457 réponses à ce sujet

[Barbarossa2010]

Definitely prefer a silent PC in an RPG. Voiced characters are a dime a dozen and frankly most (not all) are bad. I can deal with it in a shooter where characters are truly avatars and gameplay trumps all. But in an RPG, a bad voice actor can literally ruin the game, if gameplay can't compensate. Don't really want to hear "me" speak through someone else's voice. Silence allows me the tone, tempo, and force that I would use in any given conversation.

This works for Shepard, because I have no illusion that I'm not Shepard and the gameplay is pretty darn good. I was the Warden though, I was allowed, through design, to breathe life into a character of my own creation--to give him emotion, motivation, baggage, a voice, not to mention a race, body type and face; all without the intrusion of some other schlep's voice to break the experience that is more effectively shaped by my imagination. But Bioware pulls the plug, and goes the way of just about every other game, and dumps yet another one of their characters on me in DA2, except even doing that poorly.

Oh well, it's their franchise and they're free to do as they please. That works both ways of course.

Inspiration from Skyrim? Well being that DA2 was the supposed fix for the innumerable problems that many of us had no idea existed in Origins, I'm not exactly confident they are going to discover the right things to be inspired by in that game either.

Personally I think they are only inspired by the sales figures.

Modifié par Barbarossa2010, 21 janvier 2012 - 06:50 .

[Barbarossa2010]

bobobo878 wrote...

Anyone else wish that Bioware was taking less inspiration from Skyrim and more from DA:O?

Yep.  They got it just about right in Origins, and then they decided deliberately to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.  They should have actually fixed the issues with Origins and made it even better, not use "Ben Tre" logic and destroy it in order to save it. 

I think it was a big mistake for the franchise.

[Gotholhorakh]

bobobo878 wrote...

Anyone else wish that Bioware was taking less inspiration from Skyrim and more from DA:O?

Emphatically, yes I do. If anything, I think we needed Origins expanding on and improving, not... well, what happened instead.

Modifié par Gotholhorakh, 21 janvier 2012 - 06:47 .

[Yrkoon]

bobobo878 wrote...

Anyone else wish that Bioware was taking less inspiration from Skyrim and more from DA:O?

Yes.  Specifically, DA:O with a few adjustments that hint at a  direction towards  natural evolution  (graphics could  be improved; combat could be  tweaked; stealth gameplay could be  expanded on etc.), rather than the  friggin franchise  reboot,  180 hatchet-job that we just saw.  (what the hell were they smoking? lol)

Modifié par Yrkoon, 21 janvier 2012 - 07:10 .

[Meris]

bobobo878 wrote...

Anyone else wish that Bioware was taking less inspiration from Skyrim and more from DA:O?

Yes and no. A good sequel expands on the formula of its predecessor, not change the whole bloody thing. I wish they took inspiration from DA:O while making improvements. Instead of cutting different origins so conversations are more cinematic, they could have kept the silent protagonist and made origins more decisive; instead of trying to make the game 'playable both strategically and with a single character' as though there's a action/rts rpg toggle, I wish they had expanded on DA:O's combat with more interesting monster design. Things like that.

[LightningSamus]

Nah, keep voiced character, don't see how voiced is a problem.

Bethesda games have always been like that and they go their own way, Bethsesda don't have good stories while Bioware games do, Bethesda focus more on a open setting with more exploration and more things to do.

Bioware prefers story and their games are more linear and the voiced PC fits well but so does a non voiced but i'm just saying why fix what's not broken.

Leave it.

[Meris]

LightningSamus wrote...

Nah, keep voiced character, don't see how voiced is a problem.

Its a discussion that's going on for over 15 pages on how each side of the coin allow for differently engaging storytelling.

So yeah, according to, say, half of the fanbase, BioWare focusing more on story means they should keep the silent protagonist as well as according to, say, the other half, they shouldn't.

[TEWR]

Meris wrote...

