987 réponses à ce sujet

[Pasquale1234]

LordKinoda wrote...

The voice files themselves consume space on the disk, which limits how much other content they can deliver on said disk.

Then they could of have  had TWO discs like Mass Effect did. Or 3, or 4 like Final Fantasy VII. Blaming the voice actors for the dip in quality of the game is just an asinine argument plain and simple.

Misconstruing a simple factual statement into something other than what it actually says and then labeling the resulting mutated version asinine is just asinine plain and simple.

Modifié par Pasquale1234, 10 octobre 2011 - 01:17 .

[LordKinoda]

I'd say games like ME and DA2 have a LOT more than just two voice-actors.

OBVIOUSLY games have more than two voice actors. ALL games do. Let me amend that. All modern games. But these TWO, the protagonists, are the ones that pertain to this thread, and cover a decent amount of content for the game.

Misconstruing a simple factual statement into something other than what it actually says and then labeling the resulting mutated version asinine is just asinine plain and simple.

Riiiight.So you're saying it's just entirely impossible to make a great game that has voice actors in the protagonist slot simply because it takes up too much memory; thusly diminishing the game on the whole no matter what you do ?

Hmm. Yeah. Right. Tell that to Mass Effect 2, which sold 2 million copies in it's first week. It CAN be done. Or am I missing something you've said ?

[GodWood]

LordKinoda wrote...

He didn't say DA2's failings were because of wasted resources on voicing the protaganist.
He said voicing the protaganist uses a significant amount of resources that could be used to improve other aspects of the game.

And that is completely true.

Heh. That's just a different way to say it. You are still blaming, if only partially, the voice actors pay on the dip in quality of the rest of the game.

No I am not.
I'm not even stating my opinion on DA2.

I'm simply stating a fact.

LordKinoda wrote...
Riiiight.So you're saying it's just entirely impossible to make a great game that has voice actors in the protagonist slot simply because it takes up too much memory; thusly diminishing the game on the whole no matter what you do ?

That's not what he is saying at all.

Seriously dude, either you're trolling or your comprehension skills are terrible.

[LordKinoda]

He didn't say DA2's failings were because of wasted resources on voicing the protaganist.
He said voicing the protaganist uses a significant amount of resources that could be used to improve other aspects of the game.

And that is completely true.

Opinion.

No I am not.
I'm not even stating my opinion on DA2.

I'm simply stating a fact.

Opinion.

Seriously dude, either you're trolling or your comprehension skills are terrible.

Opinion. Spare me with the troll mierda.

[GodWood]

.... Ok. I'll spell it out for you one last time.

~ Bioware has X resources for a game.
~ Voicing the protaganist (twice for male and female) costs Y resources.
~ Not voicing the protaganist allows you to keep Y resources and spend them somewhere else.

That is it. That is the point.

Modifié par GodWood, 11 octobre 2011 - 04:39 .

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

It's not opinion.

It's debatable whether having a voice protagonist is a net positive or a net negative, but it does use a significant amount of resources that could possibly be used to improve other aspects of the game.

Just because you think it's a net positive doesn't mean you can ignore the reality of it.

http://www.ausgamers...es/read/3106069

Ken: Ah no, because what the audience wants is a polished product, and it turns out that if you wanted to make an experimental role-playing game, you could not make a modern looking one or a modern feeling one. For example: let’s talk in the abstract about the worst thing that ever happened to role-playing games is recorded audio for dialogue. I happen to believe that was the death of my joy. Because that limits... that causes production things... the content has to be nailed down at a certain point.

So [voiced] text is not easily revisable. As I play, text is easily revisable; audio isn’t. As I play, I want to make tiny little changes to the tone, to the feel of things, but you can’t do that when you have all this audio -- oh my god, all the audio that we have to record! So what I’m going to say is: for what the audience wants, we are forced to create these things that are very brittle, that cannot be revised.

That's for voice acting in general, but it's equally applicable for a protagonist (if not more so).

Modifié par mrcrusty, 11 octobre 2011 - 04:33 .

[Morroian]

mrcrusty wrote...

Just because you think it's a net positive doesn't mean you can ignore the reality of it.

http://www.ausgamers...es/read/3106069

Interesting interview I understand what he's saying about voice acting in rpgs but I still like good voice acting in games, it enhances my personal experience. 

To go off on a tangent I found this to be an interesting point given the criticism of DA2 combat:
"Ken: Reckoning has got the best combat in an RPG and it’s the best pacing of any combat in an RPG -- the best theatre. And what I hope to do is... I always felt that RPGs are kind of slow paced and it’s kind of an artifact of the table-top, to the turn-based level, to the pretty good movement, but not very good combat of modern third-person games. 

