118 réponses à ce sujet

[lx_theo]

tmp7704 wrote...

lx_theo wrote...

Respond to my entire answer. If you choose to pick and choose parts, you are no better than sleeze-ball politicians.

Sorry, the edit took me a while there. But in any case you can perfectly well address points on case by case basis. Doing otherwise is the same sort of dodging you accuse me of.

Those people are wrong. People are reacting to you. You can't interpret it any differently than the implied interpretation that the game hands to you on a silver platter. This is exactly how it was on games like Kotor, or DA:O.

[lx_theo]

n2nw wrote...

lx_theo wrote...

I'm saying that you (or whoever I was quoting) was role-playing with VOs the wrong way.

They're using their imagination the wrong way? I hate it when that happens.

No, they're refusing trying to use it. I know it can be done. I do it myself.

lx_theo wrote...
For some reason, even though people like you prasie the imagination side of the silent, you can do it for the same result in the voiced system.

No, you really can't. When you have a voiced protagonist and paraphrased dialogues, you're living out someone else's imagination. The voiced PC says things in a way I would not and sometimes I choose dialogues that say something different than what I imagined they would be. That limits your development of your character to what the developers think it should be. You end up living out their idea of your PC. As I said earlier, that makes it you going along for the ride in their story instead of creating your own.

That doesn't mean that I can't use my imagination within that story, but it does limit it.

I can't? How did I do it then? I do it all the time. I'm a bit scared, now. OoO

Its really no more living out someone's imagination than it is selecting from written out dialogue.

[the_one_54321]

lx_theo wrote...
Those people are wrong. People are reacting to you. You can't interpret it any differently than the implied interpretation that the game hands to you on a silver platter. This is exactly how it was on games like Kotor, or DA:O.

No, you're wrong.

I can interpret text however the hell I want to, whenever I want to. There is zero demonstration that my interpretation of what is being said is false.

Because there's no voice.

No voice. No demonstration. No invalidation. Pure imagination. This is strict. It is not rhetoric. It is not a conceptual disagreement. This is a statement of what the game does and does not do.

[tmp7704]

lx_theo wrote...

Those people are wrong. People are reacting to you. You can't interpret it any differently than the implied interpretation that the game hands to you on a silver platter. This is exactly how it was on games like Kotor, or DA:O.

I use interpretation in the sense of imagining what the character's voice sounds like, how they stress words and other aspects related to speaking. In this sense you can easily have multiple interpretations of the same written line that wouldn't require or generate different reactions than one the game presents you with.

[lx_theo]

the_one_54321 wrote...

lx_theo wrote...
Those people are wrong. People are reacting to you. You can't interpret it any differently than the implied interpretation that the game hands to you on a silver platter. This is exactly how it was on games like Kotor, or DA:O.

No, you're wrong.

I can interpret text however the hell I want to, whenever I want to. There is zero demonstration that my interpretation of what is being said is false.

Because there's no voice.

No voice. No demonstration. No invalidation. Pure imagination. This is strict. It is not rhetoric. It is not a conceptual disagreement. This is a statement of what the game does and does not do.

You are so wrong its not even funny. 

Its an illusion. Seriously, work on basic logic. It may help you down the road sometime. Like now.

Think about it. Really think about it. Delve into that brain and think about it. Its not hard. It really isn't.

Got it yet? Okay, maybe you'll need some help. Statements themselves have implied tones anyways. If you read, "How dare you!?", are you really going to think of it in a happy tone? Ever? If you try to, you will have that devalidated by the response that comes after. Every... single... time.

Its an illusion because the writing alrady has implied tones to them. People are going to read these the same way almost every single time, with negligible variation. This isn't too hard for you, is it?

Modifié par lx_theo, 06 avril 2012 - 07:48 .

[n2nw]

lx_theo wrote...
I can't? How did I do it then? I do it all the time. I'm a bit scared, now. OoO

It's okay, I find you a little scary, too.

lx_theo wrote...

Its really no more living out someone's imagination than it is selecting from written out dialogue.