(1) Oh come on! I said that once about Dovahkin's shouts, but as a joke. If we must nitpick that much, there are mods out there to silence the battle screams...

The difference between the Dragonborn's shouts and the Warden's battle cries is that you picked the voice your Warden had. It wasn't forced on you.

Well, it kinda was, but the decision for which voice fit your Warden was your own decision.

It's like if Alistair had no voice except in his battle cries, and he still sounded like how we know him. Would you imagine that he sounded like Gilbert Gottfried in all the dialogue?

Seriously, can you imagine the Warden in your voice and then hear Gideon Emery saying something, and just ignore it? It's not "flavor" as some people in the past have called it. It actually keeps the Warden from sounding like you.

Unless you're roleplaying a person that can make his voice change, I just can't see how anyone sees his/her Warden having his/her own voice.

(2)I can understand that you're still roleplaying, but I cannot even fathom how the voice can possibly bring you closer to your character than all the Silent Protagonist can do. I simply can't see how less personalization makes the game's story any more yours. I can't see how seeing what should be yourself talking on the screen can enhance your action of becoming and acting like another person.

I just don't care about whether or not my character is voiced. So long as I don't have to play a railroaded story and I have several options -- and can see what the hell my character is saying -- then the voice enhances my roleplaying.

While I dislike DAII's story and the paraphrases on principle, I enjoy Male Hawke's voice and found that were I Hawke -- and I would've been had DAII's story not been a massive failure where I'm watching the game instead of playing -- then that is what Hawke would sound like. That is what I would sound like.

It's complicated. Basically, my enjoyment of it stems mostly from the movie What Dreams May Come. If Heaven turns out to be a "Make your own reality" type of deal like I believe and I decided to make a Thedas Heaven -- for whatever reason. I doubt I actually would though -- then I wouldn't care that I sound like Nicholas Boulton for Hawke or Fred Tatasciore for Xanthos Aeducan.

I'd still be me, even if the voice isn't the one I hold on this earth. I could still make decisions, be motivated my way, etc.

I do know that I'll definitely make a Pokemon reality if that's what Heaven allows. I mean, there's just no way in hell I wouldn't do that.

Its like saying that you'd have more roleplaying options with Hawke if BioWare had removed class selection or face creation.

No it isn't.

Unless you're a fan of railroading, then I can understand. I can see the virtues of a more focused plot. Though, personally, BioWare doesn't need to standardize our experiences more.

If you had read my post to Sacred Fantasy -- or even the rest of the post you quoted -- you would've seen that I said DAII hindered my roleplaying due to the story despite how I feel a voiced protagonist enhancing my roleplaying.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 21 janvier 2012 - 09:44 .

[Meris]

If you had read my post to Sacred Fantasy -- or even the rest of the post you quoted -- you would've seen that I said DAII hindered my roleplaying due to the story despite how I feel a voiced protagonist enhancing my roleplaying

I did read, that's why I said that. But sorry, if you feel that adding a voice to your protagonist enhances your gameplay, then you are a fan of being railroaded into a character.

where I'm watching the game instead of playing

That's exactly what happens with a voiced protagonist. You're not delieving the lines, Hawke is.

-- then that is what Hawke would sound like. That is what I would sound like.

So, in the much more likely chance that they chose a voice actor your version of Hawke didn't feel compatible with, you would prefer the silent protagonist?

Seriously, can you imagine the Warden in your voice and then hear Gideon Emery saying something, and just ignore it? It's not "flavor" as some people in the past have called it. It actually keeps the Warden from sounding like you.

Actually, I just installed the universal voices mod and picture my warden speaking with whichever I found closest to his/her characterization (both the voice and the actual things that were said, I wouldn't give a human a dwarven voice...).

Not denying the inconsistency (actually, I personally could since it didn't matter to me), but its clearly much easier to phase out 3 lines spoken in moments you're not supposed to visualize your character talking (short of outright fanfiction) than full voice over.