So what I’m hoping is, that by having good combat -- which is exciting and satisfying -- we will increase the pace of gameplay in some way, and the mean-spirited expectations of the users so that they will start insisting that we have faster-paced games -- which, personally, I just want to play faster-paced role-playing games. "

[LordKinoda]

I never said that they couldn't theoretically use the money they pay the voice actors on other things More that it can't be such a significant amount of money to adversely effect development monetarily. Most especially with big daddy EA to back them nowadays.

Does it limit how the story can be told ? A little. Does it script the character more ? Yes. But are these hurdles that cannot be vaulted or circumvented ? NO.

Multiple discs for the increased memory. They can spend more money, or even less on other aspects of the game and still come out with an awesome game.

Money is NOT to blame for DA2's failure. That's what I'm saying.

"They didn't give the art/designer/coder/tester departments the money they used to have because they have to pay those hoity-toity voice actors out of their budget."

That's how your statements are coming across to me. And it's just garbage.

Like I said, I can see how some aspects are more limited when using a voice actor, but to blame it on their pay, like it's taking it away from the rest the developers, is just silly. They have WAY more than enough money to pay BOTH the actors and the development teams all the money they need to make a great game. They just dropped the ball with DA2. Period.

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

Morroian wrote...

snip

That's fine, but in the statement I quoted, he's expressing a reality/truth whereas in yours, he's expressing an opinion.

I personally can't see a party based RTwP system being remotely enjoyable and satisfying from a "visceral" or "action" point of view. If that's work they're going for, best to ditch it altogether and go full Action ala Elder Scrolls, Mass Effect, Witcher 2 and Rolston's own Reckoning.

Otherwise, take the choreographed method and make it fun to watch ala KotOR. Synced combat speed and animations, with more elaborate looking moves as your character grows in proficiency.

LordKinoda wrote...
snip

If you're talking to me, that's moving the goalposts and putting words in my mouth. Voicing has nothing to do with the final success or failure of Dragon Age 2, but it presents a very real limitation in writing scripts and designing the narrative and various scenarios, which goes without saying that without said voicing, more resources and/or work could be dedicated to those areas.

If you're not directing that at me, lol oh well.

Modifié par mrcrusty, 11 octobre 2011 - 05:14 .

[LordKinoda]

Otherwise, take the choreographed method and make it fun to watch ala KotOR.

Don't get me wrong, I'm a very HUGE Star Wars fan, and I still consider KOTOR to be in my top five favorite games of all time (this includes all the way back to '85 mind you).

But even while I was playing KOTOR for the first time I found it's combat animations to get old rather quickly. This was one of the better addition/changes that DA2 had IMO. More for the mages than the rogues or warriors anyway. Their unrealistic animations are a whole other can of worms.

but it presents a very real limitation in writing scripts and designing the narrative and various scenarios

Didn't I just say this ?

that without said voicing, more resources and/or work could be dedicated to those areas.

Heh, I just can't agree on this. No way is it such a significant force of labor to ADversely affect the game in a major way.

"They are spending so much time and effort on the voice protagonist that they have to completely ignore and/or scrap other important details."

Why is it so impossible to do BOTH. Implement the voiced protagonist and still crank out the other mechanics of the game with great skill ?

Modifié par LordKinoda, 11 octobre 2011 - 05:21 .

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

Out of sync combat was much worse than the over the top animations imo. It not only looks awkward, it throws tactical thinking out of the window in terms of things like queueing up moves. It also encourages things like HP bloat or a disparity between the party and enemies - something that ought to be discouraged in RPGs.

In terms of KotOR combat getting old, I'd say that's mostly because there weren't that many animations. It's 2011 now, with things like MoCap technology, I don't doubt that with enough time, you could get in double or triple the amount of combat animation sequences.

[LordKinoda]

In terms of KotOR combat getting old, I'd say that's mostly because there weren't that many animations. It's 2011 now, with things like MoCap technology, I don't doubt that with enough time, you could get in double or triple the amount of combat animation sequences.

Oh indeed. That's why I said then, while I was playing it. All these remakes they have for games nowadays, they should seriously consider re-doing KOTOR. Most especially since KOTOR 3 will never be made. Not with all the time and energy they put into TOR. I hope that book closes out Revan's story nice and tight without a lot of open ends, heh.

[GodWood]

LordKinoda wrote...
Money is NOT to blame for DA2's failure. That's what I'm saying.

"They didn't give the art/designer/coder/tester departments the money they used to have because they have to pay those hoity-toity voice actors out of their budget."

That's how your statements are coming across to me. And it's just garbage.

And nobody is saying such statemates hence why I was criticizing your comprehension skills.

This is a thread about whether people would prefer a voiced or silent protaganist for DA3.
As someone pointed out a positive for the silent protaganist is that resources that could be spent voicing the character can be spent other places and improve other aspects of the game.

That is it.

[Lotion Soronarr]

A a voiced protagonist limits the plot/script/dialogue, as recording has to be made early and changes cannot be made after that easily.