But when you select from written out dialogue, you have the option of interpreting how your pc will say it and you know exactly what he/she will say.  Take the Jacob romance in ME2.  I *never* would have voiced those lines that way and a couple of the options I used I had to go back to a save because I wouldn't have said them.  With silent pcs and full text, I know what all I'm going to say and I can imagine that I don't say it like a cat in heat.

[Cultist]

NO U!

[lx_theo]

tmp7704 wrote...

lx_theo wrote...

Those people are wrong. People are reacting to you. You can't interpret it any differently than the implied interpretation that the game hands to you on a silver platter. This is exactly how it was on games like Kotor, or DA:O.

I use interpretation in the sense of imagining what the character's voice sounds like, how they stress words and other aspects related to speaking. In this sense you can easily have multiple interpretations of the same written line that wouldn't require or generate different reactions than one the game presents you with.

I could see there being an upside of injecting your own voice into a character, but the ultimate problem with that is that the way the dialogues voices or not are already set up will break that point anyways. 

Third person based dialogue silent or no makes it not work correctly if you try to have a first person conversation. AT least this is how its done to me in my experience. Game like Skyrim being in first person make this a reasonable expectation.

[tmp7704]

lx_theo wrote...

People are going to read these the same way almost every single time, with negligible variation.

Having the same line spoken by for example James Earl Jones and Jim Carrey is hardly negligible variation.

[lx_theo]

n2nw wrote...

lx_theo wrote...
I can't? How did I do it then? I do it all the time. I'm a bit scared, now. OoO

It's okay, I find you a little scary, too.

lx_theo wrote...

Its really no more living out someone's imagination than it is selecting from written out dialogue.

But when you select from written out dialogue, you have the option of interpreting how your pc will say it and you know exactly what he/she will say.  Take the Jacob romance in ME2.  I *never* would have voiced those lines that way and a couple of the options I used I had to go back to a save because I wouldn't have said them.  With silent pcs and full text, I know what all I'm going to say and I can imagine that I don't say it like a cat in heat.

The problem is that the intent and tone weren't evident then, no? I've never played the Jacob romance, so I don't really know hat you're referring to.

[lx_theo]

tmp7704 wrote...

lx_theo wrote...

People are going to read these the same way almost every single time, with negligible variation.

Having the same line spoken by for example James Earl Jones and Jim Carrey is hardly negligible variation.

Tone wise? So long as they are trying to do the same, it should be negligible, yes.

Modifié par lx_theo, 06 avril 2012 - 07:57 .

[Tragick Flaw]

BobSmith101 wrote...

Open world and character/npc driven games don't mesh well.

This right here. See Skyrim does a fanastic job at creating a world and giving it backstory, but it really lacks in events and characters. There was so much potential in it and despite, once again being a great game, it never seizes on grabbing elements like the civil war or the Thalmor like it could have.

My go to moment for example would be the end of the Imperial Legion quest line. (I'll keep it vague for spoilery reasons.) Wandering outside, I came across one of the NPCs that had been important to hear a line of dialogue from them as I walked on by. I could have easily missed that line, but that one line would have been an entire character arc for a companion in a Bioware game.

If you want open world, resources have to go into it, and thus you lose characters and connections. I never felt as connected to characters in Skyrim than I did in DAII or DAO, and I even due to my better connection to DAII characters felt a lot more connected to Kirkwall than I did to Skyrim.

The Witcher and its sequel (a good but flawed game) are sort of the third option. They have a larger area to explore which contains most of the questing and story, but leaves some parts out of reach (or by other means) until the story has progressed. Even then (once again just my own opinion), as someone who would prefer resources go into characters than open world, I found that I would have cared a lot more about the events of TW2 if I had been able to spend more time with the other characters.

[Deviija]

On the topic of open-world, I think BioWare could do something really special with an open-world game. Not sure if I'd like to see a DA main title with this approach, but a new IP utilizing this could be quite grand. A revitalized Jade Empire franchise, for example. I think it could work beautifully.

Or, do like Bethesda did, and outsource the Dragon Age franchise to Obsidian and let them do a side-title. Dragon Age: New Orlais. And have it be a form of open world, local area.