And lastly, as far as I'm concerned, this inconsistency should be fixed by removing the avaiable voices or, even better, allowing to pick a 'Silent' battle cry. After all, some of the voices did fit with each of my wardens.

No it isn't.

Of course it is. To a lot of us being able to visualize the protagonist's role in dialogue is part of character customization, just like class selection and face creation.

Modifié par Meris, 21 janvier 2012 - 10:17 .

[TEWR]

Meris wrote...



I did read, that's why I said that. But sorry, if you feel that adding a voice to your protagonist enhances your gameplay, then you are a fan of being railroaded into a character.

If you want to tell me what I'm a fan of and what I'm not a fan of, then this discussion is beyond pointless.

I despise railroaded plots for RPGs. And railroaded plots lead to railroaded characters. I do not think that a voiced protagonist automatically means a railroaded plot. And there is nothing to support that.

DAII didn't make the best case for non-railroaded plots with voiced protagonists. But from what I've heard, the Witcher and the Witcher 2 do make a good -- if not the best -- case for it.

That said, Geralt is a pre-defined character more than the Warden or Hawke, but that doesn't mean that DAII couldn't have succeeded with a voiced protagonist and still have each player's Hawke be their own.

That's exactly what happens with a voiced protagonist. You're not delieving the lines, Hawke is.

Due to the paraphrases, which I've already clearly established that I hate on principle. Even if I'm okay with what Hawke says, it's the not knowing that gets to me.

If I was able to see what Hawke was actually saying before choosing the option, then I am delivering the lines.

And this would require at the very least a mechanic where the full line appears at the top of the screen if you hover over the paraphrase, as I said on the previous page.

So, in the much more likely chance that they chose a voice actor your version of Hawke didn't feel compatible with, you would prefer the silent protagonist?

They already did. Female Hawke. I despise her voice acting because it sounds so.... forced.

Male Hawke however has a great voice, and for that I feel comfortable with the voice. No matter what my Hawke(s) looked like -- since I've pretty much abandoned playing DAII -- the voice doesn't bother me. The paraphrases do.

Of course it is. To a lot of us being able to visualize the protagonist's role in dialogue is part of character customization, just like class selection and face creation.

Your original assertion was that by my saying voiced protagonists enhance my personal roleplaying, that I was effectively saying that if Bioware removed character customization or class selection that would enhance my roleplaying as well.

And obviously, that's just wrong on so many levels.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 22 janvier 2012 - 12:41 .

[philippe willaume]

In DA:0 on some occasion, the line I chose was not delivered with the tone I expected and the effect was not what I expected
In DA:2. The paraphrasing was sometime a bit far of what I though was going to be said but the effect was the one I wanted to produce. So the paraphrase did not matter any more, I mostly went by the icon.

I can see the pro and con for each.
It is not necessarily at the expense of Role playing. You could assume that you are speaking through your character and he uses the right words according to social environment to covey they effect you want.

So we need segregation between what we want to say and the effect we want to produce by what we are saying.
For me ideally, you get the social environment via codexes entries and your judgement of the situation.
An icon for the body language/facial expression that would modify the intent of the line we choose.
May be if we were to use intimidate or persuade then we could have the dialogue wheel type. (or for a style of play where you want to advance the story and the actuale dialogue exchange do not matter that much.)


Phil

Modifié par philippe willaume, 22 janvier 2012 - 12:03 .

[Makavellie]

the male hawke VA was good but i could do without it. if mass effect had a silent protagonist, i'd prolly rant. lol just depends on the game i guess

i just felt skyrim didnt force you to do this lame story line. it was open to whatever you wanted to do in the world.

DA2 was great it ust lacked alot of freedom compared to other rpgs i liked.