Writer1: "Dang, this conversation sucks. What was Ithinking when we wrote this. I got a far better idea here."
Writer2: "Too late now. Recording is done. We won be flying the in voice actor for a few more lines."

*repat many times*

[BGMcDF]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

A a voiced protagonist limits the plot/script/dialogue, as recording has to be made early and changes cannot be made after that easily.

Writer1: "Dang, this conversation sucks. What was Ithinking when we wrote this. I got a far better idea here."
Writer2: "Too late now. Recording is done. We won be flying the in voice actor for a few more lines."

*repat many times*

I'm relatively certain voice-overs can be done cross-country so long as there are proper recording studios on each side of the transmission and the connection is satisfactory. I believe it was done in American Dad (for Patrick Stewart's character, Avery Bullock), to name a particular instance.

If an issue like this arises, it'd be because of scheduling conflicts with the voice actor, or a budget thing. Take this with a shaker of salt, naturally.

As for the topic, I prefer a voiced protagonist. It adds some presence to the conversation. If you make a decision quickly simply because it seems natural for you or your character, often it feels as if the character you converse with is talking to themselves. Moreover, with a voice and inflection, the character can emote, thus making the conversations more dynamic.  So long as the actor and recording director are competant, it should go rather well, and Dragon Age II was rather strong in this department.

I don't find it impedes my ability to roleplay, in any case, and I like both options just fine. With Bluray discs, however, there's never been a better time for console gaming to allow for a choice-driven game to have voice overs.

[Pasquale1234]

Hoo boy.

We seem to have morphed this:

The voice files themselves consume space on the disk, which limits how much other content they can deliver on said disk.

... which was a simple, concise, statement of fact

into this:

LordKinoda wrote...
Then they could of  have  had TWO discs like Mass Effect did. Or 3, or 4 like Final Fantasy VII. Blaming the voice actors for the dip in quality of the game is just an asinine argument plain and simple.

...which is pretty darned inventive in ascribing things that were not there

... and then this:

LordKinoda wrote...
Riiiight.So you're saying it's just entirely impossible to make a great game that has voice actors in the protagonist slot simply because it takes up too much memory; thusly diminishing the game on the whole no matter what you do ?

...which is a hyperbolic, presumption-laden, statement of opinion.

LordKinoda wrote...
Hmm. Yeah. Right. Tell that to Mass Effect 2, which sold 2 million copies in it's first week. It CAN be done. Or am I missing something you've said ?

Oh, yeah.  You've done an amazing job of not only missing what I actually said, but making up plenty that I did not say.

I did make a few basic factual statements that point out some of the additional constraints imposed on a game that supplies full voicing and animations for the protag (beyond the obvious limits to role-playing).  There is a cost to the feature that goes beyond the price of hiring VAs, and very likely impacts other content in the game.  Whether the benefit to those who prefer it outweighs the costs is pretty subjective.

And BTW - additional disks do increase manufacturing / distribution costs, especially for consoles.

Modifié par Pasquale1234, 11 octobre 2011 - 07:39 .

[Heimdall]

The poll is flawed

Where is my TOTALLY INDIFFERENT option.

[LordKinoda]

A a voiced protagonist limits the plot/script/dialogue, as recording has to be made early and changes cannot be made after that easily.

Writer1: "Dang, this conversation sucks. What was Ithinking when we wrote this. I got a far better idea here."
Writer2: "Too late now. Recording is done. We won be flying the in voice actor for a few more lines."

*repat many times*

Heh, I suppose that does happen, but I doubt 'repeatedly'.

Oh, yeah. You've done an amazing job of not only missing what I actually said, but making up plenty that I did not say.

If you say so.

As someone pointed out a positive for the silent protaganist is that resources that could be spent voicing the character can be spent other places and improve other aspects of the game.

I guess I'm just having issue with you, or whoever, broadening the term 'resources' as a catch all. What resources can be used to make the game 'better' that having a voiced character takes up ? Specifically if you will, so as to subvert my terrible comprehension skills. And don't include anything that can be easily defined as an opinion.

And BTW - additional disks do increase manufacturing / distribution costs, especially for consoles.

And ? Worth it in the long run no ? More content almost always means better game. Unless said content is just all filler sidequest fetch quests and the like.

Modifié par LordKinoda, 12 octobre 2011 - 04:15 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

LordKinoda wrote...

A a voiced protagonist limits the plot/script/dialogue, as recording has to be made early and changes cannot be made after that easily.

Writer1: "Dang, this conversation sucks. What was Ithinking when we wrote this. I got a far better idea here."
Writer2: "Too late now. Recording is done. We won be flying the in voice actor for a few more lines."

*repat many times*

Heh, I suppose that does happen, but I doubt 'repeatedly'.

Then you've never met a writer...

