completely ignoring what I, and the other poster said in that quote. IT DOESN'T MATTER what intent you want to put on a line because the NPC's only respond a certain way to it. Period. Why is that hard to understand ?

Why is it so hard to understand that how the NPC reacts is completely immaterial? Any conversation in which the listener perfectly interprets the speaker's intent is unrealistic, and IMO quite frankly boring.

Conversations don't have to have 100% comprehension. I am not sure why sure would use that as a benchmark. How the NPC reacts/interprets a comment is material, otherwise it's not communication.

[Chari]

I prefer the silent one. It's my character, it's me. Not some Hawke, okay? It sounds cool in ME, but ME was ALWAYS a game with voiced main hero. DA:O wasn't

[vallore]

As I see it, the issue with voiced protagonist in DA2, as I see it, is fourfold:

 It sets the character possible answers  in a far narrower range than a mute character allows.  The simple fact that the answers were only in written form in previous games, allowed for more answer variations to be available in Origins.

Now, often you can only be diplomatic, sarcastic or aggressive. Previous possible nuances are now lost to the player.

The greater number of choices available the easier it becomes to role play a character, and choices are something that, currently, is easier to provide with a silent character.

A second problem is that by association with the paraphrases, dialogue became far less clear. It is now a guess work to identify what the character is actually going to say as the paraphrases and icons are, more often than not, unclear about what are the goals, (and even more the motivations) that are associated with any given answer.

A third problem is associated with the dominant personality mechanism introduced. It conflicts with the role play of any player that doesn’t want to make is character strictly “diplomatic”, “sarcastic” or “aggressive” by enforcing itself without regard to the  player’s preferences and style or role play consistency. (ie. A character can be friendly with those that he likes, sarcastic with those that he doesn’t, aggressive in certain situations, etc).

Lastly, it is plain impossible to provide a voice(s) for the player character that will satisfy all. At best, it can be hoped that the tone, style, accent, and other factors, please the greater number of players while not displeasing many. It can be said that, for those that appreciate a voiced character, the absence of voice results in a equally displeasing experience, but there is a fundamental difference:

The absence of voice is neutral, it does not carry within it a number of factors that actively restrict role play, (a particular style, personality, etc), the voice is not, and enforces a number of characteristics into the character that may not be those the player desires, and cause it to be far less
fun to the unfortunate player that so dislikes the provided voices, (and at
worse may even make the game unplayable).

 

Now all of this doen’t means Bioware is wrong about introducing a voiced character, but I do believe these are serious issues that are associated with it, and require serious attention in future games.

[bobthecrusher]

I do not enjoy voiced protagonists. It is an opinion, people either want a more cinematic storyline, or one that allows you to feel more in the place of the character. My main problem is that the wheel doesn't work right, you choose one thing, and hawke just says whatever he feels like, in ME (maybe it was just that I was used to it) but it seemed that shepard at least said something close to the line you chose in the dialogue wheel, perfect example of this are the jokes, there'd be the sarcastic option (with an honestly funny line) and when you choose it it butchers it into some shoehorned pun.

Once again, I agree with some of the people before me in that the wheel is just a lazy tool to be able to limit your options. If a list is given it can be anything from 1-5 lines easily, and if there's a store or an investigation line to go down even more, but with the wheel you are limited to a total of 10, if every possible spot is open, which it typically isn't. (IMO: DA:O had far too limited choices as well, one of its many flaws)

my point is that I don't like a voiced protagonist because of how little immersion i can find and how little customization it gives.

[Joy Divison]

vallore wrote...

The absence of voice is neutral, it does not carry within it a number of factors that actively restrict role play, (a particular style, personality, etc), the voice is not, and enforces a number of characteristics into the character that may not be those the player desires, and cause it to be far less
fun to the unfortunate player that so dislikes the provided voices, (and at
worse may even make the game unplayable).

Wrong.  The absence of voice makes the protagonist an apathetic mute who just stares blankly while the "red shirts," generic NPCs, and other nobodies are brought to life.

That is not "neutral" that is stupid.  IMHO.

Talk about unplayable.