[byzantine horse]

The chief issue I have with a mute protagonist in a game that is otherwise completely voiced is that all dialogue goes like this:
Man: "Blablablablabla"
You: "..."
Companion: "Says what you were actually saying to put it in context of the dialogue"
Man: "Blabla"
You: "..."
Other Man: "Again says what you just said"

The dialogue in DA:O often felt forced in the way that whatever the Warden said the dialogue was most often carried by other characters as if the Warden was the awkward person too afraid to talk more than quip in with a few words when the others catch their breath. Sure you might steer the conversation in the direction you want but by the end of the day it is everyone else who do the talking.

That's why I prefer a voiced protagonist, when you can hve a dialogue go back and forth instead of every time the PC says something it hits a brick wall and has to be started up again by some other character who mostly repeats or re-emphasizes what you just said.

Mind that I have nothing against mute protagonists, I play Zelda for god's sake, but there it works for me as everyone else is mute as well (other than the "woah", "ooh", "wii" etc) which doesn't make me feel alienated from the dialogue. I agree that a mute protagonist could give more ways to RP but at the same time imo the quality potential is many times higher with a voiced protagonist.

[Mr Fixit]

Apocaleepse wrote...

Also, as a result of a silent protagonist, free disk space from having no voice files for him or her can be used to give other characters voices, which would potentially create a lot more quests for the game. Or the spare disk space could go towards something else, such as extra environments. Just imagine how much disk space a voiced protagonist actually uses, because you have both male and female characters and a hell of a lot of dialogue choices. A voiced protagonist only works in linear games from my experience.

This is a point that is also woth remembering when it comes to voiced protagonists. Just imagine the amount of resources (financial and otherwise) that goes into voicing the main protagonist (twice!). DA2 had around 40,000 lines of dialogue, I think; how many of those are protagonist's? 20,000 perhaps? Maybe even more? Which leaves only (this is only an estimate, of course) around 20,000 lines for various NPCs. Now, that same game with a silent protagonist would be able to devote all 40,000 lines of dialogue to NPCs at the same cost. And make no mistake, quality voice actors *are* expensive.

So, silent protagonist is not only more conducive to roleplaying (for a portion of gamers at least), but it also makes games cheaper to make, which frees up more resources to be diverted to other areas of game design, like more NPC dialogue, more quests, more varied environments, etc. I am certain all those things suffered in DA2 in part as a result of already limited resources being funneled into voice acting.

Modifié par Mr Fixit, 22 janvier 2012 - 01:42 .

[Cutlasskiwi]

Meris wrote...

Cutlasskiwi wrote...

(1)The Warden is just as defined as Hawke and deciding on a accent and emphasize on words wont change the fact that they're still BioWares (predefined) characters, my opinion of course.

(2)I <3 Ferelden stance and it ruined much of my enjoyment of DAO

(1) Again, how do you know?

(2) No idea what you're talking about. You're pigeonholed into being a Grey Warden, not loving Ferelden.

1. How do I know that BioWare characters are predefined or that the Warden is just as defined as Hawke? I've played the games and that is my opinion on the matter. You obviously don't agree with that but that why it's called an opinion.

2. We obviously view things differently. You have to play a Warden who, instead of retreating to Orlais to rally more Wardens, decide to stay and fight the Blight. In a country with a civil war going on. DAO demands that you have this love for Ferelden and the Wardens. Or as I see it, railroading into playing a Warden that <3 Ferelden and the game doesn't tell us ahead of time. In the Origins I could curse out and try to refuse going with Duncan but after Ostagar all that changes. 

To tie it all together: Both Hawke and the Warden have limitations and certain views are not supported by the games. Hence why a view them both as BioWares predefined characters. / My opinion of course. 

[ladyofpayne]

I only hope that Bioteam create more than 3 conversation with NPC in game.
And I hope on MOAR Orlais.

[Iosev]

@ The Ethereal Writer Redux

I wouldn't mind the "hover over" for full dialogue, as long as it's optional (i.e., something you can toggle on or off in the option menu), as I'm one of the people that prefers paraphrasing for voiced characters. I simply could not stand reading Geralt's lines in the first Witcher game, and then have him repeat them in verbatim immediately after selection.