Seriously, works is always polished, re-done and improved. Toliken spent 50 YEARS constantly re-working his stuff.

[kynvalyk]

I like voiced because makes the game more life like with emotional faces

[OldMan91]

I guess I'm just having issue with you, or whoever, broadening the term 'resources' as a catch all. What resources can be used to make the game 'better' that having a voiced character takes up ? Specifically if you will, so as to subvert my terrible comprehension skills. And don't include anything that can be easily defined as an opinion.

"Resources" in this case refers to two things: Time and money (and a few other smaller things not worth mentioning for the sake of argument). Remember that there are deadlines that each department must meet, as well as the fact that they are interconnected (e.g. in order to actually have voiced dialogue you need... dialogue, so the writers must have a script ready). The argument is this:

1) In monetary terms, you have to pay for the voice actors, the studio (assuming you use an independent studio) and other indirectly associated costs. By having a silent protagonist, you save up quite a bit of money, which can be allocated to other department budgets (this is all planned ahead of time of course).

2) They must also use a great deal of their time to organize and go through the various sessions of voice recording. This isn't solely limited to one team or department. Writers, audio techs, maintenance and other relevant employees have to use some of their time to be there too, not to mention the voice actors themselves have a certain schedule. You're taking time these people could be using to work on other matters.

And ? Worth it in the long run no ? More content almost always means better game. Unless said content is just all filler sidequest fetch quests and the like.

More discs means higher costs, regardless of whether you think that means a "better game" (which is not necessarily true). Remember that budgets are planned before any work is actually done.

[Hello There]

Lord Aesir wrote...

The poll is flawed

Where is my TOTALLY INDIFFERENT option.

There can't be a nuetral option, you must choose. If someone pointed a gun to your head and forced you to choose, what will you choose?

[LordKinoda]

"Resources" in this case refers to two things: Time and money (and a few other smaller things not worth mentioning for the sake of argument). Remember that there are deadlines that each department must meet, as well as the fact that they are interconnected (e.g. in order to actually have voiced dialogue you need... dialogue, so the writers must have a script ready). The argument is this:

1) In monetary terms, you have to pay for the voice actors, the studio (assuming you use an independent studio) and other indirectly associated costs. By having a silent protagonist, you save up quite a bit of money, which can be allocated to other department budgets (this is all planned ahead of time of course).

2) They must also use a great deal of their time to organize and go through the various sessions of voice recording. This isn't solely limited to one team or department. Writers, audio techs, maintenance and other relevant employees have to use some of their time to be there too, not to mention the voice actors themselves have a certain schedule. You're taking time these people could be using to work on other matters.

1)Granted that money used for the voice acting "side" could TECHNICALLY be used for other things. But it's only TWO people we're talking about here. The companions and NPC's of the game would still be voiced no matter what. Nicholas Boulton and Jo Wyatt's (male and female Hawke) personal salaries cannot add up to such a gigantic amount of money that it's detrimental to the rest of the game's budget. Sorry. They are not HUGELY well known celebrities who demand and/or warrant a large salary because their voice alone will draw in a few extra gamers. So this particular point just falls apart for you in my eyes.

I've read somewhere, and had it quoted to me now that I think about it, SAG has it defined that voice actors get paid $760 for a four hour session of voice work. That works out to $190 an hour. How many hours did Nick and Jo put in ? Realistically, probably around 20-30. So that's 3800-5700. But let's go a little higher with the hours (both for DLC and re-writes) and their pay rates because this game wasn't their first outing as voice actors, so maybe they get paid a little more. Let's allow $1200 for a four hour session for them. That's $300 an hour. And let's estimate 40 total hours of work. That's $12,000. And $12,000 X 2 is $24,000. Let's round it up one more to make is 25k.

And what is the budget for a game like Dragon Age ? Or Mass Effect, Halo, Skyrim, Arkam Asylum, GTA, or Uncharted ? It's in the MILLIONS. Almost as much as some Hollywood blockbusters. I'd wager 20-50 million dollars. So 25k makes such a dent in the budget that it's starts to have detrimental affects on the rest of the game's aspects ? I just can't see that until you pose something more logical or factually detailed. Heh, even if we round it up to say they paid both Nick and Jo 25k EACH it's still low in the scale of the budget.

2)I must point out again that this is only for TWO additional actors. They still would of been doing voice recording, writing, animating characters faces and bodies, etc. The time spent on TWO additional characters is just not logical for your argument.

Modifié par LordKinoda, 13 octobre 2011 - 07:46 .

[Hello There]

DarkSun522 wrote...

Voiced by far. All the voice acting in DA II was top notch.

The voice acting is irelevant, since the player may dislike the tone, pitch or personality of the voice (like me). Regardless of how the lines are delivered, the voice itself can ruin a game for players. I dislike both Shepherd and Hawke (female, never played male) because neither voice fit my character.