I'm not keen on seeing Dragon Age's combat move toward more action-RPG ground, like Skyrim's clunky real-time combat or Kingdom of Amalur's action flow, because the franchise so far has been built on being a party-based tactical system and those games seem more one-woman-army type of games, with Amalur having more emphasis on being a Beat'Em'Up Action game in its combat. I have trouble seeing how everything would fit together without it becoming even more chaotic than how it felt for me in DA2, with everyone flipping and running around using their powers. I'm not saying it is impossible to be done well, just that I have a hard time imagining it while looking at DA2 and these games.

[tmp7704]

lx_theo wrote...

The problem is that the intent and tone weren't evident then, no? I've never played the Jacob romance, so I don't really know hat you're referring to.

Jacob romance lines are a case where, while the intent was evident from the paraphrase, the VA laid the "flirt tone" painfully thick. So bad it made many cringe. If it was a silent character, it'd be far easier for someone to imagine the same line, same inten,t but doing it more subtly.

[the_one_54321]

lx_theo wrote...
Its an illusion.

So what.

Allow me to sum up your argument; "everyone plays the same way I do. Therefore, what I enjoy must be the better way to make the game." It seems to me that you can't wrap your head around the notion that different people play the game differently than you. "I can't concieve of imagining a different tone or personality than the one I think the game implies, therefore no one can."

Where does the game tell me what the character's tone and personality is? Give me an example. If the game doesn't actually demonstrate tone or intent, I can make up whatever I want. Because there is no instance where I am shown to have been mistaken. That is basic logic.

Modifié par the_one_54321, 06 avril 2012 - 08:05 .

[n2nw]

tmp7704 wrote...

lx_theo wrote...

The problem is that the intent and tone weren't evident then, no? I've never played the Jacob romance, so I don't really know hat you're referring to.

Jacob romance lines are a case where, while the intent was evident from the paraphrase, the VA laid the "flirt tone" painfully thick. So bad it made many cringe. If it was a silent character, it'd be far easier for someone to imagine the same line, same inten,t but doing it more subtly.

This.  Oh, but yet other dialogues were voiced alright, but the intent was not what *I* had intended.

Modifié par n2nw, 06 avril 2012 - 08:03 .

[tmp7704]

lx_theo wrote...

tmp7704 wrote...

Having the same line spoken by for example James Earl Jones and Jim Carrey is hardly negligible variation.

Tone wise? So long as they are trying to do the same, it should be negligible, yes.

No, not tone wise, but how it'd sound overall. Focusing on tone is convenient because it allows you to overlook the very aspect i'm talking about -- that is, being able to imagine how your character actually sounds, the timbre of their voice, the accent, etc.

[lx_theo]

tmp7704 wrote...

lx_theo wrote...

tmp7704 wrote...

Having the same line spoken by for example James Earl Jones and Jim Carrey is hardly negligible variation.

Tone wise? So long as they are trying to do the same, it should be negligible, yes.

No, not tone wise, but how it'd sound overall. Focusing on tone is convenient because it allows you to overlook the very aspect i'm talking about -- that is, being able to imagine how your character actually sounds, the timbre of their voice, the accent, etc.

I was referring to tone, which was what was brought up.

[tmp7704]

lx_theo wrote...

I was referring to tone, which was what was brought up.

You may be referring to the tone because like i said it's convenient for your argument, but i'd question whether people you are discussing it with are doing the same thing, or if they're taking into account more aspects instead.

As long as this disparity of views on what's actually getting discussed exists, this is going nowhere.

[lx_theo]

the_one_54321 wrote...

lx_theo wrote...
Its an illusion.

So what.

Allow me to sum up your argument; "everyone plays the same way I do. Therefore, what I enjoy must be the better way to make the game." It seems to me that you can't wrap your head around the notion that different people play the game differently than you. "I can't concieve of imagining a different tone or personality than the one I think the game implies, therefore no one can."

Where does the game tell me what the character's tone and personality is? Give me an example. If the game doesn't actually demonstrate tone or intent, I can make up whatever I want. Because there is no instance where I am shown to have been mistaken. That is basic logic.