I understand why people can prefer a silent protagonist (as it can often give you more "perceived" agency over your character with imagination, as well as self-insertion), but unfortunately I am one of those people that prefer a voiced protagonist, at least when everyone else in the game is voiced. For me, it is important for my character to react, both verbally and physically in dialogue, as it creates more realism in conversations between the characters of the game.

For example, while I enjoy Skyrim, I often find myself less engaged in the dialogue (and ultimately speed reading and skipping through the dialogue), as a part of me feels like my character isn't really participating in the dialogue, but rather, just selecting what monologue I want the NPC to say. This is in stark contrast to when I play the ME series or DA 2, where I leave the subtitles off, and can sit back and listen to the dialogue exchange, with brief pauses when I quickly select a response.

Again, I understand why people enjoy silent protagonists, I just hope that they understand that there are also people like me who prefer voiced protagonists in dialogue-focused games.

Modifié par arcelonious, 22 janvier 2012 - 07:19 .

[alex90c]

Cutlasskiwi wrote...

Meris wrote...

Cutlasskiwi wrote...

(1)The Warden is just as defined as Hawke and deciding on a accent and emphasize on words wont change the fact that they're still BioWares (predefined) characters, my opinion of course.

(2)I <3 Ferelden stance and it ruined much of my enjoyment of DAO

(1) Again, how do you know?

(2) No idea what you're talking about. You're pigeonholed into being a Grey Warden, not loving Ferelden.

1. How do I know that BioWare characters are predefined or that the Warden is just as defined as Hawke? I've played the games and that is my opinion on the matter. You obviously don't agree with that but that why it's called an opinion.

2. We obviously view things differently. You have to play a Warden who, instead of retreating to Orlais to rally more Wardens, decide to stay and fight the Blight. In a country with a civil war going on. DAO demands that you have this love for Ferelden and the Wardens. Or as I see it, railroading into playing a Warden that <3 Ferelden and the game doesn't tell us ahead of time. In the Origins I could curse out and try to refuse going with Duncan but after Ostagar all that changes. 

To tie it all together: Both Hawke and the Warden have limitations and certain views are not supported by the games. Hence why a view them both as BioWares predefined characters. / My opinion of course. 

Your Warden stays in Ferelden because that's just the way the game is. You might as well complain that we weren't able to take a boat to Rivain and just go travelling around the country doing ... stuff - the point of the game is to stop the Blight ASAP, not go to Orlais while Ferelden gets absolutely steamrollered.

[Sacred_Fantasy]

Cutlasskiwi wrote...

Meris wrote...

Cutlasskiwi wrote...

(1)The Warden is just as defined as Hawke and deciding on a accent and emphasize on words wont change the fact that they're still BioWares (predefined) characters, my opinion of course.

(2)I <3 Ferelden stance and it ruined much of my enjoyment of DAO

(1) Again, how do you know?

(2) No idea what you're talking about. You're pigeonholed into being a Grey Warden, not loving Ferelden.

1. How do I know that BioWare characters are predefined or that the Warden is just as defined as Hawke? I've played the games and that is my opinion on the matter. You obviously don't agree with that but that why it's called an opinion.

2. We obviously view things differently. You have to play a Warden who, instead of retreating to Orlais to rally more Wardens, decide to stay and fight the Blight. In a country with a civil war going on. DAO demands that you have this love for Ferelden and the Wardens. Or as I see it, railroading into playing a Warden that <3 Ferelden and the game doesn't tell us ahead of time. In the Origins I could curse out and try to refuse going with Duncan but after Ostagar all that changes. 

To tie it all together: Both Hawke and the Warden have limitations and certain views are not supported by the games. Hence why a view them both as BioWares predefined characters. / My opinion of course. 