Here's the thing about you. I am considering how different people play the game. You don't care. You insist that the way I percieve playing the games is based around how I play them, but I have not. I only use that as an example for what I know is possible. Otherwise, I'm just looking through the simple trins of thought that will go through most everyone's head. Rational thought is not as different as you may think. Logic is a universal trait that leads people, especially on tiny levels like we are discussion to come to said conslusions consistently.

Yes, you prefer ignorance is bliss, fine, I get it. It doesn't take away reality. What makes you or anyone special has nothing to do with specific, minor rational thoughts that are ingrained in the human psyche.

[lx_theo]

tmp7704 wrote...

lx_theo wrote...

I was referring to tone, which was what was brought up.

You may be referring to the tone because like i said it's convenient for your argument, but i'd question whether people you are discussing it with are doing the same thing, or if they're taking into account more aspects instead.

As long as this disparity of views on what's actually getting discussed exists, this is going nowhere.

If you are referring to injecting your own voice, I've already answered that in another person's argument on that. I will not answer it again because you believe I didn't answer everything in one post.

[the_one_54321]

tmp7704 wrote...

lx_theo wrote...
I was referring to tone, which was what was brought up.

You may be referring to the tone because like i said it's convenient for your argument, but i'd question whether people you are discussing it with are doing the same thing, or if they're taking into account more aspects instead.

As long as this disparity of views on what's actually getting discussed exists, this is going nowhere.

He wants basic logic.

Voice acting shows you how the character behaves.

Silent PC does not show you how the character behaves.

Being shown how the character behaves can lead to a contradition of what you imagined. Not showing you how the character behaves cannot lead to a contradiction of what you imagined. It's simple.

lx_theo wrote...
Yes, you prefer ignorance is bliss, fine, I get it. It doesn't take away reality. What makes you or anyone special has nothing to do with specific, minor rational thoughts that are ingrained in the human psyche.

What in the hell are you talking about? 

Modifié par the_one_54321, 06 avril 2012 - 08:17 .

[lx_theo]

the_one_54321 wrote...

tmp7704 wrote...

lx_theo wrote...
I was referring to tone, which was what was brought up.

You may be referring to the tone because like i said it's convenient for your argument, but i'd question whether people you are discussing it with are doing the same thing, or if they're taking into account more aspects instead.

As long as this disparity of views on what's actually getting discussed exists, this is going nowhere.

He wants basic logic.

Voice acting shows you how the character behaves.

Silent PC does not show you how the character behaves.

Being shown how the character behaves can lead to a contradition of what you imagined. Not showing you how the character behaves cannot lead to a contradiction of what you imagined. It's simple.

You must be among the least intelligent people on these boards. You choose to ignore most of what I;ve said, or you've not understood it. Go on and be as ignorant as you want. Just remember its not a proper argument.

Modifié par lx_theo, 06 avril 2012 - 08:17 .

[lx_theo]

the_one_54321 wrote...

lx_theo wrote...
Yes, you prefer ignorance is bliss, fine, I get it. It doesn't take away reality. What makes you or anyone special has nothing to do with specific, minor rational thoughts that are ingrained in the human psyche.

What in the hell are you talking about? 

Something you obviously aren't smart enough to understand. Even though I've explained it a number of times.

[the_one_54321]

lx_theo wrote...
Uou are biggest idiot I've net on this boards. Go on and be as ignorant as you want. Just remember its not a proper argument.

"He that first resorts to violence has lost the argument."

Show me, or explain to me with "basic logic" how a silent PC demonstrates to you, definitively, how a line is delivered in dialog.

lx_theo wrote...
You insist that the way I percieve playing the games is based around how I play them, but I have not. I only use that as an example for what I know is possible. Otherwise, I'm just looking through the simple trins of thought that will go through most everyone's head.

Logic is strict.

"A is possible" !=> "B is not possible" unless you can demonstrate it definitively. You have done no such thing. All you have said is "lots of people did it the same way I did." 

Modifié par the_one_54321, 06 avril 2012 - 08:22 .