We can't argue whether the Warden is as predefined as any BoWare's characters or not, when we view things differently. You are looking from ouside your character while I look from inside my character. You choose a dialogue line. I  choose one dialogue lines and make up more dialogue lines You see and hear NPCs response to your line, I see the npcs response more to it.  You follow the writer's intent, I follow my own intent. You choose a predefine origin, I make my own origin like this:

Who said Lady Aeducan has to be a dwarf? She can be adopted too. There's a story behind it as well. Oh! don't worry about NPCs. I've already made sure everyone acknowledge her as an elven Aeducan. After all, I'm a Creator God when it come to third person character.   

The point is, it's all depend on how we roleplay our character. You want to be defined by the writer, you get a predefined character and response. But for me, I want to journey my own adventure. Therefore I define my own character, especially my avatar. 

Regardless, there is nothing wrong with how we view things when it comes to roleplay. Whether we play WITH the warden or we play AS the warden is entirely subjective.  

 

[alex90c]

what is up with all these half dressed characters you have

i mean in this screenshot, seriously, the dwarven massive armour in its normal state looks much more badass

[Iosev]

Sacred_Fantasy wrote...

The point is, it's all depend on how we roleplay our character.

And that's essentially the take away from this thread. Some people like to role-play with an avatar-type of method, where you're inserting yourself in the game's world, whereas other people enjoy role-playing as an actor or actress in a more defined role within a story, choosing how to deliver the lines you're given.

There are numerous ways to roleplay; I just dislike it when people act as if one way of role-playing is inferior to another.

Modifié par arcelonious, 22 janvier 2012 - 08:19 .

[Sacred_Fantasy]

alex90c wrote...

what is up with all these half dressed characters you have

i mean in this screenshot, seriously, the dwarven massive armour in its normal state looks much more badass

I forget to uninstalled the mod and that's the only armor she has. I won't want her to stand there naked. 

[Fast Jimmy]

arcelonious wrote...

Sacred_Fantasy wrote...

The point is, it's all depend on how we roleplay our character.

And that's essentially the take away from this thread. Some people like to role-play with an avatar-type of method, where you're inserting yourself in the game's world, whereas other people enjoy role-playing as an actor or actress in a more defined role within a story, choosing how to deliver the lines you're given.

There are numerous ways to roleplay; I just dislike it when people act as if one way of role-playing is inferior to another.

I don't prefer one method over the other... but I don't want the method of how I roleplay to be the determiner if I can enjoy the story.

If I have to roleplay motivations, scenarios and "off-camera" thoughts, conversations, actions and options in my head for the story to make sense, regardless of how my character is presented to me, then that is a game with poor story.

DAO did not do this. I knew what the Blight was and WANTED to stop it.

DA2 did this, in aggravating fashion. I didn't know who or what I was struggling against.

Even before I became a "rich" citizen, I was well on my of gathering 50 sovereigns, which is more than most refugees would come across in their lifetime. So it never felt that I was "struggling to survive." Without the trip the Deep Roads, I was on my way to getting back my family manor and if I had a few more weeks/months, I could have gathered enough gold to last me through the game without the Expedition.

I knew the Qunari would be a threat, but their plot line, which is the best in the game, is resolved far too early. Meanwhile, Mages and Templars, which are portrayed as the flimsiest plot that only serves to give me mooks to kill for no reason other than they are crazy, turns out to be the "main" plot and is supposed to show a "flawed, tragic" tale in the story. Bull honky.

Role play how you want, without a dozen self-given motivations, my Hawke would have either had the motivation to get involved with the conflict seven years ago when he first landed on the shore or he would have stayed out of it, saying "screw being the Champion, fix this problem yourselves." He wouldn't have sat on the sidelines for almost a decade, then hopped in like it was his duty all of a sudden. The lack of agency and immediacy is terrible.

Modifié par Fast Jimmy, 22 janvier 2012 - 08:29 .